GBTV Signs On

On September 12, 2011, Glenn Beck’s webcast network GBTV had its official debut.  Beck broke from his popular 5 PM show on Fox News Channel in June and put everything on the line to establish a subscription based web streaming network in less than six months.

Critics claim that Beck was fired from FoxNews for being too controversial and losing key sponsors at that time slot.  Well, if that were the case, Roger Ailes would have acted immediately rather than allowing Beck to allude to his future project for a couple of months.  Moreover, if Beck was such an out of control anchor, why was he able to do his final show entirely live?  It is more plausible that Beck felt constrained, even as an opinion maker, being on a news network. By the same token, FNC might not have minded taking more heat for Beck’s controversial views and wanting to win back big advertisers who refrained from playing on Beck’s timeslot.

Beck’s weltanschuung is that political correctness, big government, straying from capitalism and not reacting prudently to instances of Islamofascism will result in coming difficult times for American and the world.  Beck believed that thru his FoxNews show, he had done what he could do to inform Americas about the impending dangers.  Beck wants to use GBTV along with his other ventures (Beck’s 1791 Clothing line giving seed money to his Mercury One charity efforts) to prepare dedicated viewers to prepare their own lifeboats and be ready to assist their neighbors.

Beck notes that unlike National Public Radio, GBTV does not defend on viewers like you but on you.  GBTV is using a subscription model for the streaming network, which starts at $4.99 a month for basic access to $9.99 a month for the equivalent of the “Insider Extreme” all access pass. In July, there were just 80,000 subscribers.  Just before the launch of GBTV, the subscriber base swelled to 230,000 but some of them may be promos. This compares with Oprah’s OWN channel on basic cable, which only manages to attract 183,000 viewers. It is estimated that GBTV is on track to gross more than $20 million in its first year of operation.

Currently, GBTV consists of broadcasting a televised version of Beck’s three hour radio show, the “4th Hour” featuring Beck’s sidekicks Pat Gray and Stu Burguiere as well as two full hours of Glenn Beck’s TV show.  Beck has referenced “The B.S.(Brian Sack) of America” and Liberty Treehouse, aimed at educating children about America’s founders.  Beck wants to establish a news comedy show as a conservative antidote to the Daily Show.   Beck is also trying to score rights for classic television series.  But for now the spotlight is mostly on Beck.

By being on his own GBTV network, it is like having Glenn Beck Unplugged and Glenn Beck Unleashed. But the blackboard is back and is new and improved. While the set looks good and is personalized by Beck himself with memorabilia, GBTV does not have the resources or broadcast experience of FoxNews, so some transitions were rough and the audio had slight echos when throwing to different segments.  GBTV is using streaming technology from Major League Baseball and the material posted before the first show looked spectacular on a big screen HDTV.  Alas, technical difficulties at my household with Roku wiring necessitated watching the GBTV premiere on a laptop.  Perhaps my laptop was strained for RAM, but there were a couple of streaming hiccups during the two hour show.  The show will also be available to subscribers on smartphones, but may also be prone to data delivery challenges. But shakedowns are to be expected for a new media venture.

The content of Beck’s GBTV debut showed why he wanted to get off cable television for his own network.  When opining about the economy, Beck bluntly said: “The President, he’s a Marxist”. Beck blazing appraisal epitomizes his mantra of “The Truth Lives Here” and to speak his mind freely. The first hour included a prolonged and personalized benediction.  These are things that would just not be a good fit on FNC.

Contrary to liberal preconceptions, the show was not railing about the Obama Administration or scaring people to buy gold.  A poignant moment was when Beck invited ten 9/11 First Responders (including the NYFD Captain photographed with President Bush on the Pile) into the studio to be honored.  Beck interacted with the studio audience and sought opposing opinions about a second amendment issue without berating those who opposed him.  Historians should love GBTV’s flagship, as the first show detailed the Black Tom explosion in New York City in 1916.  The explosion was the result of German sabotage which registered 5.6 on the Reicher scale.  But progressive President Woodrow Wilson (surprise) conveniently covered up the terrorist attack which damaged the Statue of Liberty so as not to rock his “Wilson Kept Us Out of War” platform.  Beck then connected how FDR cited the Black Tom incident as a rationale for rounding up the Nisi in World War II.  Beck likened the suppression of the Black Tom incident with the deliberate forgetting of salient details of 9/11.

GBTV’s flagship program also has news updates from The Blaze, Beck’s internet news blog, as delivered by former NPR and CNN analyst Amy Holmes.  Beck also introduced Raj Nair, a former ESPN reporter, who will eventually be the face of GBTV and will highlight Mercury One’s charity endeavors. Neither Holmes nor Nair are typical TeaParty types and that is not just based on their ethnicity but their world views.  Yet both are willing to risk their careers to go with GBTV because they believe in the overall cause.

During these bad economic times, GBTV’s subscribers will mostly be the same facetiously nicknamed “sick twisted freaks” and motivated tea party types who want to stop the progressive red tide which has been expanding big government.  But GBTV shows nascent signs of quality production, compelling in-depth programming and a conservative/libertarian point of view with a sense of humor.  GBTV may still be too early for the market, but with Roku boxes, Netflix streaming strategy and the prospect of an Amazon Tablet which relies on Amazon video, this may change how news junkies on the right side of the aisle get their information.

Debating the GOP Debates

CNN/Tea Party Debate   Source: Edmund D. Fountain/St. Petersburg Times

After five debates among the Republican Presidential candidates, viewers have a somewhat better feel for the candidates and the biases by the broadcasters.

While the debate organizers may point to quantitative metrics as to which candidates qualify for participation, it is likely that the broadcasters can tip the scale to make for good television.  There will be few arguments that ex Governor Gary Johnson (R-NM) presence was a one and done, since he is going nowhere in the polls, has scant funding or organization and he did little to contribute to the debate aside from spouting a libertarian harrange for the War on Drugs.

Most of the debates have eight or nine candidates on stage.  It is tempting to narrow the field to a few of the top tier candidates.  But such a handpicked crop of candidates would preclude breakaway moments for candidates down in the polls and might actually stifle candidates from mixing it up.  Herman Cain was impressive in the first debate in the Palmetto State and the so called “non-politician” candidate continues to score some memorable quips about Washington not working.  While former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA 6th) may have no chance of winning the GOP nomination, he cuts quite a profile during debates by railing against the Media’s compulsion to start fights between the GOP team of rivals.  And Gingrich uses his remaining time in debates to target what he perceives is the real problem–Obama being in the White House.  Now it may be strategic or merely serendipitous that Gingrich plugs his own books and web sites and burnishes his mantle for being the smartest future Republican commentator on television.

