It's a looming crisis for the country's aged, worthy of front-page coverage in today's Washington Post.
Is it the classic pay the heating bill or buy groceries quandary? No. The media-hyped dilemma of whether to buying gasoline or fill prescriptions? Good guess, but no. It's, wait for it, millions of elderly people with equally elderly TV sets facing a boob tube-less doomsday come next February!
I know what you're thinking. "Isn't there a government handout in the works so that people can get buy digital converters for their analog sets?"
How heartless of you! Post staffer Kim Hart explains why this program is just not enough.:
A $1.5 billion federal program has been set up to provide $40 coupons to help pay for the converter boxes, which cost $60 to $120 at stores such as Best Buy and Wal-Mart. But 73 percent of older consumers don't know about the program, according to a Consumers Union survey of 1,013 people. And some living in larger communities or group homes many not be eligible because of the program's limit of two vouchers per household.
The District of Columbia Health Care Association, which oversees 16 nursing homes, is starting to evaluate the options for residents, many of whom use older TV sets in their rooms. Veronica Damesyn Sharp, the association's executive director, said some residents are too frail to go to the common room to watch the buildings' main TVs, which are hooked up to cable. And many cannot afford to buy a new TV or a converter box, let alone get cable service.
Sharp says she's worried some residents may not qualify for a coupon because they live at the same address. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the agency within the Commerce Department administering the coupon program, requested approval to change the eligibility rules, but the process could take up to three months.
Still not convinced? The folks at the Post knew you'd be heartless and cruel, so they threw in the requisite picture of a worried-looking old guy (top right of post).
Caption: Sean Venable, who lives at St. Mary's Court in D.C., is worried his coupon for a TV converter box might expire before St. Mary's decides whether to hook up cable for residents.
Photo credit: Ricky Carioti/Washington Post.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Comments Policy
All hail the return of
March 31, 2008 - 11:59 ET by balboaAll hail the return of radio!
Ah, under the covers
March 31, 2008 - 14:25 ET by FastEdwith the transistor, ear piece, Jean Sheppard on WOR 10:15 - 11:00pm Monday-Friday. Story teller extrordinary.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Jean Sheppard? Local boy
March 31, 2008 - 17:40 ET by Indiana JoeJean Sheppard? Local boy made good!
What would Christmas be without 24 hours of "A Christmas Story?"
RIP
Actually, to turn a phrase
March 31, 2008 - 18:37 ET by FastEdInstead of Flick Lives!, we now shout Shep Lives!
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Ok
March 31, 2008 - 12:06 ET by ScrapironSo we have a bunch of elderly sitting around all day watching TV and they don't watch the numerous ads on TV telling them about the government program to help provide them converters. I'll make a bet that most of the elderly have cable/satelite TV and don't need the converters or they already have digital TV's that won't need the converter. Like my 81 years old brother who had cable, switched to satelite (for program choice) and is now looking for a 'larger' than the current 32" LCD TV. Someone tell the idiot reporter that the elderly built this country and they aren't as stupid as he is.
Old, Retired and glad of it.
Amen, Scrappy. I am
March 31, 2008 - 14:07 ET by QueenMumAmen, Scrappy.
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
No one loves the elderly?
March 31, 2008 - 17:20 ET by nkviking75And apparently the elderly all have no family who care for them enough to get a converter, connect them to cable or satellite, or even buy them a new digital capable receiver. Undoubtedly some older folks will be in this bind, but most won't.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
nkv, a lot of those families
March 31, 2008 - 21:26 ET by motherbeltnkv, a lot of those families won't even buy their parents the medicine they need (that's the taxpayers' problem!) They have their own problems; what with the $300,000 home, a couple of cars and private school for the kiddies! You expect them to spring for a converter box?
The family doesnt have to
April 1, 2008 - 10:01 ET by misterbee241The family doesnt have to be responsible when the government is. I know an elderly couple, Lord love'em, who're always complaining about how the government treats the seniors. They have three grown children who have decent jobs. Why dont the children come forward to help? They dont have to when Uncle Sugar does.
