US Troops Appear Much Smarter Than Kerry

In vintage (John) Kerry (D-MA) arrogance, the Senator told an audience "You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.” The natural response to that by me was "ouch." Surely the Senator will own the inappropriateness of the remarks and distance himself. After all, we can all think of individuals whom we know who are well educated and successful and decided to risk it all for their country. The most classic example is Pat Tillman, who was a successful safety for the Arizona Cardinals with a multi-year contract worth millions and who graduated with a 3.8 GPA in three and a half years from Arizona State University with a business degree. Hmm, financially successful, very smart, and a volunter who gave it all for his country. I'm sure his family, friends, and former teammates appreciate that. I personally know of college educated individuals who chose to volunteer to fight for their country when they had plenty of other options.

Kerry was immediately taken to task by the media and the Republican party. I'm sure the rest of us who would make such a stupid remark would quickly apologize. Instead, Kerry has decided to defend his behavior and now describes his remarks as a "botched joke." The "uneducated ones" wasn't the soldiers, he now explains, but the Bush administration who got us "in this situation." I remind the Senator that the President, who is the butt of many jokes because of his unique language, did graduate from Yale and went on to get an Harvard MBA. Also, Bush actually made better grades than Kerry during his college years. Furthermore, it is clear by what he said about the troops that all of our collective interpretation is exactly what he meant. This argument that those who serve in wars are not smart is as old as military history itself. This was the mantra of critics during the Vietnam War and he was one of the leaders in that anti-war effort. And wasn't true then and it isn't true now. Furthermore, those who fought now are actual volunteers, which wasn't always the case during the Vietnam war. This makes his remarks all the more hurtful, in my opinion.

Senator Kerry has been caught, red handed, taking a position that he desperately needed to apologize for and distance himself. Instead he moves from a shovel to using heavy equipment in his effort to destroy his political future. I feel confident that any and all of our troops are smarter then that.

If the Democrats Win the US House There Will Be a Tax Increase. Guaranteed.

With the Democrats will come tax increases. That's right, there will be nothing the President, Senate or anyone else can do to stop a tax increase if the Democrats win. Why? Because the tax cuts the President had passed has to be reapproved by the new Congress. The new Speaker of the House in a Democrat controlled Congress, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has made it perfectly clear that she and the new Ways and Means Chairman (Charles Rangel, D-NY) will not allow any of those cuts to stand for reapproval. Without Congressional action, the tax cuts will expire, which will equal a tax increase for all practical purposes. As the President has been telling us, they are not permanent. With the Democrats, they are history. Pelosi and Rangel have both declared that they can't think of a single tax cut worth keeping on the books.

The only way to avoid an inevitable tax increase is to elect a Republican House and Senate. Period. Otherwise, kiss your hard earned money goodbye. I believe the knowledge of such is among the reasons we are seeing a turn around for the GOP.

Prepare for Kinky's Surprise

I've been involved in politics since 1980 when I was a leader in Students for Reagan and Young Conservatives of Texas but have never seen anything like the Kinky Friedman phenomenon. According to the polls, Governor Rick Perry should win handily with 38 percent of those supporting him. Strayhorn and Friedman have around 20 percent each and Democrat Chris Bell is a distant fourth at 14 percent (and dropping). According to virtually everyone I talk to -- be they liberal Democrat or hard line conservative -- Friedman is going to win hands down. I know you have to worry about the validity of anecdotal information, but something is clearly going on here.

I'm beginning to believe that voters might be uncomfortable with telling a pollster they are voting for a rather unconventional independent like Friedman, but are comfortable doing so when visiting with a friend. The question these voters need to ask, is where does Kinky stand? He only talks about a wall between Mexico and Texas and the need to govern differently than "the politicians" (will he become a politician after this election?). He has a long history as a liberal activist and I believe the largely conservative state will be shocked by how he will govern. The only ones who might be more surprised by a Kinky election than the pollsters, are the voters. I don't think it will be a pleasant surprise.

Hot and Not so Hot Talk Radio

Recently Air America, the liberal answer to the prevailing Conservative talk radio programs, declared bankruptcy. It appears that Liberal dogma doesn't translate well on radio. While the Liberal radio network contemplates how it will not pay it bills, I was curious to find out which talk programs are hot.

