It wasn't enough for Al Gore to invent the Internet. Now he has to have his own television cable network.
The Associated Press released a story Tuesday announcing that Gore, along with other investors, is establishing a news network that will offer "irreverent and bold" programming for young adults, 18 to 34.
To quote the AP: "The group is buying the Newsworld International channel from Vivendi Universal Entertainment for an undisclosed sum. The deal with Gore's company, INdTV Holdings, was announced during a cable industry convention in New Orleans."
Mr. Gore reassured the press that Al TV (my designation) will not be liberal or conservative. Instead, it will be "fair and balanced" like all the other networks. Of course it will.
It would almost be better if Al TV was the TV station for the flaming liberal generation, because a lot of the network's programming will be provided by the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. Do you know what that means? It means the Canadians will have a beachhead from which to invade the United States. Yes, the rumors are true - Gore's plan is part of a greater conspiracy that, had he been elected to the White House, would have been implemented much, much faster. We could all be choking on Canadian bacon right now. We will be if Gore's network becomes popular. You just wait.
Good luck, Al. You've had such great success with the Internet, television is the next natural step. But please promise you won't host your own show; there are enough empty talking heads on TV already. If you must have a show, though, maybe you can call it "Al's Lock Box".
GREAT, MORE ADVERTISING
The only time capitalism really stinks is when somebody creates a hot new product meant to make something better for businesses, but annoy the rest of us.
Take an outfit called Gourmet Impression. They've created a device that will allow companies to stamp or roll advertising messages onto food, and to make it real easy, food items are being created to specifically handle the stamps. Check it out at www.gourmetimpression.com, and see if you don't agree that this is possibly most annoying invention in history.
In an age when we are bombarded by advertisements on all sides, from television, Internet, billboards, and even movies (try going to the theater without seeing commercials before the previews, like paying $10 to see a movie in a theater with lousy seats and noisy patrons isn't punishment enough). Gourmet Impression wants to put commercials on our burger buns, and they are going to give it a shot whether you like it or not.
I guess the only good thing about this is you can dispose of the commercial in a couple of bites.
Why can't we get a break from Madison Avenue shoving products down our throats? (In this case, literally.) People who create stuff and build stuff need to market it to make money; that's fine. Most new inventions are nothing but time-wasting junk, but it is the mission of the bright boys and girls on Madison Avenue to make us think we can't live without this stuff. They go to college for that, you know. They have a degree.
Maybe the guys who invented TiVo, which lets you zap through TV commercials, will come up with an anti-food-message-roller that will wipe out the advertisements some joint stamps on my burger bun. I could also just pick away at it like I do the onions, but that's enough work as it is.
Two weeks ago I wrote a piece about banning cars (see "Killers On Our Streets"). Never before have I received so much hate mail. Never before have I been called so many colorful names as I suggested high-horsepower vehicles should be taken off the streets, and overall driving restricted.
The point of the piece wasn't to attack cars - it was to draw a correlation between the hysteria of the so-called epidemic of gun violence with the high amount of traffic-related deaths that nobody pays attention to. Unfortunately I didn't set the argument up properly. However, with all the hate mail, I realized the point had been made anyway. Many suggested that cars are symbols of American freedom and independance and to suggest taking them away was a horrible concept. It's the same thing with guns - substitute "gun" for "car" in that article, and you'll have the Handgun Control, Inc. playbook used by Ted Kennedy and Charles Schumer and Barbara Boxer and Hillary Clinton and other anti-gun politicians.
The difference is, cars are important to our economy while guns are not (anymore). That's why they're easy targets. Start attacking cars, and it becomes a whole different ball game.
Wait, it's already happening: ever notice how many do-gooders want to restrict/get rid of SUVs? It's a slippery slope and all that.....
And by the way, Mary Jo Kopechne just called (if you do not know who she is, I suggest an immediate Google search). She said Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun.
Brian Evankovich lives in California where he swears he has nothing to do with firstname.lastname@example.org.