There is none so blind as they that won’t see. Jonathan Swift 1667-1745
The Ironic Truth
March 31, 2008 - 12:09 ET by geoff.galeThe ironic truth in this matter is that most Americans would be better off if their TV's took a permanent vacation. Can you say media overexposure? I knew you could.
This is too funny. Prices
March 31, 2008 - 12:11 ET by kgThis is too funny. Prices start at $43 and go up. Plus they haven't had them on sale yet either. I am sure stores would be happy to sell them for the $40 as the date nears. But don't look for the prices to drop much below the $40 mark because the stores will want all the tax money they can get.
"Forget change, I want improvement!"
So its TV welfare now, eh?
March 31, 2008 - 12:14 ET by R D HelmA $1.5 billion federal program has been set up to provide $40 coupons to help pay for the converter boxes...
So the Imperial Federal Government has taken a time-out from bailing out idiot mortgage lenders and confiscated an additional $1.5 bil. of our tax dollars (assuming they didn't have to borrow it from the Chicoms) to buy votes from old couch potatos.
I guess people now have a "right" to view TV.
This is beyond outrageous.
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
You Haven't Been Paying Attention
March 31, 2008 - 12:45 ET by JoelCTR D,
I'm kind of surprised you haven't heard of this. The government madated that all air-based TV stations convert by February 2009. Then people said, wait, will my TV still receive this new-fangled signal? The government said no, you have to get cable or sumpin. The people said, I can't afford to pay $100 just to watch TV. So, the government said, we'll help you buy a box to convert it, since we forced this on you.
I consider it costly, but fair.
</sarcasm on>
Besides, it's in the Constituion that the federal government can force TV stations to change their method of broadcasting! It's right there, between the 18th and 19th Amendments, I swear. If you squint and look real hard, you can see it.
</sarcasm off>
Joel,
March 31, 2008 - 17:26 ET by R D HelmActually, I heard about this some time ago. I was just being a little sarcastic.
But I still don't like the idea of the government forcing broadcasters to switch completely from analog to a digital signal, and I like the fact that I am having to subsidize those who don't wish to pay for the converters even less.
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
I guess people now have a
March 31, 2008 - 14:11 ET by motherbeltI guess people now have a "right" to view TV.
That's
right, RD, and it's up to the government to make certain that every
home has the appropriate equipment come next February. Just look
at that poor man! Would you deny him???
That photo is the
stupidest thing I have ever seen! They had to take a
picture of a guy sitting on a couch for this story???????
Good grief!
mb,
March 31, 2008 - 17:37 ET by R D HelmJudging from the small size of that guy's TV, how long will it be before we are paying for the government to buy them all bigger flat screen units to go along with their nifty new taxpayer-supplied converter boxes, which they will no-longer need.
I mean, that's the next logical step, after all, but not before we will find ourselves subsidizing toilet paper and ketchup, too.
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
I'm not a senior citizen
March 31, 2008 - 12:22 ET by Subsailor599I'm not a senior citizen yet, but all my friends and family that are were way ahead of me in getting a digital tv. They all know how to setup their satellite or cable and use the remote. Who says that the 60+ crowd does not keep up with new technology?
That explains the article being about the eldery
March 31, 2008 - 15:52 ET by kgDon't forget that lady in New Orleans who is on welfare and has a 60" flatpanel HD TV. That explains the article being about the eldery.
"Forget change, I want improvement!"
STOP PLEASE
March 31, 2008 - 12:27 ET by ff_emt1"A $1.5 billion federal program has been set up to provide $40 coupons to help pay for the converter boxes"
At some point these handouts have to stop. I am running out of money.
Who is John Galt?
A Democrat is someone who wants to put YOUR money where HIS mouth is.
The bigger question...
March 31, 2008 - 12:31 ET by ExtirpaterWhere does the Federal government derive the authority to dictate what kind of TV set people watch?
Appears to be a step beyond their authority.
extir
March 31, 2008 - 12:36 ET by candanceThe government made the decision because of concerns about future communication needs. Classic bunny ear TVs get their signals through the air. Problem is, the number of possible frequencies is limited. Thus, as our population grows and more cities require more and more police/ambulance/National Guard/etc, more frequencies have to be set aside for them.