Rep. Ron Paul’s (R-TX 14th) participation in the debates is questionable but no mystery.  After all, Dr. Paul quit the GOP under President Reagan.  Moreover, after he lost the 2008 GOP primaries, Paul gave good lip service to several third party Presidential candidates rather than the GOP nominee Senator John McCain.  While the 75 year old Congressman has little to no chance of winning the GOP nomination, he has fanatical Paulestians who do good internet fundraisers for him and act as enthusiastic useful idiots during public appearances. Besides, Rep. Paul’s unabashed articulation of Libertarian policy and American isolationism is a challenge if not a thorn to the side for mainstream Republican candidates.

Former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) has not gained much traction in the race and was looking like a has been during earlier debates.  But Santorum’s Tea Party debate appearance was spirited, managed to articulate his policy and Santorum got some zingers in on Rep. Paul and Governor Rick Perry (R-TX)

It is dubious as to why ex-Governor Jon Huntman (R-UT) continues to cruise into GOP debate nominations.  Huntsman is doing dismally in the polls.  He had banked on basing his campaign headquarters in Orlando, Florida but then retreated after doing poorly in the Florida straw polls.  Since Huntsman is heir to a fortune, he has the financial resources to bankroll his own campaign.  As Obama’s ex-Ambassador to China, Huntsman provides an interesting moderate contrast to the rest of the field.  Now that Huntman has dropped his Mr. Nice Guy guise, his mixing it up makes for an intellectual food fight, which is good television but not necessarily enlightening. Besides, there are suspicions that Huntsman might try a bite at an independent run for the presidency if he can not snag the GOP nod.

While Huntsman continues to share the stage with GOP rivals, Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI 11th) can not seem to snag a ticket to the big debate dance.  This may be due to poor name recognition in national polls without regard to the state organization in Iowa or New Hampshire.  It is a shame as McCotter is a thoughtful, articulate and personable conservative who just released a social security plan.  But when one quixotically tills at White House windmills, sometimes one is left alone in the field.

Despite her meteoric rise during the Granite State debate, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN 6th) has been somewhat subdued in later debates.  This may have been due to ex campaign manager Ed Rollins’ strategerie (sic), or the fact that television prefers a tete-a-tete between two frontrunners.  Bachmann scored some points against Gov. Perry during the Tea Party debate when the subject of forced girls’ HPV vaccination was revisited.  Bachmann sounds strong about repealing Obamacare, but she seems unable to break away.

With former Governor Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) dropped out of the race, debates have developed into parrying between Gov. Rick Perry and the early frontrunner former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA). Both candidates have some vulnerabilities along with their great strengths.  Romney championed universal healthcare coverage in the Bay State which some suggest was the model for Obamacare, which Romney denies but does not apologize for his initiative.  Perry sounded Fed Up! about the Social Security so called Ponzi scheme, which he roundly defended during the Politico debate, but then tried to walk back during the latest Tea Party debate in the face of criticism amongst seniors in Florida.  Perry also has needed to do lost of explaining about his HPV Executive Order.

During the recent Tea Party debate, Perry seemed to channel the enthusiasm of the room full of Tea Party activists, while Romney sought to look and sound Presidential to wider audiences. Other candidates were able to take potshots at current frontrunner Perry and he did not always decisively answer.  In fact, Perry’s quip that he was insulted that he could be bought by pharmaceutical company Merck for a $5,000 contribution opened the door for a bedrock emotion Bachmann retort and Perry’s cynical jest might continue to haunt him.

CNN did a better job during this debate than when John King grunted his way through the New Hampshire debate. Wolfe Blitzer asked challenging questions which sparked spirited exchanges without sounding like he was cribbing DNC talking points as Brian Williams did during the (MS)NBC/Politico debate at the Reagan Library last week.  Blitzer was good about spreading the love and letting second tier candidates participate while fostering feisty extended exchanges between candidates.

While it was admirable for CNN to try to take questions from Tea Party gatherings around the country, this was a gimmick and did not always technically flow well.  But this was a better gimmick than NBC’s insulting innovation of bringing out a Telemundo anchor to put all GOP candidates on Immigration.  CNN did not stoop to play “This or That” again with candidates.  But CNN bookended its triteness by starting the broadcast with video vignettes of all the candidates that seemed better suited for a Monday Night Football opening rather than a Presidential debate.  And Blitzer’s last question of what (furniture) a candidate would bring to the White House allowed for open ended responses but was trivial.

Having the vocal Tea Party audience was mostly a positive thing.  One could certainly sense who was scoring support among the Tea Party base and what rhetorical tactics played well.  More importantly, it gave viewers a sense of what parries did not carry and when certain candidates were off the Republican reservation (namely Ron Paul’s isolationist foreign policy).  The raucousness of the crowd could cut into candidates' times.  Moreover, it does set the table for organized vocal demonstrations, likely from Paulistinians.  But it was pleasant to hear figuratively hear crickets chirping at some of Huntman’s attacks.

As for the Tea Party debate, Romney continues to play cautiously in order to sound Presidential and succeeded.  But Romney’s staunch support of Romneycare still does not play well to the base.  Perry was ganged up upon.  But Perry’s shoot from the hip style lost some of his swagger by backtracking on Social Security and HPV, which may check his frontrunning standing.  Bachmann’s policies make her the darling of the Tea Party.  But Bachmann did not dominate the debate or score sufficient points to upgrade her current showing.  Gingrich does well in debates, but overall his candidacy stills suffers from the perception of being a Newt-run Bomb. Santorum made an impression at the Tea Party debate but it was not a breakaway moment. The big loser at the Tea Party Debate was the National Anthem, but unlike Cindi Lauper at the U.S. Open or Christina Aguilera at the Superbowl, at least she remembered the lyrics.

There will be a couple of more debates this month where political junkies can learn more about the prospective challengers to President Barack Obama.  Stay tuned.

It Isn't Easy Believing Green

Considering the blind faith and fanaticism of believers of anthropogenic Climate Change theory, it could be considered a religion.  But based on the scandals, corruption and need to hold revivals, it seems proto-Manmade Climate Change are Losing Their Religion so to speak.