Before I had a chance to do some serious research, I stumbled on a Parade Magazine, which had a list this week of the top five radio talk show hosts. Who are they?

Rush Limbaugh, the Godfather of modern Conservative talk radio, is number one with an estimated 13.5 million listeners. Limbaugh has gone through numerous personal challenges and has had to adapt to the ever changing talk radio environment. In the end, however, he remains very Conservative and very popular.

Sean Hannity, who is relatively new compared to Limbaugh and is as known as co-host of a show on Fox News, has a substantial audience of 12.5 million. Every bit as Conservative as Limbaugh and with a phenomenal audience.

Michael Savage, of Savage Nation, may be the most frightening of Conservative talk show hosts. He says exactly what he feels, even if it is offensive, and it attracts a massive audience of over 8 million (his site claims 10 million). Savage is also an intellectual with a PhD from UC Berkeley in Epidemiology and Nutritional Science.

Dr. Laura Schlessinger, a long time Conservative darling who focuses on cultural, social, and (especially) psychological issues. Her PhD is in Physiology (from Columbia) but has training in Marriage and Family Therapy from the University of Southern California and is a licensed Marriage, Family and Children Counselor. Very controversial, but also quite popular with 8 million listeners.

Finally, the only other woman on the top 5 list is Laura Ingraham. Following her graduation from Dartmouth, much of Laura's career has been in government related institutions, including a stint as a speech writer for Ronald Reagan and (following getting a law degree from the University of Virginia) a period as a law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Very Conservative, and very popular, she enjoys an audience of over 5 million.

What do we learn from this assessment? Conservative radio is hot (these hosts have a combined audience of over 45 million, though I'm sure many listen to more than one show) and, from the struggles seen by Air America, Liberal radio is not. In a future post I'll discuss why this is the case.

So, Jack Welch Wants to Buy a Newspaper

So, Jack Welch wants to buy a newspaper. That's the word coming out of Boston this week. Welch is at an age (70) where I'm sure he has a love for this old media. At 44 I still love print publications. But I believe he is not making a very good entrepreneurial decision. The Boston Globe, owned by the New York Times has a projected value of between $500 and $600 million, yet it sold for over $1 billion in 1993 (ironically, the year many believe the Internet obtained its market relevance). With its continued decline, it seems ironic that someone like Welch would be interested. Even more interesting is that his partner, advertising executive Jack Connors, would be involved in such a project. Few understand the devastating impact the Internet has had on newspapers than someone in the advertising field.

So why get involved in such a project? In spite of the fact I believe print is largely dead, I would love to own a newspaper or magazine. I wouldn't be surprised if someone like Welch would have the same passion. Also, Welch is among many executives who has disliked the treatment that business has received from newspapers. This could be seen as an opportunity to create more balance. It could be that he actually believes that his ability to turn GE around (a struggling company when he took the reins) could transcend to a newspaper. Whatever the reason, I believe he will likely find the result less than satisfying. For $500 to $600 million, Welch and company could develop a website that will further contribute to the transformation of media through the web and he would likely have a national (or international) presence for that kind of money.

If there is anyone who could help turn a faltering business around, it is Welch. His likely failure in a project such as this will only further demonstrate the continued decline of print media.

More Bad News for Those Who Love Bad News

The bad news lovers out there have to hate the rash of good news being reported on the economy. The Federal Reserve choose to maintain interest rates at current levels. Lowering them would indicate concern that the economy was stalling, raising them would mean that the economy was too hot and becoming inflationary. The Feds response is that the economy was enjoying smooth sailing. Furthermore, the Dow closed at a record high and the other major markets closed on the upside.

Specifically, the Dow closed at a record 12,134.68, the NASDAQ closed at 2356.59, and the S&P closed at 1,382.22. For those who make a living saying the sky is falling this is terrible news. For the rest of us, it translates into greater opportunities. Hopefully the end of the election cycle will bring a little sanity to the way news is spun.

