“NPR can survive on its own. It has quality programming and I know that in the free market, should they decide to do that with a new business model, they could survive and even thrive,” Lamborn told CBS. “So let’s let them loose from taxpayer subsidies.”

Lamborn has introduced several bills targeting public broadcasting over the last two years. He has said he’s merely seeking to cut back on spending and he repeated that refrain yesterday to interviewers at CBS and Fox, who questioned whether the bill was just partisan maneuvering and whether it had any chance of moving beyond the Republican-controlled House.

“Do you think it is going to get a vet in the Senate?” asked Fox host Greta Van Susteren.

Two-thirds of the Senate did not face the voters in the last election and they have not seen, I don’t think, the righteous anger of the American people. We in the House all got it. We faced the vote. We came through the other side. They don’t understand this is a serious matter, spending in general. This is one of a bunch of things,” Lamborn said.

“Is this a political vendetta or spending issue?” Van Susteren asked.

“This to me is a spending issue,” said Lamborn.

Although he has been less coy in the past about the fact that he thinks NPR is “a friend and protector of liberal issues and political correctness at the expense of free speech and balanced news reporting,” he expanded on the fiscal discipline motives guiding the bill for CBS, arguing that the American people believe that NPR doesn’t need the funding.

“I can’t predict what the Senate will do. If they want to take ownership of continuing to fund things that have outlived their usefulness, and in this day and age, if they want to keep spending money on things that the American people think do not need the funding if we’re gonna get our spending under control, they can make that choice. I think it’s a mistake and I think voters will remember that, but [senators] have that right.”

Surveys suggest a majority of Americans support federal funding for NPR. Supporters point to the popularity of the network and the vital role it plays in the increasingly partisan advertising-driven corporate media environment.

Critics of Lamborn’s bill point out the fact that the bill cuts nothing from the federal budget. As the bill stands, it won’t save taxpayers a dime. Lamborn concedes that fact but said that it would cut roughly $64 million when teamed with an appropriations bill.

Fans of NPR and Democrats in Congress said that amount of money is crucial to NPR and its rural affiliates but means very little in the enormous federal government’s budget. More meaningful substantial cuts should be made elsewhere, they said.

Lamborn, whose district houses military bases, has repeatedly voted for outsize defense spending. His earmark votes alone over the last three years for defense projects amount to well more than half of the $64 million he says taxpayers would save by defunding NPR. He also voted to spend $485 million last year on the Joint Strike Fighter Alternate Engine program, which the Department of Defense, Pentagon leaders and Presidents Bush and Obama have tried to end as overly expensive and redundant.

ABC News called the engine program a “$3 billion government boondoggle” and government-spending watchdogs have railed against the project as one of the biggest pork projects of the last fifty years. Yet Lamborn told the Colorado Independent he was committed to the project. He said paying for the alternate engine project ramps up competition among Pentagon contractors, ensuring a better product. He said a crusial defense project meant to keep the nation safe can’t be compared to broadcast funding at a time when Americans are saturated in media.

“We have to be serious about making spending decisions,” Lamborn told CBS about the NPR bill. “We have to start somewhere. To reach one and a half trillion dollars, there’s no one program that’s going to do that. It’s going to be a combination of many steps. So we have to take a lot of steps to get to the goal of getting our spending under control.”

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Massa’s incredible radio meltdown over the weekend was tailor-made for talk radio and TV. It led the Drudge Report for much of Monday — today, Drudge is focusing on the not-so-subtle gay innuendo that Rahm Emanuel “thugs around gym showers.” And on the snippets I heard of talk radio yesterday, hosts delighted in how Massa validated their narrative of the Obama administration as a thuggish (always that word) Chicago mob that had the power to, say, initiate bipartisan ethics committee investigations of political enemies. Mark Levin, whose shtick is that of a brainy conservative lawyer who’s had enough, played clips of Massa bellyaching about the conspiracies against him — Levin, back in the studio, darkly intoned what this proved about the “Chicago machine.”

Fox News has had some trouble making this narrative stick. Last night’s episode of Greta Van Susteren’s show began with the host breathlessly reporting that Massa claimed to have been offered a “bribe” by unions — his word for union offers of electoral support if he voted for health care. When Van Susteren and guest Rick Santorum tried to delve deeper, they… well, here’s what happened:

SANTORUM: I — it’s — it’s irrational behavior. I don’t understand why he’s doing it. If he was as angry as he was at being forced out, he should have stayed. I mean…

VAN SUSTEREN: But was he really forced out? They’re having an investigation. I mean, his behavior — I mean…

SANTORUM: Yes. Investigating someone is not forcing someone out. I mean…

VAN SUSTEREN: Right. He was being investigated.

SANTORUM: He was being investigated. And I understand, you know, he’s obviously under a lot of pressure. There’s all these bizarre stories about Rahm Emanuel and — and what — you know — I don’t know. I don’t know…

VAN SUSTEREN: The nakedness in the shower. We got that on “Hannity.”