The Obama Administration has made touting Green Energy as a cornerstone of their stimulus national budgetary “investments”.  Additionally, to symbolize the Administration’s commitment to cutting greenhouse gas emissions, President Obama personally went to Copenhagen in 2009 to endorse the concept of higher energy prices to try to mitigate manmade CO2 emissions. But Obama’s eight-minute speech in Copenhagen did not convince Congress to effectively cede U.S. sovereignty for a specious theory. And opinion polls indicate that American concerns about climate change have fallen from 62% in 2007 to 48% in 2011.

Even though Green Jihadists will dismiss climate change “deniers” as being anti-science,  bitter xenophobes who cling to their guns and their bibles, there is good reason to be skeptical about the authenticity of Climate Change models.  Anthropogenic Climate Change proponents cling to data coming from East Anglia University which showed a hockey stick model which bolstered their beliefs. But just before the Copenhagen 2009 “synod”, leaked e-mails revealed that the East Anglia “scientists” manipulated their data, had personal doubts about the conclusion and sought to suppress contradictory evidence.  Oh H-E-double Hockey Sticks!

President Obama keeps pointing to Spain’s “The Sun Moves Us” initiative as a model for a green economy.   There are a couple of problems with emulated this solar Castle in Spain.  Firstly, the government subsidy spread funding to shoddy solar panels which did not last long. The Spanish government subsidy was so lavish that much of the funding went to solar panel manufacturers in China. The Zapatera government created a boom and bust solar economy that resulted in solar ghost towns, like Sesena Nuevo 30 miles south of Madrid.  And talk about the green jobs in Spain–the official unemployment rate is a mere 21%.  No wonder why thousands of young Spaniards gathered at the Puerta del Sol in Madrid as well as other cities in May.  This could explain why Spain’s governing Socialist sustained heavy losses in the spring elections.

When President Obama was trying to sell his American Recovery Act in 2009, he alluded to dire consequences unless America committed funds to a bevy of “shovel ready” projects to create a clean energy economy.  But experience has taught Americans that the $787 Million in stimulus was actually Porkulus which financed shady crony capitalism, especially for FOBs (Friends of Barack).  For instance, the legislation earmarked $4.3 Billion for “fossil energy research and development” with a $2 Billion for “near zero emission clean coal powerplant(s)”.  Well, oddly enough, only the FutureGen coal gasification plant in Mattoon, Illinois could possibly qualify for that $2 Billion line item.   Supporting the incertion of the FutureGen line item included ex-Governor Rod Blogojevich (D-IL), former House Majority Leader Rep. Dick Gephart (D-MO 3rd), a former aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and former House Appropriations Chairman Rep. Bob Livingston (R-LA 1st).  That is a lot of lobbying muscle for a surgical strike stimulus line item for a technology which many environmentalists and renewable fuel advocates claim is an impossibility.

If that is not enough to demonstrate how Obama Administration clean energy stimulus spending is a piggy bank for political friends and home state boondoggles, consider the case of Solyndra.  In 2010, President Obama trekked out to Fremont, California to visit the Solyndra solar manufacturing plant which had received over a half billion dollars of 2009 stimulus funding.  Last month, Solyndra filed for bankruptcy.  The owner of Solyndra is Obama fundraiser George Kaiser, who has only visited the White House 16 times since Obama took office.  Synchronicity?  More like crony capitalism.

Former Vice President Al Gore, Jr. has made a fortune hawking the myth of Manmade Climate Change.  His Powerpoint presentation was converted into a documentary film An Inconvenient Truth (2006) grossed nearly $50 Million worldwide. An Inconvenient Truth won Gore an Oscar (2007), a Grammy (2009) and a shared Nobel Peace Prize (2007) It is safe to say that Gore embodied the spirit of the liberal intelligencia. Schools made watching the film mandatory for students, even though an English court found nine substantial errors in the film.

Gore had been called to testify before Congressional Committees as an expert witness on energy and environmental issues, even though Gore stood to substantially profit from the proposed policy changes.  Gore defiantly declared that he was putting his money where his mouth was when he responded “"Do you think there is something wrong with being active in business in this country? I am proud of it. I am proud of it.” Gore’s $75 Million investment in Silver Spring Network could reap dividends from its share of a $3.4 Billion grant from the Department of Energy for smart grid technology and make Al Gore the first Carbon Billionaire.

General Electric has not been shy about embracing the green mantra.  When G.E. owned NBC Universal in 2007, it devoted 75 hours of free broadcasting on NBC, CNBC, Bravo, Sundance, Universal HD and Telemundo for Gore’s “Live Earth: Concerts for a Climate in Crisis”. G.E’s lobbying filings in 2009 seemed like it was proselytizing the Gospel of Gore.  But their were business incentives for their embracing green policies–the green from government grants, tax incentives and the management of prospective new environmental markets.

Naturally, G.E. could get green from Uncle Sam for starting wind power projects or solar energy spots.  But the big money concern was profiting from Carbon Credits.  G.E. lobbied heavily for a Cap and Trade System rather than a straight tax system, so that the credits would be exchanged via G.E.’s new Greenhouse Gas Services unit.  Who else had a hand in crafting from the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX)?  Are you surprised to learn that it was community organizer Barack Hussain Obama?  Even more interesting is the fact that one of the major investors was Al Gore’s Generation Investment Management.  It's too bad that Cap-and-Tax did not pass the Senate in 2009 and the CCX subsequently folded.

Now that belief in the myth of manmade Climate Change is in the doldrums, Al Gore wants to hold a revival to rail against climate deniers.  On Wednesday and Thursday, Gore will hold “24 Hours of Reality”, which will broadcast an Al Gore presentation every hour for each time zone to convince the public about climate change. It might be more beneficial if Gore spent his energies concentrating on releasing his chakra.

Typically, the left is contemptuous of authentic expressions of Judeo-Christianity as being knuckle draggers for not worshiping their scientifically driven progressive policies.  But the Sun King and the Pretender to the Throne ought well to be turning green with nausea for a simple glance in the mirror would reveal that the Environmental and Energy Emperor is not wearing any clothes.  Such an epiphany should make us all sick.

H/T: Tim Carney, Washington Examiner

Some Pols Made Bad 9/11 Connections

Today America marks the ten year anniversary of the horrible suicide terrorist attacks which employed commercial airplanes as missiles killing 2,977 innocent civilians at the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon in Virginia and in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.  At the major commemoration in New York at the National 9/11 Memorial at the former World Trade Center site, current New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (D, R, I- NYC), made two unfathomable decisions.  Mayor Bloomburg banned clergy from the dias for the commemoration. Bloomberg also prohibited contingents of Firefighters to participate at the WTC memorial.

