I wish Soros and the other "billionaires" would buy a television

[Cadence]

network to battle fox. I'm glad they are doing something, but the two things we need the most are paper trails in elections and a strong, consistent MSM presence.

[Pam-Moby]

1. Yes, I think this is the only way of getting real news on TV. n/t

[Goldeneye]

2. They know about the media.

I hope thats what they are considering.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

3. KICK

[moggie12]

4. Great idea - have Soros go mano-a-mano against Murdock

In the meantime, I'm focusing my efforts on MSNBC. Keith Olbermann comes the closest to telling it like it is in my opinion. And that Scarborough guy seems to be toning down his rhetoric a bit. I've been sending e-mails to both shows encouraging more of the same.

P.S. GE is driven by nothing but profits. They would air shows about pig bladders if it would attract viewers, ratings, and advertisers.

[bkcc]

8. You're absolutely right about the profits.

The only reason Fox News became such a huge force in the first place was that it was a financial success...because it targeted a demographic that was desperate to hear news with a right-wing bias.

Rupert Murdoch may have a political agenda, but he's no fool. Just take a look at the Fox Network--it broadcasts all the types of programming that his "news" network rails against. Why? Because it makes him money.

It's all about the money. Regardless of Murdoch's politics, I guarantee that if there were no more profit to be made in right-wing bullshit but liberal TV was the new cash cow that he'd be putting out a product to capitalize on it.

[moggie12]

9. Aha, another instance of great minds thinking alike!

I was glad to hear at least one person agrees with me on the MSM and their motives. I think the first step in doing something about MSM is understanding their motivations. I laughed when you pointed out the hypocrisy of Fox. You're right, while "the legion of decency" is proclaiming the importance of "moral values" on Fox News, the other arm of the company is make a mint off broadcasting exactly what they're all yapping about! It's a strange time we live in!

[Cadence]

10. I agree, their motives are purely profit driven.

Actually that stays right in line with their politics too if you think about it. Their number one agenda item is always about money, tax breaks for the rich, controlling oil rich countries giving the spoils to the companies they're aligned with, privatizing social security to make their friends in the banking industry richer.

It's not as much about heartfelt ideals as they would like people to believe, that's just a front for their greedy little, money grubbing reality.

[imenja]

5. agree completely

I've been saying this for a while now. Either Soros, the Heinz family, or some other rich Democrat. There are lots of them.
Apparently Al Gore has a cable station that is supposed to start up next year. From what I've read, it's geared toward very young voters.

[Cadence]

11. You know, sadly, I don't know that much about

the Heinz family fortune. I've been too focused on the issues and bigger problems at hand to care. Do they have the kind of buying power it would really take to buy or create a network?

Maybe we should suggest that to Chris next time he's around. Hey- you want to make a real difference? Get a network.

From a financial perspective, as far as return, this would have to look good. There are over 57 million people currently disenfranchised from the media. This is just begging for someone to capitalize on.

[OnionPatch]

12. I guess you don't because they are Republicans

Theresa's late husband was too. So forget about them helping out any. Some of the younger ones may be lefties but the big shots who own the corporation are GOP. (I think it was pretty funny, though, that the cons all stopped buying their ketchup.)

[Cadence]

14. Really? How did Chris Heinz become a democrat?

Does he not own part of the company? What *does* he do anyway?

Why are rich people so goddamn concerned with money and getting more and poor or middle income people aren't? It should be the opposite.

[imenja]

16. the family has billions

The family has billions. I have no idea about Chris Heinz's individual fortune or occupation. Teresa Heinz Kerry runs a large charitable trust in Pennsylvania.

You likely contribute to their wealth whenever you buy ketchup. Who doesn't buy Heinz ketchup? It's as American as apple pie.

[Cadence]

21. Oh ya gotta have Heinz....

it's the only good brand. :D

[imenja]

15. They WERE Republicans

The Republican party has moved increasingly to the right, and the Heinz's became Democrats. I heard Chris Heinz say on an interview that he thinks his father would not have supported the current Republican agenda. You also couldn't have payed any attention to Teresa Heinz Kerry and not realize she is a progressive.

[OnionPatch]

17. I know she is and I love her! She is great!

and Chris, too, but I always heard the rest, the big-wigs of the corp were Republicans. I heard he said his father would not have approved but unbelievably most Republicans do approve of Bush. At any rate, I don't see them jumping on the "Get the liberals a network" bandwagon. (Maybe Chris and Teresa would but...)

