House votes to Increase Ignorance, Kill NPR (Bonus: We Still Pay for NASCAR)

The bill, passed 228-192 along mainly partisan lines, would bar federal funding of NPR and prohibit local public stations from using federal money to pay NPR dues and buy its programs. The prospects of support in the Democratic-controlled Senate are slim. Seven Republicans broke ranks to vote against the bill.

Other Republicans also denied that the measure was a vendetta against NPR…

[then quickly made themselves out to be hypocrites]

“Nobody’s on a rampage,” said Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., who also asked “why should we allow taxpayer dollars to be used to advocate one ideology?”

via House votes to cut off federal funding for National Public Radio – The Washington Post.

Can we play “b.s. assumptions with Eric Cantor?   Yes we can.

For those of you that don’t know, just because you don’t bash on gay marriage, doesn’t mean you are biased.  It means you aren’t.

Just because you report on what the vast majority of scientists believe, it doesn’t mean you are biased.  It means you aren’t.

When you fire people who air their personal biases on national media, it doesn’t mean you are biased.  It means you aren’t.

When you consistently are shown to inform people about facts, and disabuse false notions, it doesn’t mean you are biased.  It means you aren’t.

But enough about that, the real reason Republicans hate NPR?

An informed populace is bad for them.

Hard to lie to boring people

UPDATE:  Here’s a bit more on this, and specifically targets the partisan hypocrisy here…

By eliminating the possibility of amendments, party leadership limits debate and ensures a straight up-or-down vote.

Democrats on the panel objected to a “rush to judgment” on NPR, especially after a failure to hold hearings on the justification and consequences of the ban. “This is a dangerous road we’re going down,” said Rep. James McGovern (D) of Massachusetts, a member of the Rules Committee. “This has become an ideological battle to the Republican Party. Going down this road will have a chilling impact on news organizations.”

To make the point, Congressman McGovern proposed banning federal advertising dollars from being spent on the Fox News network. “If you’re saying we should defund NPR because some people might not agree with the programming, what’s wrong with the idea that I don’t want my tax dollars to go to advertising on stations I don’t agree with?” he added. His proposal failed.

Just to be clear, it’s perfectly all right to spend federal money buying ads on private for-profit “news” networks, but horribly, horribly wrong to use that same money to help produce world-class news in a non-profit environment.

UPDATE2:  Wanted to put another one up here...just in case anyone thought this latest round of targeted budget cuts is anything other than partisan-based vendettas.

The U.S. House voted Friday against an amendment that would have banned military sponsorship of NASCAR teams, but the Minnesota congresswoman who introduced it vowed to continue fighting taxpayer-funded racing.

The amendment lost 281-148. Rep. Betty McCollum ( D-Minn.), who sponsored it, did not vote because she was traveling to the Middle East on government business. Her office, though, issued a statement that she “intends to introduce legislation to prohibit taxpayer funds from being used for sponsorship of race cars, dragsters, Indy cars, and motorcycle racing.”

– The U.S. Army pays $7.5 million to sponsor Ryan Newman’s team.

– The National Guard pays about $20 million in sponsorship fees – down 35 percent from last year – to be with Dale Earnhardt Jr.’s team.

– The U.S. Air Force pays $1.6 million in sponsorship fees to be with AJ Allmendinger’s team.

Tiger Blood vs. Pitbull With Lipstick: Who Wins…

In the totally improbable yet amusing match-up, Palin takes only 36 percent of independents to [Charlie Sheen’s] 41 percent, according to a Public Policy Polling survey out Thursday.

Not surprisingly, the overwhelming majority of Republicans — 84 percent — would choose Palin over Sheen if given the choice. But the poll underscores just how polarizing Palin has become, as she now sports astonishingly high negatives in most surveys.

President Barack Obama also has polarizing numbers, but would still swamp Sheen 57 percent to 22 percent among independents.

via Poll shows Charlie Sheen over Sarah Palin: Winning, duh! – Andy Barr –

I was *almost* hoping Palin would stick around long enough to make for some great lulz during the primaries, but now it looks like even that isn’t going to happen.