Mayor Bloomberg defended his decision to prohibit pastors from ministering to the still grieving survivors, widows and orphans. Bloomberg pontificated:

It’s a civil ceremony. There are plenty of opportunities for people to have their religious ceremonies...Some people don’t want to go to a religious ceremony with another religion. And the number of different religions in this city are really quite amazing.

Bloomberg blustered that the terrorists wanted to take away freedom of religion and that he did not want government to force particular religious views down peoples’ throats. This was a rhetorical shift from prior justifications from Gracie Mansion which claimed that it was too complicated and controversial to choose which clergy should participate.

Bloomberg’s befuddling decision shows the insidious stamp of political correctness.  Since someone “might” be offended by clergymens’ comments, there should be no participation by pastors around this secular sacred space.  Bloomberg’s stance is in complete contrast to his support for the 9/11 mosque project for a minority which requires special consideration.  But regarding this year’s 9/11 memorial, Bloomberg’s staunch secularism transforms the Freedom of Religion enshrined in the First Amendment of our Constitution into a public Freedom from Religion. This is such a betrayal of the aftermath of 9/11 when Americans of all religious persuasion packed the pews of places of worship to put philosophical and spiritual context on these acts of evil.

Of course, Bloomberg’s anti-clerical bull did not totally excise all references to scripture from the ceremonies.  But having President Obama and former Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R-NYC) quoting from scripture (Psalm 46 and Ecclesiastes respectively) just did not seem quite right.

Bloomberg also banned rescue workers from sending contingents of comrades to honor the 343 NYFD and the 60 Policemen who gave their lives to try to save others at the World Trade Center on 9-11-01.  Mayor Bloomberg claimed that there would not be enough room for the fireman at the 18 acre site. Bloomberg wanted to ensure that there was enough room for victim’s families for the 9/11 Commemoration. As Michael Burke, whose brother NYFD Capt. Billy Burke, died in the WTC North Tower trying to save a paraplegic victim, poignantly put it:

The firemen, being who they are, would never complain or bring attention to themselves. I, however, am not a fireman. Just the son of one and the brother of another. To deny the firefighters and our first responders—these most humble and dedicated servants of New York—the opportunity to honor, at Ground Zero on 9/11, their lost brothers and sisters is atrocious.

It is thin gruel to the rescue workers that Mayor Bloomberg’s Big Apple would work to have other events to commemorate them on different days. .  There was an official city commemoration on 9/08.  The NYFD held a service uptown on 9/11 and had over 5,000 participants.

Former Mayor Giuliani’s reflections on the terrorist attack observed:

Sept. 11, 2001, stands as the defining event of the 21st century. For me, 9/11 remains puzzling. It was the worst day of my life and the best day. It was the worst day because of the incomprehensible death, destruction and evil. Very soon after the attacks, we began to understand the threat posed by Islamic extremist terrorism.

Sept. 11 was also the best day because it put on display the very finest human instincts — compassion, courage, kindness, selflessness. First responders rushed into what they knew was a life-threatening emergency. Neighbors helped neighbors, and aid poured from good people all over the country and the world.

The Firefighters, Paramedics, NYPD and Port Authority Police who perished in the Twin Towers collapse epitomized the compassion, courage kindness and selflessness to which America’s Mayor alluded.  Not including these heroes is like not including spiritual leaders who helped us live through this tragedy.  Check Mayor Bloomberg.

President Obama made a couple of miscues in preparation for the tenth anniversary of 9/11.  First, the Obama Administration circulated talking points to their minions about 9/11 which wanted to give  a positive, forward looking narrative that minimized mentioning al-Qaeda so as to minimize the terrorist group.  In a piece just published by French newspaper Le Figero, President Obama asserted that al-Qaeda is nearing total defeat having failed to destroy America’s unique leadership role in the world. Well, the terrorist concerns this weekend over a dirty bomb and the truck bomb in Afghanistan that killed two and injured 77 US servicemen puts a lie to that legerdemain.

Pro arguendo, even if al-Qaeda per se is on the ropes, cells of franchise groups of al-Qaeda, or al-Qaeda 2.0 still pose a serious threat to the homeland. We do not live in a Hogwort’s world which invoking a name could conjure up Voldemort. Besides, it is intellectually dishonest.  To quell the possibility of anti-Islamic animus, President George W. Bush called our military engagements “The War on Terror”, as if America was pitted against an asymmetric warfare tactic. Our enemy are fanatical salafists who are hijacking a so called “Religion of Peace” to become a “Religion of Pieces” to further a worldwide Caliphate.  By using PC euphemisms and mealy mouthed misdirection allowed for a lack of resolve for “The Long War” against us and allowed the 43rd President to be maligned for his efforts to preserve and protect our Republic.

From the start of his Administration, President Obama has sought to subvert the 9/11 Day of Remembrance as a “National Day of Service”.  Fortunately, this recasting of 9/11 has gained as little traction as President George W. Bush’s effort to refer to 9/11 as national Patriots’  Day.

President Obama volunteering at DC Central Kitchen for 2011 National Day of Service

Donald Rumsfeld at Pentagon 09-11-01

While encouraging Americans to serve others is admirable, as is honoring patriots, these qualities should  should not replace remembering the evil that was perpetrated on 9-11-01.  Some religious traditions, such as Catholicism, can find goodness stemming from suffering.  In the case of 9/11, we saw great heroism by the First Responders at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.  This includes sacrifices by leadership.  Fire Chief Peter Ganci, a trusted advisor to Mayor Giuliani, died in the collapse of the WTC North Tower.  After evacuating the Pentagon after Flight 77 struck the building, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld went back in to assist rescue workers. The passengers of Flight 93 which crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania sacrificed their lives to prevent a likely attack on the U.S. Capitol. These heroics are instances service and sacrifice which needs to be honored by America’s collective remembering, not by watering it down into a mealy, meaningless “Day of Service”.

