Remember Air America?

That was the liberal radio network that lasted about 12 minutes before going down in flames.

Al Gore and Joel Hyatt started Current TV at just about the same time that Air America crashed and burned.

Al thought that there was a yearning out there for a liberal TV news channel.

That’s because Al hasn’t noticed that ABC,CBS and NBC have been liberal for the last 50 years, CNN for the last 30 and MSNBC for the last 15 or 20.

If Al had thought about it, he might have realized that Fox News Channel’s success is a direct result of all those years of liberal news. There was a huge audience of non-liberals waiting to be spoken to.

The people at Air America were also too stupid to understand that, before Fox,  conservative talk radio was successful for the same reason.

Current TV is a national network devoted to political coverage.

On the night of the Iowa caucuses, it had an audience about twice the size of The Nightly Sportscall on Pittsburgh’s CW–47,000.

And now, the former Vice President of the United States, Al Gore, has been reduced to groveling in front of one of the biggest assholes in the history of television (and believe me, that’s saying something), Keith Olberman, in a last ditch effort to save his baby.

Good luck with that.

Quick question: Have there ever been two people on the planet who deserved each other more than Keith Olberman and Al Gore?

(By the way, Olberman’s politics aren’t what make him one of the biggest assholes in television. He’s an amazingly smart, talented guy. He’s just an amazingly smart, talented, flaming asshole with flames as long as the Parkway.)

Be Sociable, Share!
Share →

60 Responses to ANTI-FOX NETWORK “CURRENT TV” STILL IN TOILET

  1. Kenman says:

    How can you possibly label Olbermann as smart when he is a big lib, thinks socialism can work, and can never get along with anyone, including other libs?

  2. YamRZ350 says:

    LOL!

    The only thing that would’ve made that post better, was if you had done it on video.

  3. Al Bundy says:

    Keith Olberman is the only living human being in the whole world that I can’t stand more than Rachel Maddow.

    • bald guy says:

      How sad that the people you can stand the least are not those that have done anything bad. Rather, it’s solely because of what they have to say.

      I find a lot of people on the far right have trouble with others who don’t think as they do. They make it personal and hateful.

      I can disagree with people, strongly disagree with people, and still like them. I even like some of the people that don’t like me because of my political views. They’re good people, just closed minded. That’s a fault, but it doesn’t make them bad people.

      The people I can’t stand are those that do bad things, like cheating, hurting others, things like that.

  4. Matt says:

    They already have a 24 hr liberal news network, it’s called CNN.

  5. GeeWhiz says:

    Don’t know much about this network, but Viral Video Film School is very good! :)

  6. IsraelP says:

    They should call it “Chicken TV” because the Fax ate it.

  7. Mike from Boston says:

    It’s laughable to think that a putz like Al Gore actually believes there’s a need out there to create a brand-new “liberals only” channel to fill some missing need for liberal propaganda on the air waves.

    What I’d really like to see is talk radio / tv for Independents. Not a channel dedicated to towing a party line, but an outlet for people who aren’t firmly entrenched with a single party’s agenda.

    Reason.com occassionally has video blurbs dubbed “Reason TV”. I think they have potential to make that grow into a more permanent fixture. That would suit the Libertarians, but there’s still a wide scope of Independents out there who’s voices are being drowned out by the Big Bad Bills, O’Reilly and Maher.

  8. Chuck says:

    On the subject of assholes, Current TV should add Chris (I get thrills down my leg) Mathews, to make it a threesome with Ozone Al and that smarmyass Keith Olberman. What a trio. Huey, Duey, and Louie, all on one network. The ratings would go through the roof……

  9. franji1 says:

    Keith Olbermann wrote many of the bio’s on the back of the 1976 SSPC “Pure Card” baseball card set – 630 in all. He’s not an idiot – he just needed to stick to sports.

    Al Gore, on the otherhand, is disliked down here in Tennessee. I don’t know how he was popular – I think he reads his own press and became what they thought he was, a whacked out liberal. He ran on his father’s coat-tails as long as possible (fall ’00?) Remember when his wife Tipper came out in favor of forcing rock lyrics to have “maturity ratings” on their albums? Sure sounds like a right wing nut job to me. Oh wait, back in the early 80′s, Al Gore was more like a Blue Dog, not an MSNBC bigot. I guess Al “grew up” (really?). I’d love to see Tipper write one of those tell-all books.

  10. George says:

    Man, this is really hard to watch. It seems that Gore and Olberman actually do not realize what absolute jokes they are. Good God!

  11. The Machinist says:

    I see Obama will be using PACs in his campaign, which he previously opposed. Funny how his position changed before election time. Typical politician.

    • bald guy says:

      Given the Supreme Court decision, that left Obama with no choice. It’s like having two football teams playing the game with different rules.