A Gold Star for Brian Kilmeade

Brian Kilmeade of Fox News hit the nail on the head this week when he expressed his frustration over the way business news is delivered. Kilmeade, who wears many hats but is the chief sports analyst for the popular Fox & Friends show, heard the business news headlines and was shocked of how they were delivered. He heard reports of businesses reaching their highest level of sales, but failing to meet analysts expectations. He heard other stories about the stock market's all time high, but fundamentals being such that long term growth is doubtful. He said (paraphrase): "That's the thing I hate about business news. Every story, regardless of how good or bad, has exceptions that make you wonder if there are any winners or losers. I'm always asking, 'was that good news or bad?' That's what I love about sports, either they win or they didn't. We need that kind of clear reporting in business news." I couldn't agree with him more. When I hear most stories these days -- be it business, politics, or what ever -- they are full of subjective speculation and fail to be hard news. It is about time that the news became the news again and make it clear when it is actually mere opinion.

Surprising Predictions on the Off Year Elections

Well, it is that time again -- mid-term elections are up and many politicians will have to face the grade from the electorate. According to the political pundits, this should be a disastorous year for Republicans and the President. I believe, historically speaking, that this will be far milder than what is being predicted.

The reader needs to be aware that off year elections have been bad for Presidents for years. Dwight Eisenhower lost over 40 Republican Member of Congress in 1958. Bush is one of the only modern Presidents that has been able to maintain a Republican majority throughout his administration. Like him or not, this is a remarkable accomplishment.

I believe that Republicans are going to perform much better than expected. The magic number in the U.S. House is 15 seats, in the Senate, 5 in terms of what Democrats needed to win to get a majority. Three weeks ago I believed Republicans would likely lose the House and maybe the Senate as well. My view is changing due to several factors:

First of all, the unemployment situation remains extremely low. These kind of numbers (4.6 percent nation wide) are considered extremely low by any measure.

Second, the stock market is exploding. The "historic" 12,000 mark of a few weeks ago is slowly becoming the norm and there appears to be no end to the growth.

Third, home ownership is at its highest in US History.

Fourth, the "scandals" that were haunting Republicans seem to be chasing Democrats. There seems to be several "Mark Foley" like incidents in Congress and they appear to cross party lines. These could come out any day now. Meanwhile, the Minority Leader of the Senate (Harry Reid of NV) is battling back from accusations of unethical behavior in his disclosures. This means that neither party might do well when it comes to ethical questions. The Foley "October Surprise" was actually in September and may have given Republicans too much time to recover.

Finally, with the most violent month in the war in Iraq being used by Democrats as a case for a change of course, many Americans are interpreting this as a possible vote by our enemies for the Democrats. I don't believe Americans are going to give terrorists what they clearly desire.

So my prediction? The polling numbers are showing that seats that a few weeks ago were going Democrat are now up for grabs or going the other direction. I believe Republicans will win a small majority in both Houses. Keep an eye on this post, however, there might be a slight alteration in a few weeks.

The Phone Directory's Tough Sale

Over the weekend I found myself at a tire store waiting for a replacement for one with a slow leak. While waiting, I some how struck up a conversation with a gentleman and he informed me that he published telephone directories. I was in shock, "you mean one with paper and ink?" He said, "yes." I said, "that is one tough job." He quickly responded back, "no, it is a great business." I said, how? According to recent research more people find businesses through the web than any other source." He said, "no way, people are creatures of habit and the phone directory is the habit of most."

The truth is, phone books are only suitable to those uncomfortable with the web, which is a very small population and phone book users are decreasing every year. Plus the web is now available to more than 75 percent of all homes and the number is growing daily and the web allows the user to not only find the business or person they are looking for, but also an exact map of where they live. Furthermore, they can find the business that is near to them and specific directions from point A to B. Then there is the fact you can choose text size, making it easier for older readers. I think you are getting my point.

However, I appreciated this man's efforts. At every turn this gentleman was sincerely telling me the "web may be the tool of the future, but I'm talking about today. Furthermore, you can expect my latest directory on your door step soon." I said "great, it can join the one that has been sitting there for over a week." He looked at me in shock, I said "at least I know where that one is, I have no idea where to find the one I received last year." He was very nice, even though our conversation got a little passionate, and we agreed to disagree. But as I was driving away I remembered where my last directory was -- it was hand delivered by one of our kids from the porch to the trash can after a week or two. I guess that will happen to the latest directory gathering dust on my porch. We might as well wait until his arrives and we can kill two directories with one throw.

