Sherrice Iverson was molested and murdered while David Cash stood guard outside of a Las Vegas Casino Restroom, Prosecutors refused to press charges.

In 1997, 7 year old Sherrice Iverson was molested and murdered in a vegas casino public restroom by Jeremy Strohmeyer while his friend David Cash witnessed part of the assault. I never forgot that story because it involved such a young girl in a Vegas Casino bathroom. and because the witness, David Cash, who knew what was happening and did nothing, was never charged with any kind of a crime.

The Sherrice Iverson murder is one of the most gut wrenching stories you may ever read about. Please take a moment and read this story of a murder that happened 12 years ago that let a possible accessory to a murder, walk away completely free.

I seem to recall Cash hung out at the doorway of the restroom as a lookout for part of the time, the wikipedia description seems to downplay that aspect of the case although they place David Cash actually in the next stall watching part of the rape and torture before he leaves to go grab a meal.

Why can't Mr. Cash have his day in court now? Why not let David Cash prove in a court of law that his actions did not contribute to the death of Sherrice Iverson? Why did the district attorney pre-decide that David Cash was not guilty?

If the internet had not been in its infancy back then, isn't it a no brainer public outrage would have made it harder to camouflage that Strohmeyer's friend, David Cash, was never charged with a crime? Wikipedia offers a description of what David Cash did and did not do.

Click here to review non crime scene photos that tell the story in pictures.

Click here to review the time line of the murder/rape.

What I found troubling about the prosecutors not even attempting to file charges is that the young girl, seeing a second male nearby do nothing while she was being beaten and raped, could quite possibly not have struggled as much knowing that even if she could get away, there was someone else right there to stop her.

We don't know if Strohmeyer could have said, "don't even try and get away, my friend is by the door making sure you don't escape". Just because there was "no good samaritan law" back then does not mean David Cash should not have stood trial.

How can a seven year old mentally process a situation in which she is being abused and sexually assaulted while a SECOND ADULT is acting as if it is no big deal?

The emotional paralysis of knowing that David Cash was nearby and doing nothing to help could have caused Sherrice Iverson to not even bother to scream or try as hard to escape because she knew there was a second adult there to stop her. I believe there are experts who could testify that by David Cash being there, doing nothing, actually weakened Sherrice Iverson's RESOLVE to try and get away.

After David Cash witnessed a portion of the assault on Sherrice Iverson by Jeremy Strohmeyer, he left to go grab a meal. The young girl could have thought David Cash was going to get help. Dave Cash then leaving could have tricked the young girl into thinking she didn't have to escape, just hold on long enough until David Cash returned with help.

Whether these scenarios are provable or not, they are POSSIBLE, and reason enough that David Cash should have had his day in a court of law and let a jury decide.

Since David Cash was never charged back then, could he still be charged now?

At the very least, how about honoring Sherrice Iverson's death by visiting a forum that was set up on her behalf that have received no responses or posts at the time I first posted this article.

For more info, here is one more article.   There is also a "Rip Off Report" about David Cash, which makes sense since he did rip off society by not standing trial.

In case you're wondering why I am bringing this story up now, 12 years later, I actually tried to find this story a couple of years ago but could not remember any of the people's names involved and was not able to find any details about the murder. I recall researching for at least an hour with no luck. For some reason, I found something right away this time.

Additional archival articles can be found here.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

Consumer Protection Financial Agency works perfectly fine in Canada, why not here?

Before Barney Frank turns the proposed Consumer Protection Financial Agency into "Barney's Rubble" by granting waivers to all the businesses that the agency is supposed to oversee, please read this article.

The article states that in Canada there was a flurry of protesting by businesses when a similar agency was proposed back in 2002, yet once the Canadian agency was passed, without "Barney's Rubble" added in, businesses to this day have been accepting of the agency.

Why should Canadian businesses complain anyways when their consumer protection financial agency provided a LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR ALL and did not necessarily cause Canadian businesses to go out of business, at least the ethical ones anyways.