      But don’t worry. Romney has been outspending everybody by a large margin, and look at the problems he’s having.

      And, regardless of how much Obama and his PAC raise, the GOP nominee will have much more money at his discretion.

  12. Cambot says:

    47,000?? Man you could get a bigger audience than that just from people whose television remotes fell under the couch while channel-surfing and so they couldn’t change to another channel.

  13. Naum says:

    LOL, Fox News :)

    Top 2 owners are (a) a foreign billionaire with Chinese family and (b) a Saudi oil sheik… …what exactly is their agenda?

    NBC, liberal? Maybe on social issues, but who owns NBC? GE. Largest manufacturer of weapons and munitions, hardly a hippie haven.

    CNN? Owned by Time-Warner, socially liberal (as is just about all of corporate America — see American Express, Microsoft, Google, etc.… all line up and lobby for gay marriage, etc.…) but hardly a bastion of leftist economics…

    There is no left party in America. Only extremist right wing and moderate / centrist Republican-lite. With a few odd ball lefties like Kucinich and Bernie Sanders.

    And sorry, as someone that went to journalism school, everything Fox does goes against the grain of ethical reporting — but don’t take my word for it, read the words of those reporters who’ve given far too many testimonials for it to be an anomaly or two.

    Think about it. Fox News went all the way to the Supreme Court to argue that they had a 1st amendment right to lie to its audience (see the case of Jane Akre & Steve Wilson) and twist the facts of a story — a story they internally admitted was true, but expressed their desire to morph into deceit…

    • A lot of outrageous statements there. Not the least of which is that there is no lefty party. What is Nancy Pelosi? A centrist? She was Speaker of the House a year ago. How about Toothless Barney Frank? Another centrist? Barbara Boxer? And is Obama, who was the most liberal senator now a conservative?

      • oksteelerfan says:

        My opinion is anytime someone says there is no left party it means they’re to the left of Pelosi which is really kind of scary imho.

        • oksteelerfan says:

          That reminded me today I was talking with this woman about taxes and of course I gave my usual that we shouldn’t have to pay income taxes. She asked me if I was a sovereign citizen. I had no idea what that was, so she went on to tell me the FBI was warning against them and that’s what they all believe that we shouldn’t pay taxes or have environmental control and all of them are dangerous and they shoot cops. Well I’m not dangerous and I would never shoot a cop because I don’t believe we should have to pay taxes but I do pay taxes, because I like my freedom.
          That conversation though got me to thinking though if I was a conspiracy theorist that would be a good way for Obama to shut us all up, just have anyone who questions government, taxes or regulations arrested as a threat.

      • bald guy says:

        Obama was a much more liberal senator than he has been as president. He’s been a centrist. As a matter of fact, Obama has upset a lot of liberal Democrats because of his actions.

        You’d love to portray him as a liberal, to scare people, but it’s simply not true. A real liberal would not have extended the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. A real liberal would not have surged up the troop levels in Afghanistan. A real liberal would have been reluctant to authorize the raid to take out Bin Laden. A real liberal would have hesitated to support the action to take out Khaddafi.

        And, even as a senator, Obama was not consistently the most liberal senator:

        2007- Most liberal
        2006 – 10th most liberal
        2005 – 16th most liberal

        • He had to be dragged kicking and screaming to increase troops to Afghanistan and extend the Bush tax cuts. Whoever was sitting in the Oval Office would have authorized the raid on Bin Laden. He found out that he’s not a dictator and you can’t vote “present” when you’re president.

          • bald guy says:

            Actually, Obama increased troops in Afghanistan early on in his administration, well before the big surge. And, he was the proponent of that surge.

            There was no kicking and screaming except from some liberals in the Democratic party as well as a number of Republicans who just wanted to take issue with whatever he did.

            As for the tax cuts, the only kicking and screaming he did was for extending the tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans. The GOP held the rest of us hostage, until their rich friends were taken care of.

            As for Bin Laden, Bush scaled back on that effort He told the American people that getting Bin Laden wasn’t important.

            From the beginning of his presidency, Obama ramped up the effort to locate Bin Laden. And, he made the tough call to go in there with a raid instead of the safer drone attack.

            You’re kidding yourself if you think that call was an easy one. If the raid failed, you would be attacking Obama for making a dumb mistake and not using drones to kill him. You’d be comparing him to Jimmy Carter and the failed hostage rescue effort in Iran.

            It’s easy to Monday morning quarterback. Perhaps you feel any quarterback could have thrown the great passes Manning made. We’ll never know. The fact is, Manning made the plays. He gets the credit. Ditto for Obama.