Glenn Beck harkens for us to return to being 9/12 Americans, were there was national unity and genuine concern for our neighbors. He is launching GBTV on 9/12 to speak the truth like a purifying blaze and is simultaneously launching community bolstering charities.  Whilet may be facile for politicians to temporally attach such community spirit to 9/11 but we should not crowd out the ultimate sacrifice of both the victims and the heroes of 9/11

In academia, Administrators at Marietta College in Ohio nixed a student led initiative to commemorate 9/11 by placing 2,977 American flags on a campus display, unless flags of other nations were also included.  Sarah Snow, the College Junior who was seeking to organize the memorial reacting to the jaw dropping administrative edict:

Why should we place the extra flags anyways? It was an attack on AMERICANS, AMERICAN ideals, AMERICAN capitalism, defense, and freedom. The World Trade Center wasn’t hit because a Chinese accountant was working that morning; it was hit because American capitalists were there.

This political correctness was prospective and hypersensitive since no international students objected to simply displaying the stars and stripes.  The Free Speech of the First Amendment at Marietta College goes the way of Freedom of Religion at the World Trade Center Memorial.

In the decade since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, America has gone from collectively wondering “Why do they hate us?” to a politically led “What are we commemorating aside from our loss of loved ones?”  To add injury to this insult, it was rare to see the much filmed impacts of the airplanes on the World Trade Center so as not to traumatize viewers.  Unfortunately, this allows us to forget the horror that we should never forget.  As George Santayana wrote: “Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it”.  May this 10 year anniversary of 9/11 remind us of our past and inspire us to be unified as Americans, know what we should honor and why we fight “The Long War”.

Obama Does a Job in Joint Session Speech

President Obama before Joint Session of Congress giving Jobs speech/  source: AP

President Barack Obama deigned to demand a Joint Session of Congress to kick off his between the beltway re-election campaign and announce an American Jobs Act. There were a couple of problems with that plan.  Firstly, the President did not have the power to convene Congress, which is a separate co-equal branch of government in our democratic Republic. Secondly, the date Mr. Obama proposed was curiously the same time which Republican challengers for his job would be gathering at the Reagan Library for a long planned debate.

It is worth noting that during the eight years that both President Bill Clinton and President George W. Bush were in office, they only made two extraordinary speeches (aside from States of the Union) before Joint Sessions of Congress.  One of Bush 43's speeches was in response to the terrorist attack on America on 9/11/01.  In less than three years, President Obama has given two Joint Session speeches and both of them seemed to be partisan packages.  But it is remarkable that President the Obama was forced to switch his rhetorical road show to a non-prime time speech to Congress timed so as not to overlap the NFL opener between the Green Bay Packers and the New Orleans Saints. So much for burnishing the aura of the occupier of the Oval Office.

By insisting on giving his job speech before Congress, President Obama raised expectations for his American Jobs speech.  Surely, the Obama Administration wanted to project an image of leadership and perhaps confront his political enemies in a forum where they could not really respond , as  Obama did to House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA 7th) during a George Washington University Deficit Speech in April.   But perhaps President Obama laid off his clutch speechwriters as Mr. Obama’s rhetoric did not soar.  In fact, it seemed reminiscent of a used car salesman.  And Mr. Obama fell into his contrived campaign cadence of dropping the last syllables on words.

During President Obama’s 32 minute speech touting the new American Jobs Act, he managed to say a variation of “Pass this bill now!”  19 times.  Of course, President Obama managed to work in class warfare (tax the rich and corporations to pay their fair share), vilify bad businesses like oil companies, give pecuniary shouts out to his comrades in teachers and construction unions and hype the already hyperactive spending on dubious high speed rail projects.  Seemingly, the only things missing were actually having a bill, designating exactly how everything will be paid and calling Mr. Obama’s $450 million in spending as another stimulus package.

Even though President Obama introduced the American Jobs Act with great pomp, it is still vaporware. President Obama insisted that everything will be paid for, which is amazing as no legislative language exists.  President Obama wanted to pawn off cost cutting to the Gang of 12 Congressional Super-Committee.  And even though President Obama implored legislators to “Pass this Jobs bill now!” to alleviate this jobs crisis, he only promised to release more details which finances his stimulus jobs bill and stabilizing the debt. So, as former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 6th) would say “We have to pass the bill to know what’s in it.”

If history is any guide, President Obama will propose sweeping cuts which will be scheduled to take effect in the off-years of a ten year plan., which means that they are ethereal as future Congresses and Presidents will not be bound to the plan.  Moreover, it will likely have more budget gimmicks, such as counting trillions of dollars of budget savings for not having troops in Afghanistan, which will have already been withdrawn by 2014.

It is curious how legislative language is inconsequential to the Obama Administration.  In July, Congress agreed to a hard fought compromise that raised the debt ceiling by $1 trillion in return for a Congressional Super-Committee finding $1.5 trillion in budgetary savings or else impose draconian cuts on the military and social programs. Now President Obama wants to impose another $450 billion of stimulus Jobs spending to that effort.

No wonder Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) chose to sort his sock drawer rather than hear this claptrap. Senator David Vitter (R-LA) had a better plan to watch the Saints-Packers game.  When the camera panned the chamber, it was obvious that two rows in the middle section were vacant. Only 26 of the 80 seats in the Congressional Media section were filled.  Perhaps that is why disgraced former Representative David Wu (D-OR 1st) was let in for the speech.  House Minority Leader Pelosi was said to be peeved that there was no official televised Republican response to compete with the NFL opener, but really what new to which to respond?

There may be some ideas to Obama’s ethereal American Jobs Act which will not be dead on arrival. Job creators need long term financial incentives and breaking down barriers.  So one off incentives to hire workers will probably only result in temp hiring or short term governmental jobs (like the Census). Pumping government money to favored companies has proven to be a waste, such as the Solyndra green jobs which wasted $600 million before going belly up when Uncle Sugar’s cash stopped.  If Mr. Obama’s rhetoric would match reality, reducing the regulatory burden would help. If President Obama really wanted to help small businesses, he would lower the tax rate on sole proprietors rather than rail for tax increases on Millionaires (which seems to include thousandaires who managed to make more than $200,000 per annum).

 But President Obama’s “Pass this bill” mantra gives an all or nothing vibe, so the talk about working with Congress is just a mighty wind. May the 112th Congress not be cowed by the bully pulpit and the “Do Something” disease to pass this mighty wind and do a better job than President Obama did with his Joint Session shuck and jive.