You can call your congress via the internet, click on this sentence to learn how.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

Jessica Watson, youngest teen to ever attempt to circumnavigate the world on a boat, alone.

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE. Original Image at Marinasguide.

Good Luck Jessica Watson. Jessica is attempting to become the youngest teen to circle the globe, alone, on a boat.

If David Letterman wanted to slightly atone for his various mean and degrading talk of young women that seems to permeate his stand up routines from time to time, he'd do a show from your boat, or at least do update feeds.

Jay Leno, are you paying attention?

My concern about Jessica is not her ability (although apparently she did bump into a huge craft while preparing for her journey), but is her boat the kind of boat one takes around the world? I have to assume yes as she has sponsorship and all kinds of navigation and nautical gear on the boat, but if anyone can fill in more details, I'd like to learn more.

(Edit update, you can follow Jessica's tour around the globe by looking to the right of this column and finding her blog, called "Youngest Round").

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

The Great, Dr. Phil vs Jezebel debate over what is "Shameful" teen girl behavior. Who is right?

Why does shame exist? Is shame outdated?

Why does society place "shame" on people, especially if the behavior that is considered shameful is between consenting people of similar ages. Does shame exist to punish those who give in to all of their impulses and as a way to elevate those who don't give in to those same impulses?

Is text messaging and all the instant gratification wireless communicating creates manifesting a culture of "impulse madness", are people beginning to believe that acting on all of their impulses is a "right"?

Imagine being a teenage girl who is shunned by boys because she controls her impulses better than another girl who simply enjoys her impulses. If shame didn't exist, girls who adhered to a stronger form of impulse control would lose out to those willing to be "looser" with their impulses. What do I mean by "lose out". lol, I'm not sure.

Clearly an impulse controller would lose out of being on the receiving end of inmature brats with a limited attention span who only value people that just want to have fun. Is that a bad thing? Or, is it just part of growing up to be able to interact with people of a similar age no matter how stupid or pointless their behavior might be? Is being so in control of impulses that elders respect you but people your own age ignore you also a detriment?

Is it shameful to enjoy giving in to consensual impulses?

If someone is labeled a "whore" but they like being a whore and like what a whore does, are they really a whore? It would seem to me a whore is someone who does something for money that they don't like to do. Uh oh, that definition could apply to most of us who have taken jobs we did not believe in but did it because we would be paid and needed the money.

If a teenage girl is paid by a teenage boy to perform a sexual act on him, should she be shamed by others who found out about what she did? The website Jezebel says no, how dare anybody judge a teenage girl. On the other side, a Dr. Phil video clip featured in that same Jezebel article says its time to take back your child from bad behavior.

The old school method taught by many of our moms was that it is the girl that dictates a boys behavior. If a girl is stricter in controlling her own impulses, we boys will follow and be more respectful as well. In the old school way, formality ruled and being formal was supposed to create respect, if not from one's peers, than from the adults.

Jezebel is saying forget that, each sex should have its own standard that is not codependent upon the other side, or, the two sides should be judged equally when an allegedly shameful act occurs. Jezebel also appears to be asking why is it society's business to judge consensual acts anyways?

Why should a teenage girl be shamed by society for performing a sexual act on a teenage boy of a same age, for money, while the boy receives no label in return? Either both people get a label, or nobody gets a label is the message that jezebel is espousing. I suppose the question of legality is also an issue as well. But is that really the reason the act is considered shameful, because it is illegal?

If we really took a big step back, wouldn't the person who pays for sex be the one who should be more "ashamed" than the one who receives money? Yet somehow, in general, the performer is considered by society to be the one who should be shamed more, especially if they happen to be female.

Is it wrong to try and shame people of similar ages who engage in consensual acts? If shaming children is not an option, does that diminish the role of the parent to nothing more than a room and board provider if they can't use shame to guide their child's growth towards adulthood?

