I think he's probably referring to the fact that Ted Turner was married to Jane Fonda. Of course Turner no longer runs CNN, and Turner & Fonda have divorced, but little things like facts don't matter much to Hornback.

Yes, they divorced about seven years ago, and Turner resigned from the board of Time Warner some years after that.

One would have to do some serious "fact-checking" just to see whether Jane Fonda was married to Ted Turner while Turner still had any control at CNN. But who wants to waste time over such imbecilic comments?

This guy's blogging crew is pretty funny.

We had group think at the same time.

I read on Eschaton that Laura Ingraham will be taking Paula Zahn's prime time slot for one week. I'm sure if the ratings are good the job offer will be permanent.

The implications could be pretty serious. The WSJ editorials are already more conservative than even what we see on Fox- so who cares about that(and I say that as a conservative). But where the real damage could lie is in the independence of the reporting. Lots of folks invest at least in part based upon what they read in the WSJ- I have. The WSJ influences investment decisions. Is Murdoch really trustworthy enough to control the most influential financial print source in the nation, particularly given his own vast holdings and resulting self-interest? I don't think so.

At least WSJ readers won't have to suffer through many more articles about the family's angst over whether to sell. what a soap opera. Like it wasn't obvious these heirs and heiresses wouldn't take the money and run.