Of-course, I am sure a government funded 100%-republican news and broadcasting agency with news pieces spouting right-wing talking points trotted out with regularity would be fully accepted as an excellent use of taxpayer money in the public interest by democratic politicians.
The difference is that being a republican is an ideology you choose. Republicans can stop being republicans at any time - but they don't, they continue, because they enjoy being republican.
What I mean is, republicans choose to be ideologically opposed to journalism and ideologically opposed to education. Why would they become journalists? They hate journalism, by choice.
I guess they expect NPR to have diversity hires to meet republican quotas now?
Of-course, I am sure a government funded 100%-republican news and broadcasting agency with news pieces spouting right-wing talking points trotted out with regularity would be fully accepted as an excellent use of taxpayer money in the public interest by democratic politicians.
Undoubtedly that's the reason for the under-representation of women as Fortune 500 CEO's. They're just not applying.
The difference is that being a republican is an ideology you choose. Republicans can stop being republicans at any time - but they don't, they continue, because they enjoy being republican.
What I mean is, republicans choose to be ideologically opposed to journalism and ideologically opposed to education. Why would they become journalists? They hate journalism, by choice.
Would applying be a personal and professional liability for women, the way doing so at NPR could very well be for a "Republican?"
How many "Republicans" apply for jobs in gay bars?
Nice false-equivalency attempt.
You're not making an actual argument.
You understand there are many gay republicans right?