          • He had no choice after what happened in 2010 but to extend the cuts. He put politics ahead of principle. Bush was fighting two wars when he said Bin Laden wasn’t his number one priority. Obama was fighting one. He waited months before giving the generals more troops and then gave them a lot less than they asked for. He made the only call on Bin Laden he would have made and he would not have gotten him if not for the techniques he railed against when he was a candidate. And maybe you can explain to me why it would be politically wise to “take care of their rich friends and forget about the rest of us?”

            How can anyone get enough voted by only taking care of a few and “forgetting about the rest of us.” That’s idiotic.

    • JC says:

      Keith Olberman is as far left as Rush Limbaugh is right… They cancel each other out… You can say the same things about Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck as you can Olberman and Rachel Maddow.

      The REAL problem is everyone wants to tell you who is to blame and point fingers, and no one wants to actually FIX the problem.

      I love how it’s always the “liberal mainstream media”, it’s like conseratives relish the “us against the world”, “F.T.W.” mentality.

  14. Mike from Monroeville says:

    I thought the whole media was librul. You need to get your conspiracies straight.

  15. Ochotexto says:

    But don’t forget JS. , if Al Gore hadn’t invented the Internet there would be no Just Watch the Game blog. And your books would probably never have been written. You could be down and out., homeless., or even one of us 99% ers.
    I’d suggest you just say thanks.

  16. bald guy says:

    Conservatives don’t want to hear unbiased news. They have to have a conservative bias. They go with FOX News, which is biased to the right. They listen to Limbaugh, who is funny, but certainly biased to the extreme right (as well as consistently getting his facts wrong).

    Moderates and liberals are more open minded to unbiased news. They don’t have to have the news presented to them in a biased way. That’s why MSNBC doesn’t do as well as FOX. That’s why Current TV isn’t a great success, nor was Air America.

    I’m pretty liberal, but II know MSNBC is biased to the left. Just like FOX News is biased to the right. I watch both FOX News and MSNBC at times, to see how the BIASED news channels present the news.

    I do find it incredibly funny, though, when right wing nuts say that FOX News is the only unbiased news on TV.

    Complaining about the main stream media is good for appealing to the right wing base of the GOP, but it won’t win over any moderates or conservatives. They laugh at that whining, just as I do.

  17. Matt says:

    Speaking of anti-fox. Good Morning America spliced Santorum’s speech from last night to make it sound like he was talking about Romney rather than Obama. Santorum stated that he was the conservative opposition to Obama not Romney. He went on to say how Obama doesn’t listen to the American people and that he thinks he knows better than you do. They spliced in from he thinks he knows better to an earlier clip when Santorum was speaking of Romney. If I hadn’t seen the full Santorum speech on the local news, I would have thought Santorum was speaking about Romney.

  18. Gary M says:

    If you have the time, take a peek at this Washington Post investigation concerning Congress members using earmarks to divert funds. There are two categories. Diverting to projects that are close to where they own personal property or diverting them to programs where family members benefited.
    My favorite was Rep. Ed Pastor (D – Ariz.).
    Between 2005 and 2010, Pastor earmarked about $4 million from an Energy Department agency tasked with securing the nation’s nuclear weapons stockpile to a program for at-risk teenagers at Maricopa Community Colleges. His daughter runs the program. “The perception is that you helped your daughter, but if you evaluate the kids who benefited from this, it was worth doing,” the congressman said.
    Yep, let’s give them MORE money to spend…..

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/capitol-assets/public-projects-private-interests/

    • bald guy says:

      Earmarks do not create additional spending. They simply give control to Congress as to where some of the spending goes. By taking away earmarks, that control goes to the Executive Branch (i.e. the President).

      The way to cut spending is to cut spending. Getting rid of earmarks doesn’t cut a penny.

    • Gary M says:

      bald guy,
      It’s your kind of thinking that has gotten us into financial difficulties. Allow me to explain.
      IF, we determined that it cost 100 million to secure our nuclear weapons and Ed decided to divert 4 million of that to his daughters program, then EITHER:
      We over budgeted for the safeguarding of our weapons and we are now out the 4 million, which should have gone before congress and rose or fell on it’s own merit.
      OR
      We now have a short fall of 4 million for safeguarding our weapons which will need to be made up later.

      Without a line item veto, a bill to safe guard our arms, something that every American hopefully would be for got bundled with Ed’s desire to help his fat daughter get ahead in her new career.
      Saying that not a penny is saved with an earmark is blessing this process that allows riders to be attached to important spending for individual gain.
      You may not look at that as ‘additional spending’, I disagree.

  19. Mike V says:

    Since nobody watches the left wing media or even pays that much attention to the left wing media, I hope if Obama wins again, we don’t have to listen to “conservatives” piss and moan about how the media influenced the election.

Leave a Reply