if I undertood it rightly, with federal $, npr reporting is threatened to be "under the government's thumb" for content, which is contrary to free reporting.
yet, npr is known for its liberal bias (hence, seemingly not under "the thumb").
better to let npr to be as wildly liberal as it wants (because I guess the only thing keeping it from sounding like pacifica radio is that it reins itself in because of the possibility of losing federal $).
furthermore, it is wrong to partially fund npr with taxpayer dollars from americans who disagree with npr's core values (as constrained in its liberal bias as it is)
therefore, we should eliminate federal funding to npr.
why do I detect a hint of sleightness-of-hand?
(this argument reconstructed from a discussion hosted by npr, voiced by David Boaz, executive vice president of the Cato Institute and longtime critic of federal funding for public broadcasting)
you can hear it too, at:
http://www.kqed.org/a/forum/R201103181031
