...that NPR is full of shills for Obama:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolit...pass-this-bill

Comparing his words against Christ's words to His disciples. One giant facepalm for you, NPR (National Propaganda Radio not National Public Radio)

 

Frank, I think you're misunderstanding. The blog you're pointing to is titled: "It's All Politics". And, the blogger, Frank James, seems to be pointing out that President Obama is trying to "recapture" some of the "star status" he had back when he was elected. (A political ploy.) I certainly don't see Mr. James comparing him to Jesus in this, but comparing his words? Certainly.

If anything, Mr. James could be accused of unfairly picking on the President for paraphrasing Biblical words in his speech.

But, that's the way I read the blog, and after all, it's just a blog.

- Jack

 

Which part is Frank not understanding? Sounds like you guys said the same thing.

 

But hey, Jack says we're the ones that are misunderstanding.

 

Uh, Jack, the blog is at npr.org.

 

The first line of the blog: The realities of governing as opposed to the unrealities of presidential campaigns may have made President Obama a much more human figure compared with the almost messiah-like status he had in the eyes of many supporters in 2008......polite, but far from an endorsement.

The reference to Christ's conversation with Simon Peter has such a poor connection to this speech as to be laughable and not worth the ink. But, keep digging.

 

And the second line is: "But that doesn't mean there still isn't the occasional moment reminiscent of a Bible story."

This second line implies that Obama was Christ-like in his first presidential campaign, and that he still (occasionally) has that power.


As to the part you quoted, the author states Obama is 'more human' now than he was in 2008. What exactly did the author think he was in 2008, if not human? In the context of the blog, the clear answer is the author felt Obama had some sort of divinity.

Sorry, but it is offensive to many to imply that a President is Divine. Using a taxpayer funded bully pulpit makes it even worse.

 

Be careful not to shoot the messenger because you dislike the message. Everyone here knows you are an Obama apologist whenever anything like this is posted.

For anyone that has actually read the entire link, it is obvious the connections that are made.

 

Looks like many those who wrote comments to the blog felt that the author was comparing Obama to Christ, and they are not happy this was done with taxpayer money.

Either they misunderstand, or the author did a very poor job expressing himself.

 

I think the problem is, we bring our own prejudices to the table in matters like these and see only what we want to see.

Again, I did not see Mr. James doing anything but drawing parallels regarding words, and pointing out that President Obama has lost the "superstar/savior/knight to the rescue/etc." image he had right after the election.

It was hardly a direct comparison to Jesus.

And Frank, a blog IS only a blog. I don't care where you find it. That's why I have so much trouble with the blogs YOU drag up as "fact".

- Jack

 

Ah, but this blog is paid for with tax dollars.

 

but its just a blog

 

Jack, I honestly could not care less if you have a problem with it. Even though we are all aware of how highly you regard your personal opinion (as all liberals do), I post things for general consumption, not for one person. You fail to understand-for some reason after repeatedly being told-that this blog is on NPR's official website.

Are you denying that this blog is actually on their site? Do you feel that the NPR site is not really their site but some "vast right-wing conspiracy"?


Methinks that you have no problem with tax dollars being used in this way, and you are trying to deflect, yet again.

 

OK, Frank - since you brought up this fallacy too, take a look at this: http://www.npr.org/about/aboutnpr/pu...ofinances.html

Please notice that NPR is "self supporting". It IS sponsored, by corporate sponsors, who happen to include the Ford Motor Company. (I suppose you think Ford is just a liberal Democratic "front" company now?) Or, gosh - maybe Ford recognizes value, unlike you.

You and many others, including Dirt Bike, are confusing NPR with Public Radio stations, which DO receive Government support. But, as you see, that support is really a small part of the total. Over 50% comes from individuals and, corporations! (Dang, there's that private sector interest again! Seems to me that if corporate America didn't like what Public Radio was broadcasting, they'd withdraw their support.)

Now, it's true that Public Radio buys content from NPR, so you could say that your tax money eventually gets there, but they don't have to. They only buy that content in response to the wishes of their listening audience. And really, how much money are we talking about? You can look at their financial statements. It's really "petty cash" in the Government budget.

And Frank, it's not so much that I have a "problem" with your one-sided view, it's just that it seems fair to provide a touch of reality when needed.

Finally, to set the record straight - Do I feel my personal opinion is superior to yours? You're damned right I do!

- Jack

 

So since NPR is so well funded, I guess they won't miss it if the government cuts off all their subsidies.

I think it's 'only' $90 million a year or so they get from the taxpayers.

Hey - Perhaps NPR could just refund this year's subsidy. Lots of folks seem to need that $90 million, and then NPR would not have to endure all the jokes about being like Pravda.

BTW, we recently got some insight into how NPR views the American taxpayer from former NPR exec Ron Schiller. Interesting video, if you have not seen it.