Where is the "leftist" media in the US?

I would be a little disinclined to agree with this. But then again I don't know enough about PBS. But from my understanding is that PBS is not owned or operated by rich white guys, nor are its member stations owned by rich white guys, but by more independant people. Also PBS is operated via council where it is not necessairly run by a rich white guy. Currently though, as i understand it, the CEO of PBS is a rich white guy.And on top of that the investors of PBS are not out for profit (again to my understanding they are run by private donations, industrial donations and federal grants). And also to my understanding is that the Federal government created PBS, but tried to minimize anykind of influence it had within PBS beyond general funds for programming.

ERrr sorry i think i was talking a specific subset of PBS which would be NPR (national public radio), cause i also think that is incorporated into the public broadcasting service.

So is that any better then only presenting the bible as literal fact and truth and shielding the kid from outside literature?All of the information regarding criticism of bible is open to public to look at, and people look. Cept the people who need to look most are told that the open information is biased liberal goddestroying garbage that will make you unchristian.Whereas the bible is also open for everyone to see, and given free oppurtunity, people if they have never encountered the bible, never really care nor wonder about it.

Ah but consider which is better, the fundamentalist who follows strict adherence to bible, which has led to hardcore racism, KKK etc. That would like to force a belief in Christ upon others?Or a 'morally corrupt' liberal that would like to think things through prior to making decisions? And really doesn't care what other people do so long doesn't cause harm.Note: of course these aren't the only two options, but they are the most stereotyped.

Actually what was funniest about NPR, is they are equally castigated by liberals and conservatives. Apparently they get many many letters about their and unbalanced media coverage.

Same here I read a fair share of the bible, I didn't touch the new testament though. i finished somewhere like 6 or 7 books after numbers. I can't exactly remember where.All I remember is alot of killing, persecution, suffering a few bits about health codes, covering the feet and knowing the wives. Of course the language was such that it wasn't terribly violent the way normal violence is now a days. Was more like it was summarizing an aftermath. I mean though its literature...easily one of the most influential pieces of western literature but literature none the less...

But as i understand, the 'best' way to read it is from new testament then to the old testament. I think the justification was that it puts the changes into context or something like that.