Should Congress defund NPR and PBS?

Current Events
23

Here’s a major update that ties directly into this discussion: NPR and several of its member stations are now suing President Trump over his executive order to cut off federal funding. They argue that the move is unconstitutional—specifically, a violation of the First Amendment.

The lawsuit claims this isn’t just budgetary policy—it’s political retaliation meant to punish NPR for content the president dislikes. It also raises the question: if we start defunding media based on perceived bias, where does it stop?

This definitely adds fuel to the conversation.

24

It stops when the voters stop voting people like Trump into office. The Constitution is perfectly clear about 1) freedom of speech and 2) freedom of the press. Only a dictator ignores those important principles.

Freedom of the press or freedom of the media is the fundamental principle that communication and expression through various media, including printed and electronic media, especially published materials, should be considered a right to be exercised freely. Such freedom implies the absence of interference from an overreaching state; its preservation may be sought through a constitution or other legal protection and security. It is in opposition to paid press, where communities, police organizations, and governments are paid for their copyrights. [Wikipedia]

25

Oh Benny. You brought Wikipedia to a constitutional conversation like it was the Gospel of John. That’s cute. But let’s not confuse a crowdsourced encyclopedia with actual founding documents or, heaven forbid, truth.

Let’s walk through this together, slow and sober:

  1. “It stops when voters stop voting people like Trump into office.”

So now it’s not just Trump you oppose—it’s the millions who voted for him. Got it. You’re not defending the Constitution; you’re just mad the electorate didn’t choose your flavor of “freedom.” But freedom doesn’t mean “only vote for people I like,” Benny. That’s not democracy. That’s elitism in a bumper-sticker trench coat.

And by the way, let’s remember: Trump didn’t shut down NPR or PBS.
He suggested defunding them. You know… ending forced taxpayer support of a platform that has a documented political tilt. That’s not censorship. That’s called stewardship. If NPR is so vital to the republic, let its listeners support it voluntarily. That’s how real freedom works.

  1. “Only a dictator ignores those principles.”

No, Benny. A dictator jails journalists, censors speech, and bans dissent. Defunding media is not dictatorship—it’s fiscal discretion. Just because Trump criticized biased coverage doesn’t mean he abolished freedom of the press. CNN, MSNBC, NPR, the New York Times—they’re still breathing, still broadcasting, still slanting.

If Trump were a dictator, you wouldn’t be posting about him online. You’d be disappeared. So let’s not drain the word “dictator” of all meaning just because someone dared to challenge a sacred cow with a budget line.

  1. Freedom of the press ≠ government-paid press

The First Amendment protects the freedom of the press—from government interference, not from the consequences of losing a handout. No one is stopping NPR from airing their content. We’re just saying maybe the government shouldn’t fund it. If your doctrine of freedom depends on state sponsorship, you don’t believe in liberty—you believe in welfare journalism.

  1. Using Wikipedia to define freedom?

That’s like quoting “Chicken Soup for the Soul” in a seminary class. The Constitution defines the legal framework. The Bible defines the moral one. Wikipedia defines…whatever someone edited it to say ten minutes ago.

So here’s the mic-drop, wrapped in the First Amendment and sprinkled with 2 Thessalonians 3:10 (look it up):
You’re free to speak. You’re not entitled to be funded.

When media outlets lean left but demand money from everyone—including the right—you don’t get freedom. You get coercion wearing a press badge.

Let NPR stand on its own feet. Let PBS hold its own pledge drives. And let’s stop acting like taking our hands off their wallet is the same as putting duct tape on their mouths.

Because that, Benny, is just lazy theology and limp logic wrapped in a Wikipedia citation.

26

*** IGNORED *** – I don’t read your posts to me.