Saturday, July 31, 2010
There is an underlying reason why Hillary Clinton cannot become president in our lifetime, and it has to do with television.
One of the things I do to take care of mom is find television programs for her to watch so that she isn't on her feet all day long because she is a compulsive worker.
I gotta tell ya, 98% of the stuff on television is not just crap, it is crap directed towards those under the age of 35. I can't tell you the time I have wasted sifting through over a 100 channels trying to find something for mom to watch.
Thank God for TBS and TV Land.
The criteria used when I channel search is, no skanks (there goes ALL OF REALITY TV) and no guns or violence.
My Chase Bank and Bankster research over the past year has revealed to me that both the banksters and the television media have a very similar agenda. THE BANKSTERS AND NETWORK TELEVISION DON'T CARE MUCH ABOUT ANYBODY OVER THE AGE OF 40 when it comes to television programming because the commercials that sponsor those television programs have a specific agenda when it comes to whom they want buying their products and services.
Chase Bank went as far as to screw over A MILLION of their over 35 years of age customers by changing terms on a low interest, life of the loan credit card agreement already in place, and Chase Bank would not allow the older consumer to opt out of the tyrannical change in terms that raised the monthly payment by an additional 150%, either, which was actually against consumer guidelines.
While some of you may already know the banksters and television don't cater to anybody over the age of 40, do you know why that is?
The reason banksters and television programming don't care much about anybody over the age of 40 is because A, those over 40 generally have enough wealth and wisdom to only buy what they need, and B, those over 40 are less likely to have long term debt than the youth of this country.
Television programming and commercials are designed to promote and glamorize behavior that will create long term, indentured debt for the younger crowd. What Banksters and advertisers desire above all else is someone who will be in debt for a very long time. The younger the debtor is, the more profitable of a target they are because they can be indentured for a much longer period of time.
Until television programming is created on a more truly demographic scale, Hillary Clinton cannot win a presidential election because she is a candidate without a television channel to back her up. MSNBC backed up Barack Obama, even when Hillary Clinton was actually still running and Fox News backed up whomever the Republican candidate was going to be.
If there is any rich person out there who likes Hillary Clinton and believes she would be good for this country as President, get control of the TVLAND channel and create a nightly 1/2 hour news show that would cater to the Hillary Clinton crowd; you know, the nice people who care about others and are responsible to their family, and desire to pay their bills.
Not only could TVLAND channel level the playing field in terms of dismissing the idiotic antics of Keith Olbermann and his friends at MSNBC, it would also give Hillary Clinton supporters a channel as a home base and advertisers to support by SPENDING THEIR MONEY on the companies that advertise on TVLAND.
Posted by Alessandro Machi at 4:12 PM
Labels: Banksters, Hillary Clinton, TVLAND, why is television programming skewed towards young people.
Up to the minute news about Chelsea Clinton's wedding, please check DailyPUMA and the many blogs that are writing about it, all on one page!
Look to the right of this article for two full blog columns of up to the minute stories about Mark Mevzinsky and Chelsea Clinton's wedding. DailyPUMA proudly supports the Clintons, even if the corrupt 2008 news media did not.
Friday, July 30, 2010
In 2008, the Reverend Pfegler bore the brunt of the criticism when he did his racist "privileged Hillary" speech at Barack Obama's church. Meanwhile, his audience's joyous and over the top reaction went relatively unscathed by comparison in the media.
In 2010, Shirley Sherrod is portrayed as a victim while once again, the racist reaction of the NAACP audience to her white farmer's story goes unnoticed in comparision. Just because the Sherrod White Farmer story had a "happy ending" does not dismiss the gutless, racist reaction of the NACCP members in attendance who CHEERED and APPLAUDED when Shirley Sherrod, a PAID EMPLOYEE of the government, first stated she felt the desire to deny a claim by two white farmers simply because they were white.
In 2010, if you were an african american congress person walking by a tea party protest near the capitol steps in Washington D.C., allegations of somebody in the crowd making a racist taunt made the news for days.
I am sick and tired of the media double standard of racism in this country.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
LeBron James dons his best Tiger Woods impression, and Corporate Giants like Nike and ESPN continue to enable him.
To a large degree it would be nobodies business what LeBron James does in his social life, if LeBron james had not already claimed he wanted to be a billionaire businessman. I think the businessman aspect of LeBron James is what has riled up Cleveland so much.
LeBron James painted an aire of wanting to bring a championship to his hometown of Cleveland, a town that has gone over 50 years without any national championship (I think the Cleveland Crushers won one one year, I forget what sport that was). LeBron James also fancied himself a "business man" who was in contact with Warren Buffet. But these have both turned out to be lies.
Apparently what LeBron James really wants is to be the next Tiger Woods, with one big difference, LeBron James won't marry the girlfriend and mother of his kids, therefore he has "Tiger Proofed" himself against outraged women who would come down hard on him for having it both ways....um really?
Is that really the plan?
Sure looks like it, and once again the corporate world is enabling a guy who did not practice good business sense this past offseason by not honoring his word of bringing a championship to Cleveland. It actually looks like Lebron James and his two friends, Dwayne Wade and Chris Bosh, planned on getting together as teammates a few years ago, a form of secret collusion that actually harms the future of the teams they played for since they were not "in on it".
Boys will be boys, but do we want to continue to support the corporations that continue to coddle these manboys every step of the way? The Tiger Woods story happened less than a year ago, and now we have the next Tiger Woods on our hands, already.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Click on Image to Enlarge.