The Half Empty World of the News

I don't mean the medias head, but their glass, but it may fall both ways. Recently I received a CNNMoney Alert with the disturbing headline "Leading indicators rise, but miss Wall Street forecasts, pointing to sluggish economic growth." When I clicked it I found that unemployment claims dropped to "299,000 last week, down from 309,000 the previous week" and that the Dow broke the magic 12,000 mark. These stories are, by any stretch of the imagination, good news.

I read the story in its entirety and the only "signs" of "sluggish" growth were in specific stock sectors, not in the economy as a whole. The media, the perpetual bad news mongers, are so desperate for bad news they "find it" where it doesn't exist. It appears that people in business are going to continue to create good business news and ignore the medias fiction.

Are We Like Sheep?

Are we like sheep? Texas independent candidate for Governor Kinky Friedman seems to think so. When I first saw an ad of the candidate walking around with a lamb in his arms and quoting the Bible while making an analogy that puts him in a position of that of Jesus, with us as his sheep, I almost thought he was joking. Making parallels between Jesus and one self is pretty bold in and of itself. Further, treating the voters like they need to be taken care of like mindless sheep is down right outrageous. Most Texans I know don't see themselves as defenseless mild mannered creatures that need to be handled. Rather, they see themselves as decisive individuals who want to elect individuals that will represent our interests, make policies that maintain our freedom, and actually serve us. I, for one, have a good shepherd and he isn't running for governor.

Dow Breaks 12,000 While the Media Continually Cries "Wolf"

The Dow Jones Industrial Average hit the remarkable 12,000 mark for the first time in its history today, further sign of an economy that is continuing to grow. This, in spite of the continued out pouring of negative news stories. Furthermore, unemployment continues to stay below 5%, again a sign of continued prosperity.

Why the continued growth and prosperity in spite of the bad news? Do you happen to remember that story we all learned in elementary school of Aesop's Fable about the Boy Who Cried Wolf? The child was bored and he got into the habit of yelling "Wolf! Wolf!" in other to enjoy the excitement of hunters coming to the rescue. The third time he did this, however, no hunters came because they didn't believe him and this time to wolf actually got him. I believe the media is the boy and the American people are too busy hunting opportunities to grow their own personal economy and the economy of the country as a whole.

If there is a wolf that is lurking to devour our economy, the media will not be able to warn us of it with any credibility. Most of us are simply going to keep pursuing our own American Dream. If the media wants to be taken seriously again as an information source, they are going to have to reconstruct themselves and do it quickly.

Houston Business Show Celebrates Five Years

The Houston Business Show is celebrating its fifth year this month and over the last half decade the show has undergone enormous change. Here are a few highlights:

* It started off with my old friend Kent Batman as co-host, which he held that spot for about 5 months. Shortly after that Aubrey Theode was the host until January of this year. Then, Mark Jeffrey of UBuildIt served in that spot for six months and is now busily hosting his own show with me (the UBuildIt New Home Show). Currently I am hosting the show on my own with several guest co-hosts including Jim Stein of the Bank of Houston and others. Each of these people have made a great contribution to the show.

* When the show started there were many concerns of whether it could last. Remember what happened in September of 2001? By the end of the week that included September 11th I had lost roughly half of my sponsors for a show I had worked on for four months. I decided I wasn't going to allow terrorists to destroy my new venture. Today, the Houston Business Show is the longest running show on CNN 650. I guess we made a great choice.

* The show went from being on Sunday at noon to the very popular time of Monday at 1:00 PM. This is, of course, a much larger audience.

* There was no Business Show Advisors at the beginning, now we have them in virtually every business discipline and they play an important part of this show.

* There wasn't a HoustonBusiness.com or Houston Business Review, and you couldn't hear it online. I received an email around three years after starting the show from Steve Carr of HoustonJobs.com in which he asked if I would like to buy HoustonBusiness.com. I did want to and did so with the help of Henry Fasthoff and others. Today, thanks to excellent PR, web development, content development, huge directory development, news content and other efforts, HoustonBusiness.com has become an Internet monster with around 80,000 unique visitors each month, a Google ranking of 6 (the same as the Houston Business Journal and the Houston Chronicle), and now literally hundreds of pages of content.

* There was no Business Plus blog which has already developed a Google ranking of 4 in only 4 months.

There have been many changes since the show began in 2001, but our commitment to providing sound business news, from a solidly local perspective has been unchanging. If you want to learn more about the show, newsletter, or HoustonBusiness.com, email us at kj_hbr@sbcglobal.net.