Since television is not a life or death priority, they're the first to be forced to give up frequencies.
So candance. Are you going
March 31, 2008 - 14:21 ET by QueenMumSo candance. Are you going to be the one to tell that poor old guy that television is not a life or death priority? ;)
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
how's your 8-track doing?
March 31, 2008 - 14:22 ET by wizardjrTime and technology move on. Today is the time of digital signals and HDTV. Feel free to hang onto 8-track and VCR technology. The rest of us are movin' on. Much like the adapters for 8-tracks to play cassettes, the converter boxes allow someone to use their stone age TV in the modern world.
wizard: Your comment made
March 31, 2008 - 14:36 ET by QueenMumwizard: Your comment made me smile because my 90 year old MIL will only listen to audio cassette tapes. In fact, we bought her a couple of CD's to try with FIL's CD player to get her to consider the "newer" technology and she insisted that my hubby transfer the CD's to audio cassettes. Now how goofy is that? :)
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
Your 90-year-old MIL sounds
March 31, 2008 - 14:56 ET by Ken ShepherdYour 90-year-old MIL sounds a lot like our very own Rich Noyes.
Ken: Rich Noyes is a
April 1, 2008 - 10:39 ET by QueenMumKen: Rich Noyes is a 90-year old with senile dementia? That explains a lot. LOL ;)
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
Some older folks don't like change
March 31, 2008 - 17:24 ET by nkviking75Back in the 70's my grandmother insisted she had no desire to watch color TV. I suspect she was just too proud to admit they really couldn't afford a color TV, or just didn't want to spend the money. Later when she came to live with us, our color TV's didn't seem to bother her. Older folks. You gotta love 'em.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Yes, time and...
March 31, 2008 - 14:53 ET by ontheright...technology move on, so be it. But why do the hard-working taxpayers of this country have to pay for anyone's "upgraded" technology but their own???
You don't see a problem with this, yet another Government handout pandering for votes?
Does "Steal from the rich and give to the poor" ring any bells?
What will it be next?
"Does "Steal from the rich
March 31, 2008 - 17:04 ET by Indiana Joe"Does "Steal from the rich and give to the poor" ring any bells?"
With "rich" defined as anyone who makes enough money to pay taxes, of course. But didn't Robin Hood steal from the tax collectors?
Now I'm confused....
ontheright
March 31, 2008 - 18:01 ET by candanceI was just answering the question about why the government is banning TV frequencies. Of course I think the $40 handouts are a stupid idea.
People starving to death in Africa and people in America whining about needing tax dollars for a new TV. Beyond ridiculous.
Its a bird, its a plane,
March 31, 2008 - 12:53 ET by MrSnugglesIts a bird, its a plane, no, its SOCIALISM TO THE RESCUE!!!!!
MrSnuggles: Somehow I don't
March 31, 2008 - 14:29 ET by QueenMumMrSnuggles: Somehow I don't see this program as particularly socialist. I for one am happy to have some of my own tax money back to pay for a part of this transition. And I don't see any incentive to abuse the program by requesting vouchers for something that one doesn't need.
The gist of this article is that the MsM is finding a way to suggest that the government (aka the Bush administration) is victimizing the elderly by "forcing" this change on them.
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
The Obvious Solution
March 31, 2008 - 12:54 ET by JoelCTKen, isn't it obvious? The government needs to build new "group homes" for these people, complete with Satellite hook-ups and digital LCD TVs!
Maybe they can sell some of those trailers they have standing around in Louisiana and use that money.
Why not just use the
March 31, 2008 - 17:06 ET by Indiana JoeWhy not just use the trailers? ;^)
That's 37.5 million adapter
March 31, 2008 - 13:02 ET by Hunter12That's 37.5 million adapter boxes, provided so the elderly can continue to get their indoctrination from ABC, NBC, and CBS. There were 1.6 million people in nursing homes in the US in 2006. That leaves 35 million vouchers. There were about 66 million people in the US above 59 years old. On average, about 10% of them live below the poverty line. If that adds up to about 7 million people, that leaves 28 million of these vouchers for some other group. If you subtract the nursing home numbers from the 7 million, you have even less peope who need a voucher. If you look at the concentartions of wealth in this country, this is a stupid give-away.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
Hunter: I may be
March 31, 2008 - 14:04 ET by QueenMumHunter: I may be misunderstanding your point, but the $40 vouchers are not specifically for the elderly or the poor. Every U.S. household is entitled to two vouchers to cover the cost of buying the boxes if they need them.
