After my brother passed my family went to Nantucket to spread ashes. A beautiful place, my wife and I noticed an odd home right up against one of the sandy street to the beach. Later we learned that the home was Mr. Rogers' "Crooked House". The house seemed to embody the man's personality to a tee.
No doubt Rogers articulately stated his position, he wanted to do good things for children. Who can argue with that? Problem is when an objective is described in a way that places it in a morally superior position, what amount of money of correct? I think that by a liberal's definition that amount would be what ever they ask for, and that any resistance to the full amount is blow to children.
Well here I would use their own argument against them, one would have to agree that feeding starving child should take precedence of the needs of television watching drooler. Wouldn't one? If that is the case isn't a more moral choice to apply all the money destined for Public Broadcasting the the starving children of the world?
Watching this clip, I can't help but be reminded what a creep dude Mr. Rogers was.
Over Forty Years Ago, Mister Rogers Fought For PBS, And Gave The US Senate Goose Bumps
No comments:
Post a Comment
Show me the love. Serious, even disagreeable comments are not moderated.