Oprah and the Truth About Those Who Define the Truth

Oprah's website read last week:

"The New York Times columnist Frank Rich's new book, The Greatest Story Ever Sold: The Decline and Fall of Truth, takes a controversial look at the Bush administration, challenging the reasons America went to war with Iraq."

"Among the topics covered in the book, Rich asks why the White House suggested al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein were connected and takes the news media to task for not asking the hard questions after September 11.

"'I love America.' My feeling is that America can only function if there's truth and facts at its core,' Frank says. 'The whole point of a democracy is to make decisions based on real evidence. And if that well is polluted, we're in trouble.'"

"Frank argues that our 24/7 "infotainment" culture has made America stop thinking critically and become a society that rarely questions what it is told. "I think there's been a rise in 'truthinesss,'" as Stephen Colbert says, and a decline in truth and it's not just about war and politics," Frank says."

Frank insists that he's not a liberal, but there are few people on full time payroll at the New York Times that are anything but such, in my opinion. Frank insissts on defining the truth and it appears to be anything that is contrary to the views of President Bush. His primary focus is the war in Iraq, where he says the President "lied" about the weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

I want to recap what happened that led to the war in Iraq. Following the first Iraqi war in the early 1990s, that regime was required to submit to unfettered inspections from the UN to make sure it wasn't developing or using WMD. That regime was required to comply and failure to do so was the same as having such weapons in the eyes of the international community. After 10 years and continued roadblocks being thrown up by the regime to pursue true inspections, the allies had every right to invade. Period. Failure to do so was making the entire region vulnerable to Iraq's escapades.

Furthermore, there were locations found that indicated that they were developing chemical weapons and they had photos to validate such views. Unfortunately, the regime would not allow inspections to prove the status of the sites either way. Therefore the allies had no choice but to assume the worse.

Finally, no one knows if such weapons were moved somewhere else (we know they at least had weapons at some point and that they used them on their own citizens, the Kurds), I believe they are likely in neighboring Syria, in my opinion, though we may never know.

If the allies didn't invade, we could only expect Iraq to continue to be destabilizingng in the region. In sum, it is just as easy for me to conclude that Frank's view of truth is deceptive. The evidence certainly points in that direction.

The thing that sent me over the edge in disgust was a little conversation between Frank and Oprah on how divided the country has become. Oprah said something to the effect that "Americans are more divided now than any time in US history, isn't that correct?" Frank, in turn said something like "that's right, according to our polling." This statement, again, was left as fact. The fact is that such polling didn't even take place with any level of accuracy before the 1950s and so it is impossible to say such with any honesty (since we didn't have polling for the period before). Furthermore, historians of every stripe believe that during the Revolutionary war period, early Americans fell into three groups: pro-Revolution, anti-Revolution, and those who simply wish the fighting would stop. People were helping soldiers literally "tar and feather" their neighbors based on the views they held. Pretty divisive indeed.

The thesis of Frank's book is that people tend to blindly believe what the media conveys. I argue that he is right, I'm sure very few questioned his "truths" as presented on Oprah. I believe seriously evaluating his statements would make most of us come to different conclusions from him.

Chris Bell Helping Republican Faithful

Yes, you read right, Chris Bell is helping the Republican faithful. How? By supporting a position that will get the Republican faithful very motivated -- stem cell research.

The rumor has been that Republican scandal's and the war in Iraq would make the average Conservative voter stay at home and that they would let others decide their future as far as governing. With Bell talking stem cells and Conservatives' concern over such, we could expect a very different turn out.

Bottom line, there are things that make Conservatives unhappy with some of the people in the Republican Party, but their disdain for the beliefs of Democrats is even greater. That is why I won't be surprised if there is a much better than expected returns for Republicans.

Alaskans Put Their Lives Where Their Hearts Are

While many of us here in Houston have plenty of money and plenty of choices, many some how find themselves at Citgo stations refueling. Citgo, fully owned by the country of Venezuela which has vowed the over throw the United States and known for its disdain towards the West in general, continues to get treated as just another gas station here and around much of the country.