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
You're right, QM, but even
March 31, 2008 - 17:15 ET by Indiana JoeYou're right, QM, but even so, Hunter has made a point, maybe unintentionally. How many people other than these "group-home elderly" are really still watching TVs that can't get a digital signal, AND don't have cable or satellite? How many do you know? I can't think of one person I know that doesn't have cable or satellite TV.
I think almost all TVs sold in the last 5 years or so are "digital compatible." I bought a new 25" (for the bedroom) for my Mom last year for under $200. And if you have cable or satellite, the company will convert the signal. So, this is a very small demographic, IMO.
Well ... in fact Joe, the
March 31, 2008 - 20:01 ET by QueenMumWell ... in fact Joe, the RC and I are holding off on purchasing new TV's until we absolutely have to. The RC is chomping at the bit to get his new big screen HDTV - likely this fall. We do have cable; but the RC's parents do not. We're the sort who do our research before purchasing such things and end up with products that tend to endure, so we've had no reasonable excuse to replace our current television sets - yet. Such is life here in small town Ohio. :)
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
Naked man?
March 31, 2008 - 13:11 ET by RJWallWhy does this guy have a picture of a partially-naked man hanging in his bedroom? Even worse, it looks like Sean is not wearing any pants!
C'mon, RJ, give the guy a break!
March 31, 2008 - 13:35 ET by Mica the MagnificentThe poor guy probably voted democrat his entire life, and all he has to show for it is the half naked picture of some guy, a 13" t.v. with an indoor antenna, a one room apartment in a converted motel, and no pants.
This may seem cruel, but I
March 31, 2008 - 13:51 ET by Hunter12This may seem cruel, but I think the painting is entitled "Potrait of the Dejected Looser Who Can't Afford a Converter as a Young Man". In the WaPo story, the photo is larger and the potrait is much clearer. Back when it was painted, he couldn't afford shirts.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
This could be cruel-er, Hunter12
March 31, 2008 - 14:06 ET by Mica the MagnificentNotice that the wall clock is positioned at 'pillow height?'
Smart, eh? No need to use those neck muscles to look up at traditional wall clock placement.
And I'd like an explanaton for the extra fluffy, soft and smoothe furred, attentive-looking stuffed bear?
Hmmm?
That was my comment
March 31, 2008 - 15:27 ET by motherbeltThat was my comment above....they had to take a picture of guy
sitting on a couch, or on the edge of a bed to do this story?
What the heck did that add to it??
"Sean Venable is worried."
Sheesh!
Get a job!
March 31, 2008 - 13:21 ET by UphillYa shouldn't be sittin' around all day watchin' TV!
Oh, wait. That's what my dad told me. This might not apply to old folks. But, of course, if they're watching TV then they're not out roaming the streets.
But, of course, if they're
March 31, 2008 - 13:24 ET by Jack BauerLike those infamous HELLS GRANNIES!
What are they in it for,
March 31, 2008 - 13:57 ET by Roger the ShrubberWhat are they in it for, these old hoodlums, these layabouts in lace?
LOL
March 31, 2008 - 17:18 ET by Indiana JoeCan always count on you for the Python "bon mot," Shrub.
"But, of course, if they're
March 31, 2008 - 14:17 ET by QueenMum"But, of course, if they're watching TV then they're not out roaming the streets."
Or throwing all their money away on Bingo and bus trips to casinos.
I am the exotic Queen Mum, and I approved this message.
As if the elderly didn't
March 31, 2008 - 13:57 ET by Hero SquadAs if the elderly didn't already have enough to fear with the threat of being attacked by robots always looming.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
That's pretty funny. This
March 31, 2008 - 14:31 ET by Ken ShepherdThat's pretty funny.