SANTORUM: Yes, OK, good. I…

VAN SUSTEREN: We don’t have to do the naked shower one.

This probably won’t end with a lot of glory for Massa or his short-term allies.

To some media professionals whom I admire because you don’t let anyone tell you to sit down and shut up, please keep making the idiots’ heads spin. Thank you for not taking our Freedom of the Press for granted, you bold and patriotic, fair and balanced media folks. Keep calling it like you see it: Amanda, Andrew, Ann, Bill(s), Bob, Cal, Dennis, Dick, Eddie, Fred, Glenn, Greta, Hugh, Joey, John, Jonah, Larry, Laura, Lou, Mark, Mary, Michael, Michelle, R.A.M., Rich, Rush, S.E., Sean, Tammy, Walter… and there are more. I join you in standing up for what is right. Remember that as your voice is heard and your spine is stiffened, the spines of others are stiffened, too.

Who’s who? Here are my best guesses for most of them: Amanda Carpenter of The Washington Times, Ann Coulter, Bill Kristol, Bill O’Reilly, Cal Thomas, Dennis Miller, Fred Barnes, Glenn Beck, Greta Van Susteren, Hugh Hewitt, Jonah Goldberg, Larry Kudlow, Laura Ingraham, Lou Dobbs, Mark Levin, Michael Reagan, Michelle Malkin, Rich Lowry, Rush Limbaugh, S.E. Cupp, Sean Hannity, Tammy Bruce, and Walter Williams. Why not use their whole names? Good question.

I don’t get this. I’m looking at the list — Afghanistan czar. Why isn’t that Department of Defense or State Department? Border czar — why isn’t that Homeland Security? California water czar — why isn’t that Agriculture? Central region czar — why isn’t that State Department? Domestic violence czar — why isn’t that Justice? Drug czar — why isn’t that DEA? Economic — why isn’t that Labor?

Sigh.

The “Afghanistan czar” is actually Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, who works for the State Department.

The “border czar” is actually Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for International Affairs and Special Representative for Border Affairs Alan Bersin; as his full title suggests, he works for DHS.

The “California water czar” is actually Deputy Interior Secretary David Hayes — why Van Susteren thinks this would be a job for the Department of Agriculture, I have no idea.

The “central region czar” is actually Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for the Central Region Dennis Ross, who reports to the National Security Council.

The “domestic violence czar” is actually White House Adviser on Violence Against Women Lynn Rosenthal. And here, Van Susteren actually gets a point—Rosenthal works directly under the president.

The “drug czar” is actually Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy Gil Kerlikowske, who was confirmed by the Senate.

The “economic czar” is actually Chair of the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board Paul Volcker, the former chairman of the Federal Reserve.

This is the quality of research at Fox News.

–

You can follow TWI on Twitter and Facebook.

Young protesters at the April 15 Tea Party in Washington, DC (Photo by: Aaron Wiener)

While South Carolina’s political establishment wrestles with the fate of Gov. Mark Sanford (R-S.C.), Ron Parks has already moved on. He’s one of the organizers of a July 4 Tea Party in Charleston, a rally that will celebrate America and protest the way that President Barack Obama is governing it.

“We had 6,000 people show up at the last Tea Party in Charleston, on April 15, when [Gov.] Sanford spoke,” said Parks, a contractor who lost his job earlier this year and quickly found work as a volunteer with the Tea Party movement. “We’re expecting fewer people this time, but I’d love to have to eat my words.”

Image by: Matt Mahurin

With no great fanfare and little national media coverage, the people who organized the April 15 Tea Parties are gearing up for a new day of protests against government spending and higher taxes. Hundreds of rallies will take place, at least one in every state, in public places and in parks rented out for the occasions. Many of the same people are involved. Most of the conservative organizations that aided the last rounds of rallies are on board for the sequel, such as FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity. A proliferation of sites run by those groups and sites run by grassroots activists are pointing curious activists to rallies ranging in size from barbeques to a rally in Dallas that organizer Phillip Dennis promises will be “the biggest Tea Party in the history of Tea Parties.”

In the run-up to the first round of Tea Parties, conservative activists were aided enormously by coverage from Fox News and the endorsements of many Republican stars. Fox News ran dozens of segments about the events, dispatching five of its stars — Sean Hannity, Greta Van Susteren, John Gibson, Glenn Beck, and Neil Cavuto — across the country to cover them live. Newt Gingrich endorsed the events, speaking at a Tea Party in Times Square and dispatching talking points to protesters through his American Solutions organization. Dozens of Republican members of Congress spoke at the events. Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele passed up an opportunity to attend a Chicago Tea Party after being denied a speaking slot, but in May he told RNC members that the tide was turning against the Obama administration because “change is being delivered in a tea bag.”