The Detroit Free Press and several other national media have found one place where business is anything but usual when it comes to Citgo. A few Alaskan villages made up of homes put together with plywood and full of terrible gaps and facing sub zero temperatures this winter are actually saying "no" to Citgo. Even with Citgo willing to give it away (at around $5 million) to them. That's right, many Alaskans in extreme poverty are saying "no" to a program designed to showcase poverty in the US. They are saying "thanks, but no thanks" to free fuel.

These Alaskans who are low in income but high in civic pride are telling dictator Chavez and his company to take care of Venezuela's own starving people and not embarrass the people of these villages. Furthermore, don't dare come to the US and criticize our President. Take your bad manners back home where you would likely fund an assassin to target any world leader who would call your President "the devil" on your territory.

The people of Alaska are willing to freeze for their country. Would you be willing to simply drive by a Citgo and find another station? I know I will.

Has Capitalism Made China a "Better" Country?

The Peoples Republic of China was, for decades, one of the bad boys on the international scene. For years this country was largely isolated from the rest of the world and financially supported mayhem against the West (and the US in particular) every opportunity it had. With the recent acceptance of capitalistic elements with this country's long communist stance, China has found itself increasingly respectable. Fear that their customers all over the world will question it as a reliable source of goods because of its proximity to N. Korea, China is holding N. Korea accountable in its recent efforts to become a nuclear player in a way it has never done in the past.

Most people don't realize that China has long been North Korea's chief sponsor in terms of military and financial support. China's shift to saying that the wayward country must be held accountable is unprecedented in and of itself. When they hold N. Korea accountable through its actions, this will truly be a brave new world.

China as an ally in dealing with wayward countries such as N. Korea is a direct result of free trade and is one of the latent benefits of "exporting jobs" to this country. China's prosperity has made it possible for them to become a better part of the international community and we are all the beneficiaries of it. At 4.6 percent unemployment and goods at a much more affordable rate, it is well worth the trade.

Bad Economics on TV

This morning I was watching the Today Show on NBC and there was an interview that included one of my favorite authors, Robert Kiyosaki (author of Rich Dad Poor Dad) and Donald Trump (the man who needs no introduction).

The thing that caught my attention were remarks by host Meredith Vieira who asked about the title of a new book Trump and Kiyosaki had written, Why We Want You to Be Rich. Remarkably, Vieira said "why would you gentlemen want others to get rich, that means less money for you." Trump responded jokingly, "everyone is getting my money" or something of that effect; both responded to her statement by saying that the middle class is quickly disappearing which will have a horrible affect on a Democratic country such as the US. Meanwhile, they let her horribly fallicious statement stay out there, that some how, wealth is a finite resource and that people only get more money by taking money from others. This "win-lose" philosophy (in contrast to "win-win") is exactly the reason why many people don't even attempt to be successful. How are they going to compete against a Trump?

Wealth is not limited, there is plenty to go around. There are more people with more wealth in this country than in any time in US history. The ability to become a successful entrepreneur is greater now than ever as well. The US has a monetary policy that fosters the growth of the money supply and its spreading to others based on production, because production gives it value. If the economy is growing, the money supply can grow and the value of money is largely mantained. That growing money supply goes to the new wealthy, without taking a penny from those who have had money long before.

This failure to properly teach economic concepts is one of the primary reason we have problems with people climbing the ladder of success. People are often afraid to get on because many actually believe that the only way one can win is if others lose. That is too bad, because in the United States there is plenty of room for success for everyone.

Dan Patrick Making Plans for Statewide Office?

Karen Brooks of the Dallas Morning News had the following to say in a recent story:

"The lexicon of Texas politics has a new entry: The Dan Patrick Effect. It's the ability of an opinionated and popular conservative radio host to incite the masses enough to crush established political opponents, tie up phone lines at the state Capitol and send some Republican politicians running scared. Until now, the Dan Patrick Effect has been contained to Houston, where listeners in March helped make him a shoo-in for a state Senate seat. Next week, Mr. Patrick sweeps into Dallas when he begins broadcasting out of his newly purchased station, the 35,000-watt KVCE-AM (1160), which he's calling "The Voice of Dallas."

"The new station will put Mr. Patrick's low-taxes, small-government message in Texans' ears in the state's two most-populous regions, enabling him to needle even more fellow Republicans – they're his favorite target – than he can now. Mr. Patrick says it will take years for him to build a solid audience in Dallas. He expects to fill a niche with talk on issues such as property taxes and government spending and border security. 'Some people have said, 'Dan, you're not going to be as successful in rallying the troops in the Dallas area,' he said. "'I think those people are wrong.'"

