In a genuinely competetive free market situation, this new liberal
network wouldn't last more than a few weeks. However, I suspect that
it is being backed financially by some deep pocketed extremists who
have a socialist agenda that is more important to them than financial
profits. Poor ratings, which are nearly certain, will have no bearing
on the network's longevity. This is all theory, mind you,and only time
will tell.
But as an example, take the WNBA. Most of us have no interest in
watching a bunch of hairy butch looking women pretending to be top
notch athletes on television. If you happen to tune in to one of their
games, you'll notice that the stands in the stadium are predominantly
empty. And the seats that aren't empty are freebies given out by radio
stations and such to "lucky callers" and retarded school children.
There is no way that the WNBA is making a profit, yet unlike its male
counterparts, the old WFL and more recent USFL, it's still in
existence. Why? Because it is just one element of the "equal rights"
agenda that the leftists who own the TV networks have been beating us
over the head with for decades. They trying to brainwash the consuming
masses, through their obviously unprofitable ventures such as the
WNBA,women's boxing, etc.,into accepting as fact that females are
physically equal to males. Well,in reality, they are not. Nor are
Franken and Garafolo equal to Limbaugh and Hannity.
MB



David wrote in message . ..
Like when George Bush got his baseball stadium?

On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:25:15 -0600, "Stinger"
wrote:


"N8KDV" wrote in message
...



"T. Early" wrote:

wrote in message
. 105.130...

I detect... sarcasm.

And, as far as I know, it's not Al Franken's network. He's just one
of the
people who has a show. Janeane Garofalo and Randi Rhodes are but
two of
the other notables.

It's a breath of fresh air, that's for sure. There are too many
Rush
Limbaughs and Sean Hannity's as it is.


Actually, there's one Limbaugh and one Hannity AFAIK--but it's
possible the vast right wing conspiracy has cloned them, encased them
in pods, and sent them to radio stations around the country.

Another fellow I like is Neil Boortz... his program originates from WSB in
Atlanta, and he has some syndication across the country.


Neil Boortz is a great program. He's the only one I heard railing against
the misuse of "eminent domain" powers, in which townships force property
owners to sell so a structure that generates more tax revenue could be built
there.

-- Stinger

From: (UJ)

In a genuinely competetive free market situation, this new liberal
network wouldn't last more than a few weeks. However, I suspect that
it is being backed financially by some deep pocketed extremists who
have a socialist agenda that is more important to them than financial
profits.

Is anyone else laughing as hard as I am over this nonsense. Rich socialists
throwing away their money??

Maybe it is possible that wealthy capitlaists and Americans are tired of the
hate being spread daily on the AM frequencies by the right. I'll try to keep
from labeling them as Nazis, but that makes as much sense as calling Democrats
socialists.


Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL
Louisville, KY
R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K,
DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A
GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76
(remove "nojunk" to reply)

Michael Bryant wrote:

From: (UJ)

In a genuinely competetive free market situation, this new liberal
network wouldn't last more than a few weeks. However, I suspect that
it is being backed financially by some deep pocketed extremists who
have a socialist agenda that is more important to them than financial
profits.

Is anyone else laughing as hard as I am over this nonsense. Rich socialists
throwing away their money??

Maybe it is possible that wealthy capitlaists and Americans are tired of the
hate being spread daily on the AM frequencies by the right. I'll try to keep
from labeling them as Nazis, but that makes as much sense as calling Democrats
socialists.

But that is exactly what they are. They advocate taking from those who have, and
giving to those who have not.

From: N8KDV

But that is exactly what they are. They advocate taking from those who have,
and
giving to those who have not.


So Jesus was a socialist?

Robin Hood?


Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL
Louisville, KY
R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K,
DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A
GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76
(remove "nojunk" to reply)

Michael Bryant wrote:

From: N8KDV

But that is exactly what they are. They advocate taking from those who have,
and
giving to those who have not.


So Jesus was a socialist?

Robin Hood?

If that is what they advocated, then yes, they were socialists.

Hard for you to understand Ft Boy?

From: N8KDV

From: N8KDV

But that is exactly what they are. They advocate taking from those who
have,
and
giving to those who have not.


So Jesus was a socialist?

Robin Hood?

If that is what they advocated, then yes, they were socialists.

Hard for you to understand Ft Boy?

Nope, not at all. Your idiocy is crystal clear.


Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL
Louisville, KY
R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K,
DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A
GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76
(remove "nojunk" to reply)

Michael Bryant wrote:

From: N8KDV

From: N8KDV

But that is exactly what they are. They advocate taking from those who
have,
and
giving to those who have not.


So Jesus was a socialist?

Robin Hood?

If that is what they advocated, then yes, they were socialists.

Hard for you to understand Ft Boy?

Nope, not at all. Your idiocy is crystal clear.

Crystal clear.... Hmmmmmmmmm... did you clean your bong today?

The fact is, you are a convicted drug user... we have no reason to believe
anything you say...

Nor are we under any obligation to do so.

The students you ostensibly 'teach' should be provided with the 'facts' so
that they themselves can make up their own minds.

"Michael Bryant" wrote in message
...
But that is exactly what they are. They advocate taking from those who
have,
and
giving to those who have not.


So Jesus was a socialist?

No.

Jesus never advocated "taking." He advocated "giving."

-- Stinger

From: "Stinger"

Jesus never advocated "taking." He advocated "giving."

He also advocated paying your taxes.

He advocated helping the needy.



Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL
Louisville, KY
R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K,
DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A
GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76
(remove "nojunk" to reply)

Michael Bryant wrote:

From: "Stinger"

Jesus never advocated "taking." He advocated "giving."

He also advocated paying your taxes.

So in other words, if some government entity taxes the crap out of us we
should just pay it because your 'mythical figure' Jesus said so?

Give me a break Fat Boy.

He advocated helping the needy.

Nothing wrong with that Fat Boy... that's just something any good human
being does, regardless of 'Jesus'.