Forcing taxpaying Americans to fund liberal propaganda television and radio shows is similar to union bosses forcing conservative union members to contribute their hard earned dues to help candidates like Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama win elections. No American should have to pay for government funded media outlets who pass off biased opinions by liberal hosts as  news  or television shows that work to indoctrinate our youth. The Trump administration will end federal involvement with the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, according to Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney.Mike Gonzales, VP of Communications for the Heritage Foundation sums up the insanity of government funding for the CPB in this US News piece: There s a reason liberals have taken up Big Bird as the face of public broadcasting and not, say, Bill Moyers. Mr. Bird is feathery and cuddly, while Moyers likes to compare American flag lapel pins to Mao s Little Red Book. This is how the left undermines our institutions from within: make the effort appear homey and apple pie-ish. Show Big Bird, not Big Bill. Moyers is not alone. Many other journalists at PBS and NPR equally epitomize an aloof liberal elite that has squandered half the nation s trust in the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Over at NPR there is Nina Totenberg, who once wished AIDS on the grandchildren of Sen. Jesse Helms. No, Totenberg won t be the face of the pro-public broadcasting effort, either. Elmo is being pressed into service.I don t mean to pick on Moyers or Totenberg. They are no different from many of their brethren in other publications. For some reason probably because liberals want to change American society, which they see as inferior, and people who want to change society tend to go into journalism most people in the profession are liberal. In one important way, however, Moyers and Totenberg are different. Journalists at The New York Times and MSNBC must constantly strive to give their publics what they want. If they fall short, they ll get a quick reality check: Readers will buy a different paper or click somewhere else online. TV viewers will reach for their remotes.Only PBS and NPR journalists think they re entitled to a conservative taxpayer s dime. And this is the nub of the problem. How can an institution that represents the views of only the liberal half of the population, and only grudgingly acknowledges conservatives and their principles in passing, believe it has a claim on all taxpayers?Yes, the CPB says that it s impartial, that it s popular, and that taxpayer money covers a tiny percentage of their operating revenue. And that just makes my point. If they re willing to ignore widespread conservative complaints and refuse to institute changes, then they have a problem. And, yes, I agree, they can do fine without our money. Their membership strategy amounts to a fantastic business model. They will thrive on it. We can use the $444 million they get a year. We proposed ending funding, but technically what you ll see it s an elimination but you ll see an amount of money in the budget, and it is some amount of money that s necessary for us to unwind our involvement with CPB,  Mulvaney said during the briefing on the administration s budget blueprint.  So you won t see a zero next to it, but the policy is that we re ending federal involvement with the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Next year it might be zero, it may take a while to unwind that relationship, it s just the nature of contracts,  he said.The Washington Free Beacon previously reported defunding NPR and public radio would likely take years because the Corporation for Public Broadcasting gets its funding two years in advance.The CPB receives roughly $450 million each year, with $99.1 million going to public radio.The Trump administration will release the full budget blueprint Thursday afternoon. The so-called  skinny  budget shows Congress the administration s spending priorities, and officials have characterized the suggested spending cuts as  dramatic.   WFB