I see nowhere in Article 1, Section 8 where Congress has authority to tax me in order to pay for a bunch of elitist leftist pinkos to pretend they are objective and/or superior.

If they are worth having, they will survive in the free market or through donations alone.

Give 'em the ax.

....they started in the 60's, there were only 3 channels, maybe a need for that. now w/cable & similar private  programming like discover, history channel, etc....they need to be privatized, if they survive (i hope) fine, if not...others will fill the void. same w/NPR.

also agree, no fed. funding to the arts, I enjoy them, museums, etc,  but no pets (projects) allowed!

but NPR can not expect to operate with public funding and basically axe someone for not being liberal enough.

I also think a wrongful termnination suit should be in the works.

At one time NPR provided a unique service, offering drama, nature, history, arts, etc that was not on the commercial networks.

With cable, it is no longer needed.

Also, the problem with government media is the government selects which political views it will promote, which is a terrible thing.  

I like some NPR programs, but I don't understand why they don't have a balance of views. Hell, my taxes paid for some of it.

For those of you who think that the feds should get into this business, how would you like it if the GOP wins and given Fox a contract and subsidy to run NPR?
Or I guess, it is okay for the government to be biased, as long as it is your bias.

Everybody else gets federal funds.

Since NPR receives ZERO direct federal funding

and there is no movement in Congress to provide federal funding, your question is kind of moot.

    Nor does NPR receive on any regular basis funds from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting - they have to apply for specific grants to get any part of that money and the grants they have received lately are de minimus.

    NPR is essentially member and endowment funded  and Huckabee's call to end federal funding that doesn't actually exist makes so glad he's a talk show host there days.

the public should be informed on the prevalent issues in society from all viewpoints. Unfortunately, Fox, CNN, NBC et al, have become dominated by their juvenile instincts. Where I fault NPR, is that they do have a tendency to devote a predominate amount of time to homosexual, anti-Christian, anti-military viewpoints. They are not immune to criticisms of biased reporting. They are elitists and like to talk to the latte drinking Volvo driving crowd.

I do not know Frontline is an NPR program or not but their reporting on the Global War on Terror has been biased.

Right now only Fox News is accurately reporting the circumstances on the Ft. Hood shootings. Frankly, I am dissappointed in the coverage given to the Muslim Terrorism that has been perpratrated. We have American soldiers that were killed on an American Army Base on American soil and there is scant reporting. Whereas NPR will report any little detail if American soldiers make a mistake in the field of battle.  That's a problem.