I don't mean to sound cynical, but I think Dan had to be impressed with how strong of a platform KSEV was in getting him in the Texas Senate (he's not "elected" yet, but the November General is no contest to the Primary in this very Republican Senate district). With this purchase, Dan will have an incredibly strong voice in the two largest population areas in the state. Don't be surprised if he picks up other media in other parts of the state. Also, don't be surprised if it works.

Is It Just Me or Is It Getting Crowded?

John McCormick of the Chicago Tribune starts an article with the following headlines:

"NEXT STOP FOR U.S. POPULATION:300,000,000

1 BIRTH EVERY 7 SECONDS

1 DEATH EVERY 13 SECONDS

1 IMMIGRANT ARRIVES EVERY 31 SECONDS

NET RESULT: THE NATION GROWS BY 1 EVERY 11 SECONDS"

That sounds a little scary and from all the science fiction movies we saw and books we read in school (one of my favorite was Soylent Green; which, in case you didn't know "IS PEOPLE") and from the philosophers we read in college (such as Thomas Robert Malthus who argued that large populations mean nothing but starvation and deprivation), our concerns seem most valid.

However, I'm not buying it.

The reality is, countries are not poor because of how many people they have. They are poor because of economic policies. One of my favorite examples is Singapore, which is the second most densely populated independent country in the world. In spite of the fact that Singapore has almost twice as many people per square mile as the much poorer Mexico, it is one of the most affluent countries in the world and has the highest standard of living in Asia, and is ranked 11th in the world. Instead of encouraging population control, it has education programs and tax incentives that encourages large families. It has virtually no natural resources of its own, but the people enjoy high incomes and unemployment of less than 3 percent. This is, of course, one of the lowest unemployment levels in the world (the US, which has around 10 percent of the population per square mile, is at 5 percent). This didn't happen by accident, but by policies that support economic freedom, wealth creation, and by avoiding taxation that weakens economic growth.

We learn from Singapore, one of the most "over populated" countries in the world, that large numbers of people don't hurt economies. Government policies do. China and India's economic renaissance is proving that every day as they change their policies and move towards free markets.

If "more people" is "bad", why does virtually every city in the country encourage people to move to them and as towns lose numbers it is a sign of decline? The common sense behind the need for more people in cities works the same for countries, as long as the policies of the government work.

It isn't getting crowded, in my opinion, and there is plenty of room for more. As long as government policies are "good," we won't have to treat people as "bad." That's the American way.

E.D. Hill's Quick Departure from Fox & Friends

Although I host a show on CNN 65o, one of my favorite sources for information is Fox News. In fact, for several years now, I have begun my day with Fox & Friends and, without a doubt, my favorite personality on that program was E.D. Hill. In fact, she has been my favorite female TV news personality. She is very smart, attractive, and has solid common sense in the way she approaches a story. Unfortunately, I won't be seeing her approaching stories any longer on Fox & Friends. She was pulled from the popular program at the end of September and now anchors Fox News at 9:30 to 10:30 am (Central). This latter show is, in my opinion, little more than filler and can only be seen as a demotion.

I thought the personalities of the show made a great team, but ED made it excellent. While her colleagues joked around she found dimensions to stories that others either ignored or didn't understand. In addition to being a bad choice to pull from the program (there was no need to change anyone, in my opinion), they failed to give her the goodbye that was appropriate for a person who had served a show so well. The Katy Couric farewell tour may have been too much, but the E.D. Hill ejection seat was ridiculous. She was literally here today and gone tomorrow. "Hey, where'd she go?" I hope they bring her back to a time that will have her seen. I would love for her to go head on against Couric and the other talking heads on the evening news. I also hope that Fox News treats the departure of future personalities in a manner that is more appropriate.

Good Economic News, Bad Republican Behavior, and the Future of the Country

Today's CNNMoney has more good news for the rest of us, but terrible news for those whose primary objective is to see a change in government. Two of the top stories in today's edition shows continued economic improvement and great reasons for nothing but optimism.

