Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

I'm not voting Third Party- I'm voting for Big Bird!

Posted by   + Show Post

 That's right! I'm voting for Big Bird! 

by on Oct. 4, 2012 at 3:02 PM
Replies (81-90):
OneToughMami
by on Oct. 4, 2012 at 10:36 PM
You also didn't know it's target audience. A lot of people pointed all of this out before me.

Quoting mom2the.rescue:

Yes, I did agree with her.  Then you pointed out that people who don't have cable can watch PBS.  And I said thanks for pointing that out, I did not know that. 


Quoting OneToughMami:

No you didn't say it you just agreed that we have other channels lol my bad


Quoting mom2the.rescue:


While I totally agree with you, I'm thinking if Romney has any idea what trillions mean...why is PBS an example of things he would cut?  What about all those rich assholes who don't deserve all their perks?  I'd rather have Big Bird than those guys.



Quoting asfriend:

can someone explain why in 2012 we need a tv network paid for by taxpayers?

Are there not plenty of stations, available?


 



Posted on CafeMom Mobile
OneToughMami
by on Oct. 4, 2012 at 10:39 PM
Look into sesame street's history...

Quoting mom2the.rescue:

And I forgive you :)


Quoting OneToughMami:

No you didn't say it you just agreed that we have other channels lol my bad


Quoting mom2the.rescue:


While I totally agree with you, I'm thinking if Romney has any idea what trillions mean...why is PBS an example of things he would cut?  What about all those rich assholes who don't deserve all their perks?  I'd rather have Big Bird than those guys.



Quoting asfriend:

can someone explain why in 2012 we need a tv network paid for by taxpayers?

Are there not plenty of stations, available?


 



Posted on CafeMom Mobile
mom2the.rescue
by Bronze Member on Oct. 4, 2012 at 10:39 PM

The original comment I quoted was on the first page of replies.  Your reply about it being for people w/o cable was the first time I saw that mentioned, so I thanked you.  Jeesh learn how to say you're welcome.

Quoting OneToughMami:

You also didn't know it's target audience. A lot of people pointed all of this out before me.

Quoting mom2the.rescue:

Yes, I did agree with her.  Then you pointed out that people who don't have cable can watch PBS.  And I said thanks for pointing that out, I did not know that. 


Quoting OneToughMami:

No you didn't say it you just agreed that we have other channels lol my bad


Quoting mom2the.rescue:


While I totally agree with you, I'm thinking if Romney has any idea what trillions mean...why is PBS an example of things he would cut?  What about all those rich assholes who don't deserve all their perks?  I'd rather have Big Bird than those guys.



Quoting asfriend:

can someone explain why in 2012 we need a tv network paid for by taxpayers?

Are there not plenty of stations, available?


 


 


OneToughMami
by on Oct. 4, 2012 at 10:45 PM
Um I was just saying that others pointed it out...PBS has an interesting history in regards to what they show and why...like I said I am sure sesame streets history would be interesting? I find its beginnings
Interesting


Quoting mom2the.rescue:

The original comment I quoted was on the first page of replies.  Your reply about it being for people w/o cable was the first time I saw that mentioned, so I thanked you.  Jeesh learn how to say you're welcome.


Quoting OneToughMami:

You also didn't know it's target audience. A lot of people pointed all of this out before me.


Quoting mom2the.rescue:


Yes, I did agree with her.  Then you pointed out that people who don't have cable can watch PBS.  And I said thanks for pointing that out, I did not know that. 



Quoting OneToughMami:

No you didn't say it you just agreed that we have other channels lol my bad



Quoting mom2the.rescue:



While I totally agree with you, I'm thinking if Romney has any idea what trillions mean...why is PBS an example of things he would cut?  What about all those rich assholes who don't deserve all their perks?  I'd rather have Big Bird than those guys.




Quoting asfriend:

can someone explain why in 2012 we need a tv network paid for by taxpayers?

Are there not plenty of stations, available?



 



 



Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Joqui
by Joqui on Oct. 4, 2012 at 11:30 PM

Lol this one right here though!!!
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
viv212
by Gold Member on Oct. 4, 2012 at 11:54 PM
Wouldn't cutting PBS also cut jobs?
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Ms.KitKat
by Platinum Member on Oct. 5, 2012 at 8:02 AM

 The People have spoken.

Quoting asfriend:

Except for the little fact that the programing is liberal agenda driven


Quoting Ms.KitKat:

 


PBS stations are commonly operated by non-profit organizations, state agencies, local authorities (e.g., municipal boards of education), or universities in their city of license. In some U.S. states, PBS stations throughout the entire state may be organized into a single regional "subnetwork" called a state network (e.g., Alabama Public Television). Unlike public broadcasters in most other countries, PBS does not own any of the stations that broadcast its programming (i.e., there are no PBS owned-and-operated stations (O&O) anywhere in the country). This is partly due to the origins of the PBS stations themselves, and partly due to historical broadcast license issues.


In the modern broadcast marketplace, this organizational structure is considered outmoded by some media critics. A common restructuring proposal is to reorganize the network so that each state would have one PBS member which would broadcast state-wide. However, this proposal is controversial, as it would reduce local community input into PBS programming, especially considering how PBS stations are significantly more community-oriented, according to the argument, than their commercial broadcasting counterparts.


One would think that PBS would be pro-repub agenda as it is locally run and serves the needs/viewing preferences of local market. It takes only what? .01% of federal monies and exists through chartitale donations, locally run and operated? Isn't that a repubs dream? Limited big government, local control by the people? Why throw big government weight around by giving Big Bird the ax?


 

Ms.KitKat
by Platinum Member on Oct. 5, 2012 at 8:06 AM

 

Quoting viv212:

Wouldn't cutting PBS also cut jobs?

 No. no, no. Not at all. By cutting PBS, the government will have .01% more money which will eventually trickle down thus stimulating the economy. 

asfriend
by on Oct. 5, 2012 at 8:20 AM
Yes, I did.


Quoting Ms.KitKat:

 The People have spoken.


Quoting asfriend:

Except for the little fact that the programing is liberal agenda driven



Quoting Ms.KitKat:


 



PBS stations are commonly operated by non-profit organizations, state agencies, local authorities (e.g., municipal boards of education), or universities in their city of license. In some U.S. states, PBS stations throughout the entire state may be organized into a single regional "subnetwork" called a state network (e.g., Alabama Public Television). Unlike public broadcasters in most other countries, PBS does not own any of the stations that broadcast its programming (i.e., there are no PBS owned-and-operated stations (O&O) anywhere in the country). This is partly due to the origins of the PBS stations themselves, and partly due to historical broadcast license issues.



In the modern broadcast marketplace, this organizational structure is considered outmoded by some media critics. A common restructuring proposal is to reorganize the network so that each state would have one PBS member which would broadcast state-wide. However, this proposal is controversial, as it would reduce local community input into PBS programming, especially considering how PBS stations are significantly more community-oriented, according to the argument, than their commercial broadcasting counterparts.



One would think that PBS would be pro-repub agenda as it is locally run and serves the needs/viewing preferences of local market. It takes only what? .01% of federal monies and exists through chartitale donations, locally run and operated? Isn't that a repubs dream? Limited big government, local control by the people? Why throw big government weight around by giving Big Bird the ax?



 


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
LauraKW
by "Dude!" on Oct. 5, 2012 at 8:36 AM
1 mom liked this
*steals*

Quoting trippyhippy:

Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)