Big Bird is doing fine on his own, he makes enough to support himself without our tax dollars. Big Bird should probably be paying some tax himself. The generous distribution of our tax dollars to the many that have traditionally received them needs to be reexamined under the microscope of today's fiscal realities. Just as a family where the bread winner loses their job and must make decisions based on fiscal reality and cancel their cable or dish subscription, cut out the 3 per week restaurant meals, and shop at Walmart instead of Neiman Marcus so must the Federal Government. Yes we all love to eat out and we all love Big Bird but putting another meal on your maxed out credit card or giving Big Bird a few hundred million dollars you do not have is nuts. The sad reality with liberals is that they are very generous but only with other peoples money. Then to your point regards education. To rely on Big Bird as the stepping stone into an over funded and under performing education system is foolish at best with the good old USA ranks 25th in math and 17th in science. I fail to see how it could be much worse without him. Sadly its just another testament to public education in our country that most cannot understand the concept that you cannot get spend more than you take in. In the end Big Bird has just becomes another tool for an organization that wants to take our tax money to remain politically active and still promote "progressive policies" where it should be neutral.

I must have missed a Big Bird attack. I only heard Mitt Romney said he didn't think we should be paying for PBS. I thought Mitt said he liked Big Bird. How on earth does a TV character get this much attention with all the serious problems we have in our country? This is just another example of what some think is important to America. If our country stops paying for PBS, Big Bird will survive (actually it's Sesame Street), not just Big Bird. Look at all the Sesame Street items out there to buy. Where do you think that money goes? Let's get real America and focus on the important issues.

This has to be one of the more least sensible columns I have ever read. Romney mentioned Big Bird once. He was right. The American taxpayer should not be subsidizing PBS, NPR or public art. Not the responsibility of the taxpayer. As other posts have alluded to, NPR, PBS etc. will be fine by raising revenue on their own.
Cutting funding to these organizations will be the tip of the iceberg when the big budget crunch hits. Don't fool yourself that it won't happen.

This piece is an excellent example of the fallacy known as The Straw Man Argument.
I made it through, mainly to get to the comments, which were spot on.

(1) I'm confused. At first it seems the writer is saying the attention the Big Bird comment has received is a massive smokescreen. But the article concludes with how important Sesame Street is to a childs' pre-education, and how ludicrous it is to do away with public media... Which is it?

(2) Does anyone honestly think Sesame Street wouldn't be picked up by Nickelodeon, or something of the like, if PBS finally disappears off the face of the planet? Why does everyone's thinking have to be so binary?

Everything always has to be either or, one extreme or another. Mitt's comment was an example, an extra note for flavor, to make a point, and we're running away with this thing as if he said selling crack to children is okay. Smokescreens like these, the kind that give a puddle for all the idiots to wallow in, need to be ignored; marginalized to the backwoods of feeble-minded society while the rest of us big boys and girls focus on the actual issues.

This is a perfect example of what the left does when they are losing the argument based on real facts and substance. They result to calling the opponent names and nit picking every detail to look for something false or damaging. We could pick Obama's lines apart too but not necessary b/c Romney showed the nation what an empty suit he really is. No need to pile on I guess. If Big Bird and calling Romney a liar over and over is all the left has then desperation has truly set in.

Wake up liberals! We CANNOT AFFORD Big Bird! That is what Romney meant. In a perfect world we would all be able to have the extras...but look outside...we DO NOT live in a perfect world! Get a grip on the checkbook Washington. Get a grip on every single cent of government spending. Big Bird and PBS are luxuries if you look at what government needs to spend. For those of us that actually PAY taxes, that is OUR money! Government, make a realistic budget and stick with it. Stop bailing out private companies and then corporations can bonus their executives as they wish. It is NONE of our business if executives make multi million dollar salaries in a free market economy! FREE means that you have the opportunity to win and the opportunity to lose money without government interference.

And those children that are supposedly benefitting from watching PBS...set up an actual preschool for them (or loving Christian foster care) and help keep them safe from their unhealthy environment. It is not poverty that hurts children...it is their drug and alcohol abusing parents that have lost (or never learned) their morals and their parent(s) laziness in expecting someone else (including Big Bird the TV babysitter) to teach their children. It is a cycle that must be broken and Big Bird is not up for the job.

Although it amounts to less than .01% of the budget and was really amatuerish to bring up in the debate....I think that subsidies to all corporations need to go away.
This includes NPR, PBS, OIL Companies...etc.

When I read Kennesaw's long rambling article, It sounded more like what I read in the Banner Herald...I just got into "the Patch" and thought the Patch was not for me until I read the comments which I agree with...If people only got that Big Bird thing out of the debate, then they are telling us they thought their President was as bad in the debate as I thought.....I didn't expect much from him, and I was not disappointed!, J.L.

I think the whole point of Romney bringing it up is that we have to cut government spending and public television is one thing that can stand on its own legs. It did for years and years. It was funded by the public initially, and then became an overnight success, selling records, videos and movies. I'm so glad I'm not a democrat. I'd be feeling so embarrassed right now that that's all they had to gripe about. People have REAL problems right now. This pales in comparison. I mean, if I were an independent, I'd probably think to myself, now that's real cutting of un necessary spending! But that 's the epitomy of democratic spending- stuff we DON'T NEED. The piece was n't believable because no one has said Big Bird is bad for America, no one has said that SS is going anywhere. Smokescreen is the word alrright.

Also, Would you rather government take cuts out of a necessity like food or shelter for grandma? Kids will survive. Parents should be teaching their kids the importance of life anyway, not sticking them in front of Big Bird as a babysitter. Although I did watch it with my kids b/c I loved to sing along with Ernie!. Might explain a few things about this generation anyway. Big Bird will survive one way or another. Nick or another kid channel would pick it up. Otherwise, yes, if we want it, let us pay for it. Don't think we're entitled to it. Or God forbid, sell time to commercials.

Hear! Hear! Kim! Bravo!

Well, this is twice in a week that the obama camp has been called out. First, AARP doesn't want them using their name in the campaign, and now neither does BIg Bird! lolol

@ Chris. LOL