News is in about a zillion homes in America,
but not because it beat out its competition
with superior programming. In truth, it's because
Rupert Murdoch greased a lot of palms back
in 1996 to the tune of $5.5 per palm or, in
this case, $11 per cable subscriber.
Not charging $11. Paying $11. That's like 7-11
paying you $5 to come in and read the dirty magazines.
In case you were actually born yesterday cable operators normally pay for the
media they offer, so you can just imagine how enthusiastically they lapped-up
that deal for free news service like so much $11 honey.
Nowadays Fox News charges for their service. A lot. I'm told drug dealers work
the same way.
Fox News has, for all intents and purposes, become the Grima Wormtongue of cable
news, belching disinformation into the public's ear for the benefit of Sauron,
I mean, the Republican party. Fox has become so brazen about their partisanship
that they're now openly funding the campaigns of Republican governors. (Why governors?
They have a great deal to say in how voting precincts are allocated once the
census is in. Think, Texas, 2000. Yeah, there's good news.)
If you also think Fox News sucks then do something about it. You can vow to quit
watching it, you can call your cable operator and complain about it, or you can
get a free "Turn Off Fox" to slap anywhere you like.
That's free as in "not even paying postage". Of course, you can buy
more stickers if you like, and I hope you do. All you have to do is click on
the "Turn Off Fox" image above.
I think I'm the first person in the world to
tell the following joke:
Q: Why don't vampires shop for clothes at JC
A: Because they prefer Sears sucker suits.
Thank you! Thank you! No, sit down, really!
(Man, the shit that goes through your mind
at three in the morning.)
The Bush Tax Cuts. Here's something you may not know.
The Republican Congress rammed the tax cuts through back in 2001 and
2003 using consolidation rules, meaning no Democratic filibuster could
The cuts are set to expire after just eight years, at the end of 2010,
because any period longer than that meant the Republicans would have
had to find some way to pay for them.
one trillion dollars the wealthy received in the past eight years as
a result of the cuts was paid right out of the Treasury, just like it
It was, in reality, your money. Don't think so? Check the National Debt.
If the cuts are made permanent, and it would require an act of Congress,
they'd have to be paid for, and the first places Republicans are looking
did I mention that these are permanent cuts? When you hear Republicans
use the phrase
"redistribution of wealth" this what they really
Fortunately all the Congress need do is... nothing. The tax cuts
will sunset on 12-31-10 and become nothing more than a very painful memory
for everyone but the top 1%. In the meantime the Republican strategy
plead poverty and paint this as an enormous tax
not. In reality, it's more like shutting the barn door while there's
still a little manure left.