Kindling Introspection on E-book Readers

[Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos/ source:Newsweek 2007]

It has been about two years since I got my first e-book reader.  E-book readers had been around for years, but they had limited market penetration because of the technical backsupport that was required.  Amazon introduced the Kindle in late 2007 which could be seen as high tech for the masses, since you could download books without hooking up to a computer.  Other brick and mortar book retailers sought to get into the act with Barnes & Noble’s Nook e-book reader and Border’s Books Kobo, and Sony had it’s Reader.

When I discerned that I needed an e-book reader was when I worked in a situation that was electronically cut off from the world and brief sessions of reading e-mail from a small smartphone screen caused me severe eyestrain. I determined that an e-book reader could bring myriad of reading material that could be downloaded for later consumption, both from books as well as text based websites.

At the time, the price point for new units was quite exorbitantly priced, so I counted myself lucky when I could get a refurbished Kindle at ½ price.  Even thought I got a Kindle 1 from Amazon, I did not mind having an older unit as it still had a removable battery and an SD card slot.  It seemed like the older unit would not run out of power without recourse and I would not be stuck with the limited capacity of a Kindle.

But my fears about battery and storage were over-exaggerated.. Since you could read Moby Dick on one charge (so long as you turned off the 3G connection), battery consumption was a non-issue.  While the original Kindle could only handle 300 books without the additional SD card, my experience was that subsequent models had plenty of storage space that I did not use, and it was easy to make more space by archiving things on the web cloud. In fact, I have over 700 items on my Kindle 2 and it takes up less than 400 MB.  That being said, I figured out that keeping MP3s or Audible audio books would take up too much room and was not the right approach for me.

E-book readers can have a great capacity for electronically storing books, so a reader could carry one’s entire library in a unit that is the size of a paperback book. That makes it great for reading when one is mobile and switching between books on the fly.  These features entice me to read more and a greater variety of material.

While it initially seems cool to read on a high tech gadget, after a few pages turns it seems just like reading.  The Kindle uses E-Ink display technology, which is said to be easier on the eyes and allows for reading in direct sunlight. me. But other e-book readers can more readily mimic traditional pages like on a dead-tree edition.

One way that my reading patterns have changed with an E-book reader is that when I hear an author being interviewed flack a new book of interest, I can immediately download a sample. This allows me to remember the interview and give the opus a chance.  Because there are many public domain books as well as authors giving away samples, I have been able to collect a large collection of things to read.

Just before I got my first Kindle, I was vacationing in a remote venue and I got a yen to re-read Don Quijote.  Granted, I had read it in English and in Spanish and I owned a few tomes to that effect, but none were accessible.  When it would have taken a two hour trip to a bookstore to buy yet another copy, I let that urge pass.  Now that I have an e-book reader, I can download it within a minute wirelessly.  If I am feeling really stingy and did not want to pay for a formatted public domain book, there are legal sources to download it via a PC, use software to make it Kindle friendly and then dowload it to the E-book reader.

When my father-in-law got his Kindle, he wondered why it had a keyboard.  Despite my protestations about making margin notes, accessing the internet and looking things up on Wikipedia, he could not see the utility.  Another use that I serendipitously discovered was looking up details in a book.  I was reading a potboiler political thriller and had forgotten about one of the ancillary villains. Just by doing a search on the character’s name, I found where he fit into the page-turning plot.

There have been some situations where I could not physically read but was able to take advantage of the text-to-voice feature.  While it does not sound like James Earl Jones reading the material, it will do in a pinch or when your eyes should be elsewhere.

The feature that I really love and seems underappreciated by those who are Nook-ies (sic) is the complimentary text based web browsing.  A friend proudly showed me his Nook Color which had been modified to also allow for Android applications. The Nook Color had a seductively sharp color display, but in order for him to surf the web, he needed to use a cell phone hot spot, which was an additional monthly subscription.  While I do not think that I would want to stream The Green Lantern on a 7" screen, it would chafe me to pay $30+ a month to do text based web surfing when it is gratis on the Kindle.  Granted, this sort of web surfing is not a computer replacement, but it is more than adequate for checking e-mails and reading most blogs. And the Kindle Whispernet can be used for free in many places throughout the world.

E-book readers often offer a service to subscribe to periodicals and blogs.  I have not subscribed to any periodicals, since so much is already being given away and I do not need it pushed to my E-book reader.  I have only subscribed to a couple of blogs where “the price is right” as an experiment.  While it is nice to have the material right there without having to access it on the web, I am dubious that I would pay money for that privilege as long as there are other convenient alternatives.

Many buyers of other E-book readers (Nook and Sony) did so based on the prospect of borrowing from the public library and lending their purchases to others.  Amazon slowing adding those features. But the book lending feature has been really oversold.  A person can loan a book one time for 21 days (and not have access to it) and then no more.  As for borrowing from the public library, that seems appealing depending upon your public library system.  But publishers tend not to allow for multiple simultaneous loans.  And publishers demand that a library buy a new digital copy after 26 loans, the same as for a physical book but without the damage.

Kindle 1 with broken screen and Kindle 2

Experience has taught that E-book readers have sensitive screens which are not built with Gorilla Glass or  an "unbreakable" paper display.  So an E-book cover is essential, but it need not be treated like a delicate flower. But E-book readers are more than just hardware, as you will be linked to a bookseller.  I have nothing but kind things to say about Kindle customer service by Amazon.  After all, my unit isn’t called “Striker” for nothing.  If the rumors are true about the Kindle Tablet are true, Amazon is following a customer centric strategy that takes an initial loss on the hardware, but entices them to consume and makes up the money in future media purchases within their “click and mortar” cyber storefront.

As for the future, I expect that I will continue to enthusiastically use my current e-book reader.  The K2 is a great design for reading in all environments.  I prefer to not have a backlit screen for gadgets primarily used for reading.  And I certainly do not want to constantly wipe fingerprints from a capacitive touch screen on my reader.  I like having a physical keyboard for making notes or doing social sharing of a key passage on Facebook.

Of course I am interested in popularly priced tablets.  Maybe I will load the Kindle feature and link the tablet to my virtual bookshelf.  But touchpad tablets strike me more as a media consumption device rather than an E-book reader. Sure, you can read on it, but wouldn’t you rather watch a YouTube video or surf the web on it and then read your E-book.  What will color my enthusiasm for tablets is the price point, the features that are associated with the unit and the particulars of the hardware.

But it struck me how much the world had changed when I went camping amongst 200 zymurgists  and it was much easier to find an E-book reader than a traditional book. People use their E-book readers in different ways but nary a soul who made the leap from dead-tree editions rues the decision.

