"Red Cloud©" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 18:01:24 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:56:02 GMT, Red Cloud©
wrote:

On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:30:26 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:23:45 GMT, Red Cloud©
wrote:

On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 15:56:59 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

~~ snippage ~~

Think again Rusty old friend - if Air America can't even bring in an
audience from Boston or New York or Providence for pete's sake, then
they really suck.

Do you still ride a horse to get around?

Facts is facts - if you don't like them, not my problem.

The fact that you are overlooking is that Air America had the
foresight to sign an exclusive contract with the run-away winner in
the satellite radio race. XM. Conventional radio delivery is declining
rapidly on all fronts. At least for now, the replacement is XM.

Sirius dumped them and XM won't be much that far behind.

You can't build a radio network on satellite radio even if you have 5
million (slightly exaggerated by the way - - their actual subscription
rate is closer to 3.8 million) subscribers because you have 150
channels to choose from spanning everything from music, talk and
entertainment. Of that, maybe 1 hour of drive time listening per day
max - that's if they are tuned to XM at all which is unlikely. Sirius
and XM tend to be longer distance entertainment devices rather than
short run devices.

So much for listening to Air America on satellite.


Yeah, cable TV will never catch on either!

Unfortunately, radio is not listened to as much at home as TV. What Tom said
about 1 hour drive time listening has been a limiting factor for radio since
the early 1970s, according to my radio ad sales friend, Mike, who's been in
the business about that long.

"OlBlueEyes" wrote in message
...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

Anyway, Chrysler had to APPROVE its acquisition by Daimler-Benz. And
even so-called "hostile" takeovers are so named only because the
buyer is bypassing negotiations with the management of the company
being bought - the buyer still has to buy shares on the open market
from the current shareholders, and if enough refuse to sell, the
takeover attempt fails.

You're stuck on the idea of public companies.

Privately-held companies are no different. The OWNERS MUST AGREE TO SELL.

From an interview a
couple of years back with some broadcasting consultant: In smaller
markets, many of the companies bought up by Clear Channel are
privately held. They're run by employees, and the third generation of
family just sits in the background because they inherited it and
aren't much interested in the business. They wait for a buyer to come
along, and there goes the radio station.

So you want to prohibit those third-generation station owners from doing
with THEIR OWN ASSETS what they wish? Well, I guess since you probably
favor extending the death tax, you DO. Only that will ACCELERATE the
process of small businesses being forced to sell out to big ones. Lemme
guess, when that manufactured "crisis" reaches critical mass, you want the
GOVERNMENT to decide who can or cannot buy certain "assets that serve the
public interest" such as radio stations, so that Al Franken and his crowd
can buy stations either below market value, or with taxpayer subsidies.

Interesting conclusions. ROFL!

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article , says...
OlBlueEyes wrote:

chuckgould wrote:
:

Nominee for today's "dumb as a post" post.

Most Libs never learned HOW to think. Not much use in today's world for
these ghetto trained "intellectuals." Little wonder this one migrated to
selling used cars, ripping off the public and government in tax fraud
schemes, and other assorted shyster "deals."

--
Skipper

You clearly have libs and the right wing interposed.

Ripping off the public and government and tax fraud are the exclusive
domain of America's public corporations.

You have forgotten about all of the individuals that file tax returns every
year. How many of them have committed fraud with the returns they filed.

If they didn't move money and jobs offshore, we wouldn't have to support
such a heavy burden in the social welfare system.

Again, corporations are in business to make money. If moving a funciton
offshore will increase profits then it is a wise move. The US labor force
needs to understand that they are part of this problem with their demands
for outrageous wages and benefits.

Moving money from the pockets of the former middle class into the
pockets of the investor class.

Investor class? Do you know who is part of the the investor class? Everyone
that has a 401k, IRA or pension plan. That money doesn't get put into a
"lock box" and majically multiply. It is invested in corporations and other
business endeavors to have that money multiply.