[imenja]

18. maybe not

but it's worth a shot. They certainly can afford it.

[Cadence]

20. That's kind of what I was thinking. That they

(his dad and family) were probably part of the old Republicans, which were nothing like the version the Republican party has evolved into today.

I love Teresa Heinz Kerry! She was the reason I started supporting John in the beginning. I think it was about three years ago that I first saw her on c-span, you know how the camera hangs around to watch people after a speech is over, anyway a reporter came up and asked her if she was going to change her name to Teresa Kerry if her husband became president. I think she went by just Teresa Heinz then. Anyway you could just see this spitfire attitude leap to the surface and she said, "what a silly thing to ask me, you wouldn't be asking me a question like that if I were a man!" and she left. The reporter stood there kind of dumbfounded. LOL!!
It fit with the context because she was really saying things that were important and relevant, and to have such a trivializing question come after what she had been speaking about was ridiculous.
After that, I thought, o.k. who is this John Kerry, I don't know him but I like him because of his wife! :D

[imenja]

22. I also like her

She's a smart, caring woman. I do wonder, however, if she may have been a liability in the election. I personally never had any objection to her except for her comment that Laura Bush never had a real job. Obviously she was wrong on the facts, and she apologized. But raising children and working in the home is indeed a real job. My sister does it, and it's far more demanding and exhausting than my own work as a college professor. Moreover, it troubled me that she didn't realize how absurd a comment like that would seem coming from a billionaire.
Please don't misunderstand me. I like her very much. She would have made a wonderful First Lady. Her language ability and experience abroad were invaluable contributions. I do wonder, however, if some middle American voters might have been turned off by her and left that figure into the various concerns that prompted them to vote for Bush.

[Cadence]

23. I don't think so. I forgot she made that comment ,but at the time

she said it, I wasn't thinking about middle america housewives and how hard that job was. I was thinking about millionaire Laura Bush and I just bet her version of how "hands on" she was, was pretty far off from the rest of America. She probably had nannies, housekeepers and cooks.
Teresa, from what I know wasn't always a billionaire and I believe she knows what it means to struggle. The difference between her and Laura is that she will take her billions and try to help. That certainly came across to me during the campaign and I'm sure it did for a lot of people.
I think more middle American voters were turned off by "gun control" than anything either her or John could have said. Seriously, I don't think most of America thinks that deeply.

[calimary]

6. This may be THE best way to win.

If we can't get our message out in the media (especially since most of 'em are probably on the bush payroll in one way or another), we have to make our own media. More radio stations need to be purchased, building a coast-to-coast network that can replace the limbaugh blight with Air America, and other liberal on-air talent.

They keep whining about the "liberal media." There ISN'T any. So why not help them not to be LIARS anymore? Let's provide a genuine liberal media for 'em?

[adadem]

7. May be the ONLY way

because there is nary a liberal voice on the airwaves today.

[OnionPatch]

13. I totally agree

we'll never get anywhere until we have equal power to spread our message on the MSM. No matter what we do, the MSM will twist and misrepresent what Democrats say and stand for. Just look at the lies they spread about Al Gore and the way they all put the Swift Boat liars out there 24/7 but cringed and groveled and pissed on themselves when they were lashed out at for running the TANG stories. We need some media fast and we need some media with balls. They would make a fortune. People are dying for some truth. They would be the prefered station for at least HALF of the country! I am creeped out by the fact that there isn't one already because if there is money to be made, generally everyone is jumping on it. I think they're all afraid they'll get snuffed.

[Cadence]

19. If you have enough money, you can pay to protect yourself

from being snuffed. ;) I've wondered that too, why someone hasn't already capitalized on the rest of the market. I actually think some of what is out there from fox has a supportable market from the right wing fundie mentality. But since the other networks jumped on the band wagon and are now using each other to gauge how well they are doing instead of feedback from the public, they're getting ratings from people who don't necessarily agree, but don't have an alternative.

I firmly believe this "fundie majority" bullshit is a myth. For every hundred people I know there is MAYBE one that fits that profile. Everyone I talk to says the same thing, and I'm in a red state. But it's a good myth for keeping power and control. If you don't have the numbers fake it, and control people by sheer belief that they are in the minority.