Spitzer Channels Rough Rider In The Arena Finale

Elliot Spitzer’s nine month foray on television has ended as CNN cancelled his program “In the Arena”.  Originally, left leaning Spitzer came on the air paired with alleged right leaning  Kathleen Parker and was billed as “Parker-Spitzer. But Parker left him at the end of February to “concentrate on other things”. Spitzer’s show  is being edged out by “Anderson Cooper 360".

In some ways, it is remarkable that  Spitzer lasted as long as he did, as the Manhattan Madam panned his performance on the boob tube by opining “Spitzer is as boring on television as he is in bed”.  CNN made Spitzer his flagship prime-time anchor, and went so far as to make media buys on Rush Limbaugh’s radio program.  But the viewers never materialized and CNN constantly was behind both Fox News Channel and MSNBC. 

Aside from the low ball ratings for CNN, Spitzer could not live down his risque reputation as Client Number Nine. News of Gov. Spitzer's penchant for hiring high end escorts with the Emperor's Club caused Spitzer to quickly resign his office in March 2008.  Media critics noticed that when Parker was part of Spitzer’s show, there were many tight shots featuring the CNN couple.  It also was hard not to think of Spitzer’s political sins during the Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY 9th) Twitter cybersex scandal this spring. 

Spitzer chose to sign off his final show by citing President Theodore Roosevelt, as his 1910 “In The Area” Sorbonne speech that inspired the show’s name:

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

When one associates Eliot Spitzer with Rough Riders, it less likely that one thinks of 26th President of the United States and more of a playboy’s aids.

If Spitzer is still looking for a new outlet, perhaps he can land a show on channel nine.

Glenn Beck's Mercury Rising?

Glenn Beck recently ended his eponymous television show after two and a half year run on FNC.  The often emotive Beck managed to complete his final broadcast without tears, but during the After the Show Show for Insider Extremists, not so much.

Critics of Glenn Beck chortle that he was pulled off the air due to ratings.  The ratings belie that ranting.  Others contend that Fox News fired the controversial commentator for being a loose cannon who alienated advertisers.  This progressive perspective seems to forget their concerted campaign to sponsors to boycott the Glenn Beck program.  Once liberals had convinced enough corporations to not sponsor “the five”, they used the stature of Congressman Anthony Weiner (sic) to attack Goldline, a loyal Beck advertiser.  Beck was insistent that he was moving on without bad blood with Roger Ailes and FNC.  So much so, Beck pointed out that his entire final hour show was broadcast live.  This is not something that a network would want to do with a proven bad actor like Keith Olbermann, or without needing to liberally use a dump button as MSNBC should have recently done.

Beck believes that he is no longer called to continue his commentary from Rockefeller Center. So at the pinnacle of a media career, he is willing to risk it all to do an internet video venture which stops analyzing and starts acting on the problems which he perceives are forthcoming.  For this analysis, It is inconsequential whether you consider Glenn Beck as he had self-effacingly described himself as a “rodeo clown” or if you think that Beck is a Tea Party Incarnation of UBS anchorman Howard Beale from Network.  The question is really about the sagacity of Beck’s vision of  new media marketing and delivery as being an effective communication strategy.

Several media players have tried to launch subscriber based internet content, with varying degrees of success.  The New York Times has twice tried to force subscription for reading its content online, with the latest push occurring in March.  But the last time they tried having a hard subscription wall, the paper lost prominence, did not boost their dead tree subscriptions and had to abandon their attempted internet monetization. The Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times have been successful with cyber subscription models, but they have specialized content and an affluent target demographic to pay for it.  Many talk radio hosts have internet subscription platforms, mostly for distributing podcast, which generally cost $5 a month or $50 for the year.  Rush Limbaugh has been quite successful with Rush 24/7 at the same price which features podcasts, the live “Dittocam” and access to his show prep reading colloquially known as “the stack of stuff”.

Glenn Beck is augmenting a subscriber internet model largely for video distribution.  Prior to the finale of his FNC show, Beck had the Insider Extreme package for his three hour morning radio show running at about $7/month or $75/year.  Subscribers could obtain audio podcasts of the show to listen on their own terms.  But the Insider Extreme also included live or on demand video of the radio program from a six camera system from their Radio City studio in mid-town Manhattan.  The subscription added a 4th hour featuring his long time sidekicks Stu Burgurie (also executive producer) and Pat Gray.  Early this year, Beck gave S.E. Cupp her own show on the Insider Extreme.  Beck threw in Fusion online, his comedy magazine. Beck did a few live performances of his comedy shows on the road.  Many part of his 8/28 Restoring Honor Rally were covered online.  In addition, Beck had been producing web documentaries on complex current event and historical subjects and there were mostly historical “classes” as part of Glenn Beck University. This lineup of programming has garnered 80,000 subscribers.  Not a bad chunk of change.

The Mercury Radio Arts (the corporate name for GBTV) model can only really be compared with Pajamas Media PJTV venture.  The venture got its name from the derisive dismissal of bloggers who caught Dan Rather’s sloppy and false journalism  about President George W. Bush’s National Guard Records as being “[G]uys in their living room, sitting in their pajamas.  When Roger Simon launched PJTV in 2008, they wanted to move away from being a news aggregator into being a subscriber based internet news alternative.  Instead of being part of the liberal Lamestream Media, PJTV sought to be a conservative network which was self supported by subscriptions.   Even though PJTV landed some prominent figures, such as Glenn Reynolds and Joe the Plummer, PJTV did not have a sustainable financial model.  PJTV continues to produce some online videos but new material seems free for the taking and is supplementary to associated Pajamas blogs.

Beck’s multi-media vision goes beyond television.  Beck believes that he has reached everyone he can via standard television, but that audience is mostly over 50 (prime Tea Party demographics).  Beck yearns to reach an audience under 30, who rarely sit down to watch conventional television, even if it is recorded on a DVR.  Beck thinks that by tweaking his programming and changing his delivery system, his message will be free to reach the wizened and those comparatively wet behind the ears.

Considering what the Insider Extreme already offered and what the Beckian dream machine has already alluded, there might be enough to program a typical television network.  But that won’t due, as there could be battles for carriage.  I would imagine that NBC/Comcast would not be too cooperative to host a Glenn Beck inspired network, especially if it challenged MSNBC or Al Gore’s CurrentTV with Keith Olbermann. The SorosSchlessinger

Conventional networks usually require partners that can put the kibosh on anything controversial.  While the FCC is supposedly scrapping the Fairness Doctrine for broadcast media, there is always concerns about the nanny state strangling undesired conservative/libertarian ideas.  So Beck moving the base of operations to the internet is a facile but flawed plan.  The FCC is floating semi-final drafts of net-neutrality regulations, which indubitably would impact free internet sites, but it is a hard argument to require balance for a subscription site.

