Anti-Romney Ad Shutdown by Sesame Stree

Formaldehyde · Oct 10, 2012

Or as various talking heads on Fox News put it:

I thought Sesame Street was supposed to be sharing and being nice to people, but over the years they have gotten to be more liberal... They are brainwashing in the most obvious form.

PBS, Sesame Street, public television suckle at the public teat for taxpayer dollars. Secondly, they are propagandizing children! It is an insidious form of brainwashing and propaganda being perpetrated as usual by the lofty left.

Jon Stewart:

I see. Fox News is upset that empty-headed puppets are trying to brainwash and indoctrinate Americans. Perhaps you could sue them. The charge could be copyright infringement.

Ailedhoo · Oct 10, 2012

Patroklos said:
I think the show sucks (I thought that when I was a kid too), but I don't harbor and reserved hatred for it.

I bet GI Joe has more rabid lefty opponents than Sesame Street right wing ones.

The problem is the "right" and "left" here. Why? The American Republican Party is far to the ecomonic right while the Democrat party is ecomonically... right wing. Socially may be debative but the Tories in Britain are hippies compared to the Republicans. The Republicans are not conserative: they are ultraconserative. This has lead to questioning on whether America is heading into a electoral one party state as Japan used to be and what South Africa currently is. America has a problem.

As for "GI Joe has more rapid lefty opponents than Sesame Street right wing ones" I would like source on this. Sesame Street has been attacked by Fox News. I heard of this via Have I Got News For You which found the material from it grand to mock. Granted Fox News is fanatical even to the ultraconseratives at points but... wow.

DinoDoc · Oct 10, 2012

Cutlass said:
The point is that PBS is better than the commercial networks because it doesn't have to cave to advertisers. And because of that, it fills a nitch that commercial broadcasting would never fill. And that makes everyone better off.

Are you telling me I don't see after PBS shows "This program was made possible by a grant from ______" or have to deal with them promising to send me a chotchkie in exchange for a donation? They'd be better off with commercials.

Ailedhoo · Oct 10, 2012

DinoDoc said:
Are you telling me I don't see after PBS shows "This program was made possible by a grant from ______" or have to deal with them promising to send me a chotchkie in exchange for a donation? They'd be better off with commercials.

The BBC says hello on those who claim channels cannot work publicly funded.

DinoDoc · Oct 10, 2012

@Ailedhoo: Re BBC:

I'd rather not have to deal with fundraising drives every three months for what should be a profitable operation.

Leoreth · Oct 10, 2012

Code:

if (poster.lacksArgument())
{
    lolcat = new LolCat();
    poster.post(lolcat);
}

DinoDoc · Oct 10, 2012

Leoreth said:
Code:

if (poster.lacksArgument()) { lolcat = new LolCat(); lolcat.post(); }

That was supposed to have been an argument from Ailedhoo. :confused:

Leoreth · Oct 10, 2012

Yes. You can ignore it of course (which you did).

_random_ · Oct 10, 2012

DinoDoc said:
Are you telling me I don't see after PBS shows "This program was made possible by a grant from ______" or have to deal with them promising to send me a chotchkie in exchange for a donation? They'd be better off with commercials.

Acknowledging sponsors is different from advertising. PBS sponsors have no input on the programming itself, and they don't give the sort of money commercial advertisers do.

DinoDoc · Oct 10, 2012

Leoreth said:
Yes. You can ignore it of course (which you did).

Given the fact there are no serious proposals on the table to tax every household in the US in order to provide them with television service to fund PBS in a similar fashion to the BBC even by its most ardent defenders in government, perhaps you could give me a reason to care about his argument.

Ailedhoo · Oct 10, 2012

DinoDoc said:
@Ailedhoo: Re BBC:

I'd rather not have to deal with fundraising drives every three months for what should be a profitable operation.

Code:

if (poster.lacksArgument())
{
    lolcat = new LolCat();
    poster.post(lolcat);
}

Sorry Leoreth for stealing what you placed down but I am in a impish mood. :satan:

...and the BBC is not based on hand outs but a effective licence payer system. Results: one of the best broadcasting services with world wide prestige with especilly with Radio 4 and the BBC World Service.

Ziggy Stardust · Oct 10, 2012

Patroklos said:
I think the show sucks

Your opinion is demonstratively false:

Link to video.

ELITEOFWARMAN8 · Oct 10, 2012

DinoDoc said:
Sesame Street Is the 1 Percent

The real point is that PBS should be able to find its way in the marketplace if the programs are as popular as their defenders claim.

Agreed. if the station is so good... then fund your own way like everyone else or go bankrupt.

Leoreth · Oct 10, 2012

DinoDoc said:
Given the fact there are no serious proposals on the table to tax every household in the US in order to provide them with television service to fund PBS in a similar fashion to the BBC even by its most ardent defenders in government, perhaps you could give me a reason to care about his argument.

Um, first of all, you're supposed to care about arguments because that's the point of discussions such as this one. If you are not interested in having discussions in good faith on a particular subject, keep quiet and don't post snide pictures.

Now since you seem to have a counterargument to the BBC point, why didn't you simply bring it up? We can't read your mind you know.

Ailedhoo · Oct 10, 2012

Link to video.

Ziggy Stardust · Oct 10, 2012

Good point. Anything that enables not only QI, but also Top Gear has got to be the best broadcasting thingy ever. And since I'm not a Britianian my opinion is completely unbiased and smells of elderberries.

warpus · Oct 10, 2012

Patroklos said:
It just shows Obama is about the small issues, not the big. Mitt's mention of PBS was part of a broader debate talking point about trimming lots of small stuff to save some big stuff.

I disagree.

When saving to buy a house you don't focus on how much money you can save by cutting out a pack of gum each year. That's what Romney's focusing on.

Obama's just pointing out how silly it is.

Skwink · Oct 10, 2012

AlpsStranger said:
EDIT2: Don't talk to me about "small issues" when the entire right wing goes through fits of comically over the top horror every time they rediscover that homosexuality is a thing.

Contrary to what you might think, not all Republicans are socially conservative.

Leonel · Oct 10, 2012

Ziggy Stardust said:
Your opinion is demonstratively false:

Link to video.

I used to LOVE this sequence when I watched Sesame Street in Singapore

Link to video.

bhsup · Oct 10, 2012

Cutlass said:
The point is that PBS is better than the commercial networks because it doesn't have to cave to advertisers. And because of that, it fills a nitch that commercial broadcasting would never fill. And that makes everyone better off.

Then I am sure there will be plenty of wealthy philanthropists in America who can pony up enough to pay for PBS, if it is that important and worthwhile.

Anti-Romney Ad Shutdown by Sesame Stree

Both Fair And Balanced

wonderer

Deity

wonderer

Deity

Bofurin

Deity

Bofurin

Jewel Runner

Deity

wonderer

Absolutely Sane

King

Bofurin

wonderer

Absolutely Sane

Sommerswerd asked me to change this

FRIIIIIIIIIITZ

Breakfast Connoisseur

Deity