This one from SNL recently was also funny and along the same lines.
Yeah, that was pretty good,
March 31, 2008 - 14:51 ET by Hero SquadYeah, that was pretty good, too. Andy Samberg (particularly his Digital Shorts) is the best thing going on SNL these days. He seems to be about the only one there purely for the comedy, completely disinterested in making a political statement of any kind. At least, as far as I've seen.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
Robot deniers
March 31, 2008 - 17:29 ET by nkviking75Ken, did you catch the disclaimer at the end? "People denying the existence of robots may be robots themselves."
Sounds like Algore and the global warming fanatics.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
no TV is a good thing
March 31, 2008 - 14:16 ET by wizardjrI am convinced that onset of Senile Dementia is caused by watching daytime TV. I rarely take a sick day at home any more after forced sick time where I had to put up with my wife's selection of soap operas, etc. I think I'd rather crawl through a mile of broken glass on my hands and knees before watching another minute of daytime TV.
SAVE THE SENIORS, NO DIGITAL CONVERTERS!
YOU may....
March 31, 2008 - 14:47 ET by ontheright...consider it fair, but it's partly my tax dollars too - and I don't think it is fair one bit.
Woe is me...It's the old
March 31, 2008 - 15:54 ET by bigtimerWoe is me...
It's the old cat food or TV choice....boo-hoo!
This reminds me of the critters who phone bank the Washington Journal daily and b!tch and moan about the economy, Big Bad Bush's fault, the evil corporations on and on they whine and cry, most don't have an IQ to know how the real world works, let alone are able to speak english with any clarity or form...just talking points...all the while they are calling long distance, are on hold or quite awhile at times, which costs a pretty penny for them they way they talk... saying they have no money ect...
Phony bunch of critters...cry somewhere else.
Wait oh wait...someone on the campaign trail will make it Wal-Mart's fault and try to guilt them into promising a new digital television for all the people below a certain income level...forget the converters...which by the way this is old news now about the converters and what congress has done with all of this...including MCain.
Btw...The nursing homes and WaPo are just making a bunch of nothing out of nothing.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
Well BT, check the
March 31, 2008 - 15:59 ET by JasonCWell BT, check the thermostat in hell, cause I completely agree with your post.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
JasonC... UH-OH! ...and
March 31, 2008 - 16:05 ET by bigtimerJasonC...
UH-OH! ...and all this time I thought it was a temp. from a low grade fever I have with the flu/cold....
LOL!
Glad you set me straight...I feel much better now.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
I'll miss Jeopardy and The
March 31, 2008 - 15:58 ET by JasonCI'll miss Jeopardy and The Office, but when this thing goes into effect, I'm through with TV. It's a dying medium anyway; so long as I have my DVD player and Netflix, it'll be fine, at least until that Blue-Ray crap becomes de rigeur. I've had enough of the merchants of crass spectacle trying to manufacture and sell me desires that I never had in the first place.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
If you can watch DVD's
March 31, 2008 - 16:09 ET by kimschon your TV, it's digital or already has a converter box connected. That's another reason we had purchased a converter box, so the kids could watch DVD's on a TV that was 30 years old. One with only the screws and u-shaped connectors on flat antenna wire.
If there's a coaxial connection on the back, it's digital already.
Blu-Ray and HD are not part of this. Totally different story and technology involved.
kimsch
Really? I thought it meant
March 31, 2008 - 16:11 ET by JasonCReally? I thought it meant that you had to have an actual cable box. So if your TV has RCA inputs, you're all set? Well that's cool.
As far as Blu-Ray, I do think that in ten years or so they will have replaced regular DVDs. But if I was wrong about the cable stuff I could be wrong on this. Definitely not my area of expertise.
Who can revolt if man has become a simple conglomerate of organs, a person barely free enough to use a remote control to choose his channel? -J. Kristeva
you'd need a cable converter
March 31, 2008 - 16:26 ET by kimschand an account for the programming, but otherwise, if your TV is cable ready, then you are all set for digital.
kimsch
Jason,
March 31, 2008 - 17:33 ET by Indiana Joekimsch sounds like he knows what he's talking about, but I'm not sure. There probably aren't 10,000 TVs in the country that don't have a coax input that are still in use. My understanding is that TVs less than (X) number of years old won't need anything.