Sarah Palin was vilified in an all too familar way in PoliticusUSA's review of Palin's CSU Stanislaus speech. The nastiness reminded me of the way that Hillary Clinton was vilified in 2008 by a large group of supposedly democrat friendly media outlets.
It wasn't that long ago that D.K. Jamaal revealed a rather large consortium of media establishments that would use the race card against anyone who criticized Rev. Jeremiah Wright in 2008.
I am interested in hearing different perspectives in the comments section, better still after you have listened to the Sarah Palin Speech. State whether you are neutral, positive or negative Palin, then review the reviewer of the Sarah Palin speech in the comments section of PoliticusUSA and Daily PUMa know if you think they were right on or simply another OBOT outlet.
Is PoliticusUSA right on with their caustic and numbingly offensive comments about Sarah Palin's CSU Stanislaus speech?
Or, is this just the way Obots work, adding word tags to their articles that demean Palin knowing that when people search for critical reviews of Sarah Palin, articles like this one will be on page one of google. I am reluctant to listen to the speech because I have many many things going on right now so your opinion matters to me, along with what your view of Palin is at the time of your review.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Fox business television ran this dopey piece called "Is America addicted to unemployment benefits".
My internet research over the past two years has revealed to me that NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY, has identified interest rate charges on existing consumer debt as being the MAIN CAUSE OF ECONOMIC MALAISE IN THE WORLD, except for me.
Even the alleged maverick economic gadfly blog sites that come off as not being part of the establishment won't question the role of interest rate charges on existing debt as being the leading cause of the worldwide economic downturn.
I would ask this one question. If I was worth 10 billion dollars, and 9 billion was heavily invested, what rate of return would I get? I would imagine that a multi-billionaire would be promised at the very least a 10% return on their investments by the banking community, and there in lies the problem.
All the "rich money" that presently exists in the world can no longer be given the royal treatment when it comes to the rate of return the "rich money" generates.
Part of the reason for a depreciating return on huge investment capital is the internet. The internet has squeezed competition to the point where many businesses have reduced real products and customer service and instead are hoping to sell some type of monthly mass produced subscriber based goods or services, or a renewable software/hardware product that will please their investors and the companies bottom line, (Apple anyone?).
The problem is although internet efficiency can be created and is helpful up to a point, a threshold is reached in which the newly created efficiency results in the loss of jobs and people begin losing their own personal wealth. Enter 2010. People are losing their homes, jobs are being lost, and the worldwide situation is actually not getting better, and why is that? Because the banksters continue to squeeze interest rate charges on existing consumer debt at a time when employment opportunities and economic growth are being squeezed because of the internet.
Just look at the Fox video above. No mention of interest rate charges on existing debt as being the underpinning of our economic collapse, instead Fox just takes another opportunity to take a potshot at Barack Obama. Who runs Fox? Rupert Murdoch, the epitome of the kind of billionaire investor who is driving millions of people into economic collapse just so he can make sure the present financial investment system stays intact.
Oprah Winfrey is another example. So is Warren Buffet. Until these billionaire clowns see that they are cause, not the solution, of the world's economic struggles, times will continue to get worse.
Solutions abound. Offer a descending scale of interest rate dividends on savings accounts, also known as a inverse interest rate dividend. Savings of 1,000 dollars to 50,000 dollars would get the highest interest rate dividend, and then the interest rate dividend scale would slide downwards, not upwards, as the savings amount increased. Of course we would have to watch the billionaires who would simply put 50,000 dollars in each and every bank in the country!
Combine the inverse interest rate dividend concept with the cessation of all interest rate charges on EXISTING CONSUMER DEBT for anybody who agrees to pay down their debt, not add to it, and things will begin changing in a very short time.
These two acts alone would almost immediately begin redistributing wealth (not necessarily a bad thing when done correctly) among those who are either generating income or have assets with which to pay down existing debt.
Monday, July 19, 2010
I've only heard a portion of one or two of the Mel Gibson tapes. It appears something was done to the tapes that is not "natural". "Not natural" could be something as simple as calling Gibson from a sound studio with the intent of recording the dialogue, the unfairness of that being entrapment AND more importantly, mismatched audio quality between the two people speaking. If she is going to record the conversation, both sides of the call should be of similar quality, otherwise I believe that can be considered manipulation.
It is also possible that some editing or re manipulation of the audio or the pacing of the audio was done as well (see above, hee hee hee).
However, one thing I would advise people who have gotten all caught up in this "thing" is to take a moment and reflect on how did these two people find each other, court each other, and woo each other during the beginning stages of their relationship?
I have a feeling that Mel Gibson is no different now than he was at the beginning of the relationship. The difference being back then both sides were interested in a relationship and now perhaps one or both sides is not interested in continuing.
Obviously if Gibson actually punched her he is a fool, a big time fool. One aspect to being verbally aggressive is to do it as a way of venting anger that could otherwise go physical. If Mel did both verbal abuse and then physical abuse, then he is a big time dunce.
If Gibson's anger stems from the belief that he realizes he has been played, then that needs to be considered, but once again, would not condone the physical abuse at all.
I don't like all the focus being on these tapes and none being on the beginning of the relationship, the two aspects need to be analyzed in conjunction with one another before judgements are ultimately passed.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Most definitely Mountain Sage is not a PUMA blog, actually has a link to "Stupid Pumas" on there. I just seem to recall they were pro Hillary Clinton at one point. It appears that Mountain Sage believes the only PUMA's are stupid ones.
CHECK OUT HILLARY CLINTON FORUMS