Glenn Beck has voiced concerns that GBTV might be slightly ahead of the curve on new media models  "[b]ut I’d rather be ahead of the pack than part of it."  A subscription model allows content to be unfettered with the added virtue that the programming is truly viewer supported (unlike PBS).  PJTV failed in part due to the delivery system, as it had high definition picture, but it could have streaming hiccups and it required subscribers to sit in front of their computers.  GBTV is partnering with MLB Advanced Media, which reputedly has perfected high quality internet delivery of video and ancillary data to computers, televisions (via Roku) and cell phones and mobile devices.  It is very ironic that a sports neophyte like Beck chose bet the farm and chose to partner with Major League Baseball for his network, but he swears that it is the best.  So it is multi-platform delivery of live and on demand programming.  That should get enough youthful and seasoned eyeballs for the programming. Better delivery of programming is not enough as they must want to watch.

On September 12th, when GBTV officially kicks off, Beck will do his own show from 5pm to 7pm.  Supposedly the focus will less be on bemoaning Spooky Dude and more upon activism supporting preparations for what Beck believes will be tough times for the nation.  That preaching to the choir may satisfy and marginally add voices to the choir.  But based on comments in the blogosphere after the GBTV announcement, that won’t be enough to grow the subscriber base to a sustainable financial level.

GBTV is offering a two tiered pricing structure-$5 a month/$50 a year for a basic package that includes Beck’s new streaming show and on demand viewing or eventually $9.99 a month/$100 a year for the full package. Casual viewers bristled at paying to see what was previously “free”.  The tough economic times makes adding another subscription service as a tough sell.

 But where Pajamas Media failed was relegating PJTV to being just a conservative alternate news source.  Beck wants to make things entertaining too to win over younger viewers.  Beck cagily told the New York Times “If you’re a fan of Jon Stewart, you’re going to find something on GBTV that you’re going to enjoy. If you’re a fan of ‘24,’ you’re going to find something on GBTV that you’re going to enjoy.”  Those plans certainly must include a satirical news show with Tea Party and Libertarian sensibilities.  This would be most welcomed as Joel Surnow’s “The ½ Hour News Hour” comedy show on FNC was stillborn nearly four years ago.  And Greg Gutfeld’s Red Eye is amusing, but it’s on at 3 a.m.  Adding drama/action shows that fits a Tea Party sensibilities has a chance at winning over the key youth demographic, who’s tastes can be influenced and generally who spend more discretionary income on entertainment.  Beck also wants to do an animated series that updates lessons from the Founding Fathers.

Aside from a flexible and quality delivery platform and a variety of programming aspirations, other advantages that the Mercury Radio Arts crew has over the likes of PJTV is a front man with an established operation.  The incremental building of Insider Extreme content gives the Opinion and Education arms a head start and an established audience of paying subscribers.  While the Instapundit is great, Glenn Reynolds or Joe the Plumber are not Marquee Men.  Beck will never be mistaken as a matinee idol, but he does sell out theaters in periodic live performances, has written or co-authored many bestselling books, has the 3rd most listened to talk radio show and had a widely successful 5 pm TV commentary show featuring 21 minute monologues and chalk boards.  Rest assured, he is quite a credible front man.  But Beck claims that his new hire, Raj Nair, is the face of GBTV.  That might be a stretch but it does signal that GBTV is not intended to be ego gratification or all Glenn all the time.

One is left with the impression that there will not be overt advertising on GBTV, especially as it is a subscription service.  But considering the powerful reach that Beck has demonstrated, there might be other ancillary ways to monetize.  Merely by mentioning F.A. Hayek’s Road to Serfdom (1944), Beck turned an obscure academic economic analysis into a bestseller merely by mentioning it on his TV show.  Beck’s motivated audience are readers so look out Oprah’s Book Club!  Beck has been designing the 1791 line of clothing, which he seeks to give profits to the charitable arm Mercury One. So the monetization may not  be simply lining the entertainment entrepreneur’s pockets but helping out communities.

An exciting, but roughly hewn detail of GBTV is the viewer involvement.  Beck wants his new show to be about activism.  GBTV is teasing viewers prior to the launch with hand-held POV confessionals about the making of a network.  While it is in the offing, Beck visions interactivity, which would allow viewers on a computer to pause on unfamiliar terms and look up prior shows to get back up to speed before continuing.  Moreover, Beck hopes to establish a platform which allows viewers to create video segments of things they catch and pass it on to the producers.  So instead of being mind numbed drones watching the boob tube, they can be active Watch Dogs contributing to the cause.

Obviously, many these pursuits are praiseworthy.  Moreover, the DCBarroco blog shares the aspiration to meld enlightenment with amusement, fostering idea sharing through interactivity and encouraging the audience to “connect the dots”. But this analysis is neither a paen nor propaganda. The question essentially is “Will it work?”

Glenn Beck’s unbridled dreams personally reminds me of the soaring refrain from  “I Sing the Body Electric” from the original version of Fame.  These themes of self confident affirmation of individuality are echoed in the 2010 Glenn Beck Program radio theme.



 While it was created by an uncredited Stephen Lyons, it reminded many listeners of Muse’s anthematic "Uprising”.  But the theme certainly was not made by Muse because when Beck expressed his admiration for this European “Libertarian” oriented group, Muse responded that: "[Beck] is a crazy right winger".  So things don’t always work out as planned, which might end up being the refrain for GBTV.

The Mercury Radio Arts mission is some pretty ambitious stuff.  It is unclear if a new network can be launched in a little over three months using a subscription streaming internet model remains to be seen.  Can quality conservative news and entertainment programming draw audience away from the mixed bag of viral videos on Youtube or streaming Netflix?  Is it an impossible dream to turn an audience into activists?  Can charitable pursuits comfortably interlock with capitalism and community activism?   Will Mercury Radio Arts rise in the horizon swiftly delivering messages of hope and homespun values.  Or will it resemble Icarus, the Greek legend who flew too close to the heavenly blaze and crash landed. It remains to be seen. Stay tuned.