Or does successful parenting involve teaching children without shaming them? What if shame is proving to be the most successful method for teaching a particular child?

There are exceptions to the shame rule of course. If the recipient is famous enough, then they actually will be shamed more than the performer. But if the two people involved have a similar standing in life, it seems like the performer who is being paid is supposed to be shamed more than the recipient, especially if they are female.

Is the standard of shame changing as each new generation creates their own rules. Will the day will come when shame is no longer a tool used to mold or manipulate behavior? If the day comes when shaming is considered shameful, will be a good day, or a bad day?

If Barack Obama ends up being a really bad president, and all of the reasons PUMA gave for why Barack Obama would be a bad president prove to be true, should people who ridiculed PUMA feel ashamed?

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

REPUBLICAN POLITICIANS FAVOR HALLIBURTON RAPISTS OVER THE VICTIM. FOR SHAME.

Thanks to ABC 20/20 for Broadcasting this story and several PUMA blogs for already writing about this on their blogs... Uppity Women, The Confluence, plus, Down with Tyranny.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

TheBurningPlatform.com - Economy equals BIGGEST SUCKER RALLY SINCE THE GREAT DEPRESSION.

TheBurningPlatform.com - Economy equals BIGGEST SUCKER RALLY SINCE THE GREAT DEPRESSION

------click on link above to see article------

(Edit update - There does appear to be an ironic ally alongside the bankers and foreign banks that is helping to prop up Wall Street, it's younger people that had and have a job, but did not own very much prior to the economic meltdown. They didn't lose much because they did not have much, their spending power is increasing as prices drop on certain items, they know not to trust the banks or credit cards, stocks prices look low enough, and apparently they are looking for stock market deals.

It will be easier to have a stock market rally if the Barack Obama administration continues to ignore the middle agers who lost half their wealth in favor of the younger core group that voted him into office and had much less to lose.)

I believe this is a suckers rally as well. Better to pay down your debts than hope for change from the stock market. Undeserving and unearned bankers bonuses can go a long way towards creating a fake reseeding of the stock market. Fake enough to lure you back in.

Those who put their money in first, second and third, the bankers, can simply use their bonuses to seed the market, then get out once you put your money in.

If Bankers don't get that charging 15-25 billion dollars A MONTH in interest rates on EXISTING consumer credit card debt is a charge the american consumer cannot afford to continue paying while also trying to reseed their own lives, then they are idiots and we should not follow where idiots tread.

I believe what is also happening is the government and the banks want us to invest in stocks that have no guarantee versus bank accounts that are supposed to be safer, and insured. I fear Barack Obama was spawned from the trenches of Wall Street, and they both tap dance the same tune, a tune that makes you feel good even as the titanic heads for more icebergs dead ahead.

Shared via AddThis

Chase Bank's Smugness lives on. Will comply with credit card reform bill as written, reserving the right to raise rates prior to 2010 enactment!

Even as Bank of America states they will not raise interest rates on their credit cards prior to the credit card reform bill taking full effect in early 2010.

Chase Bank smugly states they will comply to the letter of the credit card reform bill, meaning they will do as they please, when they please, before the credit card reform bill takes full effect.

In my opinion, Chase Bank is the number one arrogant bank on the planet, and Jamie Dimon of Chase Bank is Barack Obama's favorite wall street banker, should we be surprised?

Click on this sentence to read the Follow up article at The Cat Who Ate Chase Bank.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

Another Creepy, One Dollar a Share Deal proffered by the Barack Obama administration during the bailout talks.

I find the excerpt below creepy. Click here to see the entire article.

CLICK HERE TO ENLARGE IMAGE.

CLICK HERE TO ENLARGE IMAGE.

Lets not forget how Chase Bank was able to "buy" WAMU for what turned out to be a dollar or two a share even though WAMU had huge assets at the time. The shareholders at the time of the WAMU Chase merger lost all of their stock value when the merger happened.