In article ,
says...
jps wrote in
:

In article , says...
OlBlueEyes wrote:

chuckgould wrote:
:

Nominee for today's "dumb as a post" post.

Most Libs never learned HOW to think. Not much use in today's world
for these ghetto trained "intellectuals." Little wonder this one
migrated to selling used cars, ripping off the public and government
in tax fraud schemes, and other assorted shyster "deals."

--
Skipper

You clearly have libs and the right wing interposed.

Ripping off the public and government and tax fraud are the exclusive
domain of America's public corporations.

Such as the Corporation for Public Broadcasting? Right you are! PRIVATE
corporations have to SELL USEFUL PRODUCTS AND/OR SERVICES in order to make
money. Not so with public ones.

Oh yeah, good case-building there. Drop in the ****in' ocean.

If they didn't move money and jobs offshore, we wouldn't have to
support such a heavy burden in the social welfare system.

Even a third grade history student would understand that you have put the
cart before the horse. The burdensome social welfare and taxation systems
have FORCED employers offshore.

You don't know third graders. I have two and they're quite concerned
about the people living in the streets who are apparently crazy.

Most corporations have ceased being participants in the greater good of
our country. It's not about creating a stronger country, it's about
making a richer investor class.

Kiss the middle class goodbye along with the manufacturers and retailers
that service and employ them. Short-sighted idiots whose sole purpose
is next quarter's financial outlook is what drives business now.

We have a government that's in partnership with Corporations.

That's commonly referred to as Fascism.

jps

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 11:04:44 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:


There are serious questions about how Air America was being funded and
their might be fraud indictments.

Are they the "ham sandwich" variety? Will the indictments stand the light
of day?

Could be but, there are even current liberals running away from Air America.

wrote in message
oups.com...

If Clear Channel didn't buy up Sirius, (no reason to suspect they did),
a very real possibility would be a campaign by certain susbscribers to
Sirius. "Deere Serious. Pleaze get that trayteris krap netwerk, Error
America, offa my car raydeo or I am a-gonna cansill my supskrishun. I
shir hope y'all get this, I do baleave this is the add-dress they give
out on the Hannah Tee show." Suppose? Maybe Air America got "Dixie
Chicked"? :-)


If I am not mistaken, Sirius is a Canadian company.

Eisboch

Liten up man. the drugs is etin you up. Suggest you lay off em 24 hrs before
you post.
wrote in message
ups.com...

Skipper wrote:
OlBlueEyes wrote:

chuckgould wrote:
:

Nominee for today's "dumb as a post" post.

Most Libs never learned HOW to think. Not much use in today's world for
these ghetto trained "intellectuals." Little wonder this one migrated to
selling used cars, ripping off the public and government in tax fraud
schemes, and other assorted shyster "deals."

--
Skipper

Oh, look! It's supposedly "Skipper" again. But it isn't, as this
unwarranted personal attack was obviously penned by a deranged and
bitter a-hole. I have met Skipper, and it would be hard to describe him
in such terms.

So, psuedo-Skipper,
Care to enthrall us with your wind-in-the-teeth tale of surviving
hurricane force winds aboard your 22-foot Bayliner in the Sea of
Cortez?
The version where you claimed to have a bunch of gas cans strapped to
the gunwales, (after some spoil sport observed that your boat doesn't
have the fuel capacity to provide the range for the cruise you claimed
to make), would be nice. Some details of how you managed to pour the
fuel from those
portable cans into your fuel tank, bouncing around in the midst of the
Torito hurricane would be interesting as well. (It would probably be
considered polite to spin that yarn "downwind" from the audience).

Of course, you'd need to consult the "real" Skipper for that
information.
Why not check with him, if you can find him, and get back to us?

On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:54:14 GMT, Red Cloud© wrote:

On 28 Sep 2005 07:47:50 -0700, "Mule" wrote:

Scandals and lack of funds, is it all over for this left wing radio in
a little over a year on the air? I just got the new channel guide from
Sirius Satellite Radio and they have been taken off the guide, not sure
if they are still on XM.

