Evan,

>>Get the stupid state government out of business they do not understand! <g>
>
>I disagree that government run means bad. BBC, PBS, CBC and the US public radio system (I forget the name) are examples examples of government business which not only excel in their field but are the best of best world-wide.

Well, I have seen some good programs on the public systems but most are infected with the typical politically correct nonsense. Earth first (read: worship) junk and so forth... In addition to the political orientation which we can haggle about until we both turn blue <g> is the inherent inefficiencies in gov't run enterprises. That's usually what I am referring to as 'bad'. Most are junk programs. I say that after purchasing three copies of the video that shows around here every 4th of July called, "A More Perfect Union". ( http://creativeworks.byu.edu/catalog/index.cgi?userid=120-995491507-209&NP801=Video ) It was developed under the auspices of the Mormon Church (of which I am not a member) and is one of the best videos I've ever seen. But I think this makes my case. It was more or less a private project.

Here's one example... In our PBS system we have the wildly popular Sesame Street. Now, I happen to personally like it more than most other shows. Were you aware that the revenues of Sesame Street alone could just about fund the entire PBS system? But, what happens?? The owner keeps all the $$ and expects the US Taxpayer to continue funder her program. I think that's wrong and if she has the dough she should pay her fair share. IOW, I think I'm seeing a typical liberal ploy where they want to spend other people's money for their agenda. I resent that.

Theft is the forcible taking of someone else's property. Taxes, left unpaid, can result in jail time. Taxes used for purposes quite apart from the specific, written federal obligations enumerated in the US Constitution are IMO pure theft. The usual justification is based upon feelings, almost always without merit IMO and the forcible imposition (by virtue of me not having the ability to withdraw voluntarily) of one point of view on others. For example, liberals are usually the ones whining about those of us who have a profession of faith, by virtue of our professing our positions as somehow the equivilent of forcing or pushing our views. It's nothing of the sort. It's me taking advantage of my right to free speech. And yet they think nothing of forcing me to not be able to express my faith. Pure and unadulterated hypocrisy.

Nope.. IMO if these ventures cannot sustain themselves either by the value they provide or through the voluntary generosity of others then IMO they should die a swift death and be seen no more.

I'd rather make the decisions on how to spend my money thankyouverymuch. <g>

When the feds take my money and use it for something that is contrary to the intent of the Constitution IMO it's theft, pure and simple. Having said that I will absolutely pay 100% of the taxes I owe, using all legal and officially provided means of reducing that tax burden. I believe in obeying the laws of the government I live under and, when I am able to help make changes, to so do.

The other objection I have with the involvement of federal funds is the presumption that the federal government talkes in that it now has the right to dictate how those funds are spent. IOW - control, and often repression of good, hearty debates.