• "U.S. jobless claims fell to 302,000 in the week of September 30th from 319,000 the week before." Not bad for one week. This is a massive decline in a very short time frame.
• "Retail Sales Sizzle in September." It goes on to say "Analysts on average expect total September same-store sales rose 3.8 percent, slightly below the 3.9 percent gain in the same month a year ago, according to Thompson Financial"... and that "the research firm said 72 percent of the 44 retailers that have so far reported results had beat expectations, while 27 percent had missed." In spite of the best efforts to pour cold water through negative reports, the economy only continues to improve.

Instead of focusing on such economic good news, the naysayers are focusing on the problems the Republicans have because of Mark Foley. They want to focus on the need to throw out Republicans in general because of the behavior of one. In 1992 there was a candidate that was running for office who was being accused at virtually every turn of having had affairs. He and his supporters kept saying "its the economy, stupid." That candidate was Bill Clinton. I'm not advocating that Foley should be ignored. He should, and likely will, receive a huge sentence if he is found guilty. It is the epitome of arrogance and hypocrisy to be, on the one hand, the leading advocate for tough legislation against sexual predators and if he is guilty it will be the epitome of poetic justice for him to serve a lengthy sentence due to legislation he helped write.

Meanwhile, it is becoming increasingly clear that Foley's -- and the Republican Party's -- opponents knew about the ex-Congressman's behavior long before anyone except the possible victim and perpetrator, but sat on it in order to spring it at a time such as this. During that time, how many more children were vulnerable to being victimized if the accusations prove to be true? Imagine if they left children vulnerable in order to win an election? That is the same as aiding and embedding the behavior. Will they get prosecuted for such or will they be treated as heroes? We will have to see.

I believe most Americans can sort through the bad political apples that are out there without sacrificing the entire party that has contributed to a better economy. I guess we will all find out in a few weeks on election day.

Fox News at 10 Years

Fox is 10 years old now and is now multiple times more prosperous than its closest competition. In a very short period of time it has eclipsed the once all powerful CNN (which has 26 years under its belt) as the number one cable news network.

According to USA Today "Fox News Channel now draws an average of 840,000 viewers daily (6 a.m. to 11 p.m.) as compared with CNN's 448,000 and MSNBC's 270,000." Fox, therefore, has almost twice the ratings as CNN and more than three times the numbers of MSNBC. Off the charts altogether are the many other also rans in the cable news arena.

The million dollar question is, why is Fox number 1? The answer to me is quite simple, it has clearly differentiated itself from the competition. While its critics dismiss it as "right wing," the forceful (but not that ideological, in my opinion) network has attracted a huge number of disenchanted TV viewers who were seeking something more than the typical liberal media positions. It has a number of journalists who lean to the right, but it seems to be one of the few places one can get both sides. Conservativism, which may be the largest represented philosophy in our population, and its adherents feel they have no place to go but Fox. Meanwhile, there are plenty of other cable networks that are touting very similar philosophies one another. As a result, they fall far behind because their belief systems are so similar.

Fox News is providing proof that free enterprise works every place, including in the market place of ideas.

When It Comes to Real Estate: Bad News or Ridiculous Expectations?

If you listen, watch, or read the news, even the local news, you are typically bombarded with "bad news" when it comes to Real Estate. But is it really bad news or merely ridiculous expectations?

If you talk to the average Houstonian, they will likely tell you there is a real slump in Real Estate. "The prices of homes are going down," "the number of sales are decreasing," "the average days on the market is growing," etc. They likely developed such a view from their local news. But what do the real numbers say?

Well the Houston Chronicle, which has itself gotten on the bad news bandwagon, had a graph in its Sunday (October 1, 2006), Business section that paints a different picture.

What is the median home price? It went from $144,000 in August of '05 to $152,000 in August of '06. A solid 5.6% increase in the last year. Better than most people have enjoyed from other investments and this is one that people can actually use and not merely collect on at a later date.

What is the number of sales? Sales have grown from 6,661 in '05 to 7,052 in '06. Again, a respectable increase. In some fields this would be called a growth industry.

The only one that has received a little softness is in the average number of days a home stays on the market. It has increased from 70 to 75, certainly not enough to indicate a shaky market.

As I have stated before, that some people are going to be negative about the economy no matter what. But it appears obvious to me that expectations, not real prosperity, is the real problem.