Mona.... KPOJ, the local Air America affilliate here, beats all the the righties, hands down, put together, you name it. You sound like Bill O'Reilly when you make such inaccurate statements.

This isn't true in every market, of course, but please, do some research. Also, Air America comprises only a fraction of progressive talk, several companies having jumped into the format having seen the success of Ed Schultz, Mike Malloy, Bill Press, and on and on.

Air America was the target of many right-wing smears, and a widespread ownership blackout, but the format has survived and thrived with or without it.

My comments weren't about Air America specifically as much as about progressive vs. right-wing (News!) talk in general. One challenges corporate interests, and is reluctantly given a weak signal, no marketing, and is widely declared to be a "failure" after a few months, and the other serves corporate interests, and is given several stations, relentless marketing, and many years of subsidy to catch on, and declared a "success" even after ratings prove otherwise.

The fact that Fox and right-wing radio are allowed to, loudly and emphatically, call themselves "news," while trafficking on Pravda-like propaganda, is the problem the Fairness Doctrine is meant to prevent.

If Rush Limbaugh knew that he was being followed by, say, Rachel Maddow, and Michael Savage knew he was being followed by, say, Stephanie Miller all would know that a large portion of their audience would be innately skeptical, and flagrant, coordinated lying would therefore be naturally curbed.

Moreover, my local market, which is deep blue, would have talk radio at least half and half, rather than the 80-20 it has now.

Your faith in the "market," though obviously feigned, doesn't cut it when the ownership structure of the PUBLIC airwaves is inherently tilted one way.

Ownership restrictions would of course be the better answer, but in their absence, the Fairness Doctrine would suffice.

Northwestwoods, thanks for the tip... Leaves more room in there for the bottle of gin, carton of More 120's, etc.

What I love most about Noonan's "column," and Williams' embrace of it, is that it exemplifies American post-literacy. Snide, made-up observations, heavily larded with both prejudice and inanity, strung together in incomplete sentences and eight-grade vocabulary.

Had I written such a thing in high school I would have been rightly ridiculed and received an F.

But to Williams, finger ever on the pulse of "ordinary" Americans, whom he obviously assumes are numbskulls and believes "journalism" should keep them that way, such contemptuous trash is worthy of an award.

A revealing, albeit unintentionally, statement on Williams' part.

It boggles the mind to think what possible advantage could be gained by giving a president with a 71% disapproval rating and some bloated, despised monopolies a gift, against the will of everyone who vaguely understands the issue. Even bribery oughtn't be enough. The telcos are smart enough not to even try flipping Democratic seats to Republican in this cycle, and they aren't even making a serious effort at PR or lobbying.

Glenn's hypothesis that some blue dogs just seem to have a hankering for immunity, darn it, is about the only explanation that holds water. Carney and his ilk deserve defeat not for corruption or weakness, but flat-out stupidity.

JKP's comment reminded me of the idle talk after the collapse of the Soviet Union, that something called a Peace Dividend might be available to either reduce the tax burden or serve domestic needs. That went over like a fart in church.

Iraq War I was soon launched, and amounted to an informercial for the military industrial complex, as well as a way to retire that nagging, unamerican "Vietnam Syndrome."

Of course, the key ingredient in making all this work was the complete acquiescence of the media, which, unbelievably, is even worse now.

I was astonished to compare the coverage of actual debate in congress over Iraq the first, which by Iraq the second, had been completely eliminated. Every network promoted the upcoming war as though it were a blockbuster miniseries, and practically the only one who was saying war wasn't inevitable was the Decider himself.

Of course, when the miniseries turned out to be an expensive and dreary long-running drama, the networks lost interest, and guess what? So did many Americans.

It's telling that even Hiatt has on some level, preferring to talk about Somalia, while ignoring the elephant in the room, or explaining that it's really a mouse with an endocrine disorder.

I'm with mwhite... Send them all.