re: #2 EiMitch

I’m not touching #1, but #2 shows you missed a crucial bit of context. So I’ll repeat it:

Special interests fight to strip public institutions of tax funding, then fill the void with their own checks.

Why?

Why not just pay their taxes in the first place, rather than fight to cut taxes and government spending?

Control, thats why. If its tax revenue, you don’t have any say in how its spent.* But when you directly fund an organization, you have the option to stop paying.

The plug being pulled on that documentary is technically not censorship. By definition, only the government can censor. But for all intents and purposes, it is censorship.

Special interests now control PBS. Its public in name only.

…

* - Don’t give me any crap about “elections.” Those things are gerrymandered, and you know it.

Bluntly put, I’ve got no problem with David Koch exercising that control if its his damn money. I’d rather he controlled it if he earned it, as opposed to it being taken in taxes. Taxes are a necessary evil, but a government funded radio and TV network is not necessary. Thus I prefer a donor controlled PBS to one funded by taxes. A good case can be made for using tax monies to build a highway or dam, but not to pay for television programs.