But the collaboration between the official Republican establishment and the Tea Parties has not lasted into June. The RNC has no plans to get involved with any Tea Parties. A spokesman for Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio), who jaunted around northern California to attend several Tea Parties, said that his holiday plans were private but would probably not include Tea Parties. Gingrich will not attend any of the Tea Parties, although he recorded video messages for events in Birmingham and Nashville “at the request of the respective organizers,” according to spokesman Dan Kotman.

Media coverage has also gotten a little bit more scarce. Coverage on Fox News has largely been limited to interviews with Tea Party organizers on the network’s morning shows. While sources at Fox would not discuss their plans for covering the weekend events, they confirmed that no anchors would be attending and that the attendance and news value of the events looked to be lower than that of the April rallies. Tea Party organizers are counting, instead, on local news coverage and on distributed reporting such as the conservative news site PajamasTV, which hosts an “American Tea Party” show and has asked readers to submit their own videos from their rallies.

“There are legitimate journalistic reasons for why there’s less coverage this time around,” said Seton Motley, a spokesman for the conservative Media Research Center — a group that blasted CNN and MSNBC personalities for joking about the April 15 Tea Parties. “There aren’t as many rallies this time, and there was a novelty last time that isn’t there now. Also, if you’re talking about the networks that made light of the Tea Parties back in April, they might have realized that opposite of love isn’t hate. It’s indifference.”

According to Jenny Beth Martin, a national organizer of Tea Party Patriots, there are advantages to media hype and to media indifference. In April, when Martin helped organize the Atlanta Tea Party, Sean Hannity asked for, and got, a starring role in the event — a decision that brought national coverage and 20,000 people. “But I couldn’t meet many of those people,” said Martin. “This past Saturday, we had an impromptu rally to protest the cap and trade vote. On the fly, organized with Twitter and Facebook. Only 70 people showed up but I got to speak to everyone and get to know them.” Martin did credit the media attention of April with letting the Tea Party organizers “reach an audience we simply wouldn’t have been able to reach on our own.”

The result of all of this: lower expected attendance, with some of the difference made up by a more celebratory atmosphere. On April 15, the largest Tea Party in Texas was the Fort Worth rally featuring Gov. Rick Perry, who drew days of controversy for apparently endorsing the idea of Texas seceding from the union. The July 4 Dallas Tea Party, by contrast, will combine political speeches from columnist Michelle Malkin, Bosnia war hero Scott O’Grady, and local conservative activists with entertainment from ersatz Monkees drummer and singer Mickey Dolenz, a bluegrass Beatles cover band, and a program that lets kids edit themselves into rock videos (“Be a star — no talent required!”).

“We’re using the fireworks and the Monkees and the rest of that to attract people who never though they’d be at a Tea Party,” explained Phillip Dennis. “This is going to be much more of a celebration than a protest. It’s a celebration of the Declaration of Independence, and it’s going to be our own declaration of independence from an irresponsible government.”

Dennis and the Dallas organizers are hoping for a turnout of 50,000 people, and hoping for it despite a ban on politicians speaking from the stage. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) had asked to come and to sign copies of his new book, but reeled from the restriction; retired Lt. Col. Oliver North pulled out of the event for the same reason. (DeMint will appear at the event in Charleston, the only Republican senator making such an appearance this weekend.) Without Republican politicians getting involved, Tea Party organizers can speak openly about their plans to replace them. Asked what, if any, the political impact of the April 15 events was, Dennis suggested that it was “getting Sen. Arlen Specter out of the closet as a Democrat.”

“I think of the Tea Party Movement as a play in three acts,” said Michael Patrick Leahy, a Nashville activist who has clashed with other Tea Party organizers, but who is speaking at the Dallas event. “Act one was to protest the socialist statism that we don’t believe in. The second act is happening on Saturday when we celebrate the Constitution that we do believe in. The third act will be taking actions to restore limited government.”

Leahy pointed to the more independent, more attention-getting activists as the most likely way that the Tea Parties will evolve. One example: Phil Valentine, a radio host who has launched GivetheSenateSomeBalls.com, a campaign to supplant the tea bags that activists had been sending to Congress with brightly decorated sports balls, using some scatological humor to encourage the upper house to block Democratic plans.

“The idea for the balls campaign came to me as I was sitting around waiting to go on at a Tea Party event this past Monday,” said Valentine. “People are just beginning to send their balls to their senators.”

But, really, was there ever any doubt?

Drudge reports that Greta Van Susteren has landed the interview with Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. She is traveling to Alaska to grill the former GOP vice presidential nominee. The interview is scheduled to air Monday.

Lest you get your hopes up that Palin will finally submit to a hard-hitting Q&A session, now that she has been freed from the constraints placed on her by the McCain campaign, it’s worth pointing out that Van Susteren conducted the first major interview with Todd Palin.

It focused almost exclusively on Van Susteren’s obsession with his nickname, “First Dude.”

(Via Politico)