In the remaining wake of the presidential debates, a lot of misunderstanding has been made about Mitt Romney's part involving reducing government money going to PBS.
If one truly thinks about what he said, what I think it means is that by removing obscenely large amounts of money that the government has been granting to PBS, it will actually keep it being PBS. Keep it being public broadcasting and not government broadcasting.
It is a prime example of keeping something in the hands of the public and to keep it from becoming a political propaganda machine.
- Can you pass the U.S. citizenship test?
- W. Bradford Wilcox: The new progressive...
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Are...
- In our opinion: Don't 'Army-ize' local police...
- Charles Krauthammer: The jihadi logic
- My view: Utah, where do you stand on marriage?
- John Hoffmire: To feed the world, we must...
- James Gattuso: Give Tesla a truly free market...
- My view: Utah, where do you stand on... 96
- Letter: Bush dilemma 2.0 39
- George F. Will: Obama needs Congress to... 27
- W. Bradford Wilcox: The new progressive... 27
- In our opinion: How committed are... 26
- Can you pass the U.S. citizenship test? 21
- My view: Intergenerational poverty the... 19
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Are... 19