You are full of ****. They are alive and GROWING! I hope this news
ruins your week.

http://www.airamericaradio.com/

rusty

Gosh, they're doing so well they're asking for donations!

https://secure.airamericaradio.com/
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On 28 Sep 2005 08:24:35 -0700, wrote:


P Fritz wrote:
"Red Cloud©" wrote in message
...
On 28 Sep 2005 07:47:50 -0700, "Mule" wrote:

Scandals and lack of funds, is it all over for this left wing radio in
a little over a year on the air? I just got the new channel guide from
Sirius Satellite Radio and they have been taken off the guide, not sure
if they are still on XM.

You are full of ****. They are alive and GROWING! I hope this news
ruins your week.

http://www.airamericaradio.com/

rusty


Another kool-aid drinker that believes "if it is on the internet, it must be
true"


LMAO


Better or worse than a dittohead who believes "If Limbaugh said it, it
must be true." ?

Any chance Clear Channel bought Sirius? Clear Channel owns more radio
stations and broadcasting capability than any other group in the US,
(yet still whines that their message is ignored by the "mainstream"
media). In some small communities, *all* the radio stations are owned
by Clear Channel.
That's how you guys "spread" your message, by buying up and silencing
other voices. Must be some really obvious advantages to the philosophy
you espouse when silencing dissent is the first item on the agenda.
Maybe that's why they call it "Clear Channel," they plan is to clear
the channel of anything that might impede the advance of the agenda
promoted by Limbaugh and his ilk.

If Clear Channel didn't buy up Sirius, (no reason to suspect they did),
a very real possibility would be a campaign by certain susbscribers to
Sirius. "Deere Serious. Pleaze get that trayteris krap netwerk, Error
America, offa my car raydeo or I am a-gonna cansill my supskrishun. I
shir hope y'all get this, I do baleave this is the add-dress they give
out on the Hannah Tee show." Suppose? Maybe Air America got "Dixie
Chicked"? :-)

Chuck, it's not 'dissent' that should be silenced, it's the outright lies.

You know, statements like, "Nagin did a good job."
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On 28 Sep 2005 08:48:27 -0700, wrote:


Mule wrote:
Scandals and lack of funds, is it all over for this left wing radio in
a little over a year on the air? I just got the new channel guide from
Sirius Satellite Radio and they have been taken off the guide, not sure
if they are still on XM.

Why "liberal radio" probably won't catch on in the long term:

There is a different mindset between liberals and conservatives. (news
flash, I know). Conservative radio is super successful because it is a
group-think format. "You need to act, think, speak, a certain way to be
a true and loyal American, and you certainly want to subscribe to the
following attitudes and values:____________________" Stereotypical
conservatives will more quickly gravitate toward a format where an
authority figure (such as a preacher or a radio show host)defines who
is good, who is bad, and which causes and candidates deserve political
support.

There is nothing particularly "wrong" with that, but it isn't how
liberals tend to operate. We liberals have been badly out-organized by
the right wing, and that trend is unlikely to reverse. Liberals are not
only skeptical of conservatives, we're skeptical of one another more
often than not. Sure, we'll turn out 100,000 for an anti-war march, but
there's likely to be 50,000 "discussions" going on in the crowd about
just *why* we should oppose the war.

One can see this trend in politics. The (more conservative) Republicans
continue to clean house (in all but the most porgressive states)
because they have nearly everybody singing from the same sheet music
most of the time. The (more liberal) Democrats are all over the field,
rather than working together, because the liberals are
often more concerned with being individuals than with forming a group
of loyal worker bees willing to take orders from the top.

A presumed majority of liberals doesn't want an "approved" liberal
philosophy dispensed by a radio network. Based on ratings, many
conservatives crave it.

Do the folks on Air America not define who is good and who is bad?

Are they truly fair and balanced, Chuck?
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."