[Chairman_December_19th_Society]

How do you think the playing field would change with a "Fox Evening News" airing opposite Rather, Jennings, and Brokaw?

Special Report with Bret Hume runs before, in a lot of markets, the three leftist wags. Indeed, most of the news in that show is piped out by 6:30; the remaining half hour tends to get into discussion. Then there's the Fox Report at 7:00 - also hard news. Alas, I'm not sure how that can, from a hard news standpoint, be buffed up more, but with the sheeple still getting their news (albiet among a declining share) from the three wags (for the most part), this makes the whole operation tough. I'm sure tonight's spin will be along the lines that this was a victory for those seeking to remove money from politics thereby increasing the voice of the little guy.

Never mind that it will do neither. It will simply make the money from the big boys move to areas that are harder to trace, IMO.

[hchutch]

I'm not talking about Fox News Channel doing that half-hour thing.

Imagine your local Fox BROADCAST affiliate (not the cable news channel) airing a national news program opposite Rather, Brokaw, and Jennings.

Fox has shown it can compete with the networks in entertainment. It's whipped CNN and MSNBC going head-to-head.

If I were Terry McAuliffe, FOX announcing the "FOX Evening News with Brit Hume" airing on the broadcast network (not on cable systems) would be the ultimate nightmare. Their last media stronghold is the Big Three Networks that everyone watches. All FOX has to do is jump in.

I remember an old joke Reagan told. Two Russian generals are talking, and one of them says, "The arms race was a lot more fun when only one of us was running."