When I got my DVD player, it had regular RCA outputs (the 3 colored jacks, and different from the coax. But if you have RCA, you must have coax) that went right into the same on my TV. No converter needed. It also had a digital output, but I didn't try that, my TV at the time was about 10 years old. BUT that's not (RCA) the input your normal TV signal comes in on.
Not real sure about all this, the old "flat-wire vs. coax" problem was mainly one of impedance originally. I'm trying to find out, but the website I tried from a commercial was down at the time. But I'm pretty confident that this will affect less people than is commonly supposed.
Corrections on digital TV
March 31, 2008 - 17:43 ET by nkviking75With respect, kimsch, older DVD players play discs that are digitally encoded, but the output is analog for use with analog TV's. If I had a TV from the 60's and the right connections, I could use it to watch DVD's.
Also, coax connectors predate digital TV by decades. What a coax input on your TV will do is allow you to receive digital programming from cable or satellite on an analog TV. However, it'll be downconverted to analog. The presence of a coax jack does not indicated a digital TV.
If you're not fussy, you can buy standard definition TV's with digital tuners. The view will resemble what we've all been used to, but your receiver will pick up digital broadcasts. These can be had relatively cheaply.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Thanks
March 31, 2008 - 18:15 ET by kimschI was going with what I remembered the Radio Shack guy saying when we bought the converter for our 30 or so year old Zenith. The guy said we needed the box to be able to hook up a DVD player since the TV is only analog.
The channels are selected by a vertical green line on the screen. VHF and UHF have to be selected separately by a small switch on the front and the power and volume are in the same button, a button that must be twisted. This Zenith didn't come with the handy dandy corded remote control that the big console TV's had (when remotes were first introduced). As I said, it only has the connections for the flat antenna wire.
There aren't a whole lot of those TVs still around however and most people probably have a digital compatible TV anyway.
kimsch
What about MY $40?
March 31, 2008 - 16:03 ET by kimschI have a 30 year old TV that required a converter box so that the boys could watch satellite and play with their Playstation (1). I bought this converter several years ago from RadioShack.The other TVs in the house are digital already. So, what about my $40? Oh yeah, like the mortgages, since I obtained a house and a mortgage I could afford , tough luck on bailing me out. Same with the converter box. Since I bought one years ago, SOL is me.
By the way, there are quite a few people who think that Digital means HD and flat screen LCD or Plasma displays, not just "cable ready". Any cable ready TV does not need a converter.
kimsch
Sean Venable has some kind of box on his TV
March 31, 2008 - 16:32 ET by kimschand it doesn't look like a VCR. He probably doesn't need a converter box regardless of the "bunny ears" on the TV which aren't even extended and don't have any tin foil on them.
kimsch
Yeah, those rabbit ears
March 31, 2008 - 17:37 ET by Indiana JoeYeah, those rabbit ears look like they came with the TV and are just folded out of the way. Probably had to put them up for the photo op.
I've USED rabbit ears, and NOBODY gets good reception with them folded that neatly! ;^)
Not just that...
March 31, 2008 - 17:44 ET by sarcasmoOne always breaks. Then you jam a coat hanger down it and the damthing works better than it ever has (but still lousy).
JMR
A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover.
Folded??
March 31, 2008 - 17:58 ET by RESTLESS 1Hell, I could stand on a ladder, on the roof, completely wrapped in tin foil and still not get reception from any station that is not in Spanish. Damn, I love my satellite. :)
Well, it seems the media is
March 31, 2008 - 18:03 ET by RESTLESS 1Well, it seems the media is all atwitter at the chance they may lose a viewing bloc in their indoctrination campaign. Can't have that now can we? I'm waiting for the "what about the children we need to get at them too" moment. They like to get at them young ya know.
Lemmee guess...
April 1, 2008 - 14:11 ET by greenfairieWomen and minorities hardest hit, right?