Though I am suspect of the venue (why preach to the choir), this HuffPo article raised some interesting points. I don't necessarily agree, but it did get me thinking...
A Conservative Case for Public Broadcasting
"As a fiscal conservative but a social libertarian, I can see plenty of reason to put a stop to taxpayer-financed radio and television. The libertarian in me instinctively fears government-supported media: doesn't that just lead to political capture? The fiscal conservative in me wonders why we should waste taxpayer dollars on PBS, with today's superabundance of media outlets. And the capitalist in me loves the innovation and diversity generated by a wide-open, unsubsidized, competitive media marketplace.
But the realist in me -- the one that actually listens to both commercial and public media -- sees something different. Today, public broadcasting offers far more important and thoughtful programming, and is far less politically biased, than its commercial counterparts.
Why would public and commercial media be so different? It mostly comes down to the incentives that drive the two." (source)
Then there's Planned Parenthood. Are the people griping about Republicans wanting to defund PP and extolling all of the free birth control and cancer screening really that blind to the real issue --or do they just think they can distract the general public from thinking about it. Sure Natalie Portman, we'll gladly continue to fund PP is they no longer perform abortions... Is it that hard to understand that having the public pay for abortions when 73% of them are opposed to it --is grossly unjust. And don't say 'it's legal' --nose jobs are legal too, but I don't see Uncle Sam helping me out there!
...Maybe I can get LeftyJones to tackle this issue in a guest post from the left.