The WAMU Chase merger had to do with the Bush administration. It's almost as if the Barack Obama administration wanted to have their own dollar a share company the way the Bush administration did. It's as if they were thinking, "If the Bush administration can orchestrate a huge take over of a company and destroy shareholder equity overnight, we can too"...

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

Robert Reich is Wrong about Government OVERSPENDING, and once again comments are not enabled on his Blog.

It seems whenever Mr. Reich has to give a Pro Obama, pro government spending article, the comments section for his blog are turned off.

I am flummoxed at how EVERYBODY wants the consumer to be enslaved and indebted as they continue to try and predict when the economy will recover. Rather than mildly assisting consumers who want to pay down their credit card debt by waiving future interest rate charges on their existing credit card debt, Mr. Reich proposes that the goverment go farther and farther into debt providing "stimulus jobs".

I had no idea how insulated people in the media are when it comes to actually coming up with solutions to problems that were caused by uncontrolled profiteering by Wall Street. Wall Street and the Government would rather you default on your credit card debt than mildly assist you in paying it down by waiving additional credit card interest rate charges.

Every month, law abiding citizens, many who saw their net worth plunge by 50% over the past couple of years, are still required to pay ridiculously high interest rates on OLD CREDIT CARD DEBT to the tune of 15 to 25 BILLION DOLLARS IN INTEREST RATE CHARGES EACH AND EVERY MONTH.

When you compare that kind of money to the 2 BILLION DOLLAR cash for clunkers program, do you start to see how the economy could easily be stabilized in a very short amount of time if a mild assist were giving in the paying down of credit card debt?

The irony is that 15-25 billion dollars per month that is currently going to the banks in interest rate charges WILL STILL END UP WITH THE BANKS, the difference is it will FIRST go through the consumers hands, who in turn can use more of their own money to pay off their debts. As those consumers respend their "extra money" every month, other consumers will reap the benefit of money first spreading between consumers. The recipients of this money will ironically enough, send it off to the banks to pay down their own debts!

The dynamic act of allowing a consumers paycheck to first circulate among their peers BEFORE it goes to the banks is the best of all stimulus packages.

These are troubling times when simple solutions are avoided and complex, Rube goldberg plans are implemented instead.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

How Come the Confluence or CannonFire never mentions DailyPUMA and other PUMA blogs?

Why do the PUMA blogs that apparently have bigger followings like the confluence and cannonfire ignore some of the other PUMA blogs, never mention them, don't link to them? (although cannonfire does not consider themself a PUMA blog, they most definitely were upset with how Hillary Clinton was treated during the 2008 race).

Why is this a big deal? It's a big deal because to avoid, ignore or simply be unaware of salient topics because DailyPUMA or another PUMA blog may come up with the topic first, just defeats the real potential force of PUMA's.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

Just What does it take to be a PUMA?

As time goes on, the PUMA movement appears to be simultaneously expanding, and also dissipating.

DailyPUMA thinks it is important to review and remember what the original PUMA flash point was that caused many different but formerly democratic support groups to declare themselves PUMAs, albeit their own unique brand of PUMA.

In my opinion the flash points that created PUMA were generated by media bias against Hillary Clinton. The media, led by Keith Olberman, Chris Matthews, MSNBC, Arianna Huffington of Huffington Post, Daily Kos, and then in rapid succession, Time Magazine, Newsweek, The Atlantic Monthly, Move ON, Media Matters, CNN and most definitely a few others as well, began slamming Hillary Clinton with crazy accusations while simultaneously not vetting Barack Obama.

The media consortium mentioned above ALL began putting a decidedly pro Barack Obama slant on their news reporting, while also creating an anti Hillary Clinton slant as well. Money may have played a really big role in the media bias against Hillary Clinton as the Barack Obama campaign was able to dole out a lot of money to the media and the internet in the form of advertising revenue.

Unfortunately, a certain, significant percentage of Barack Obama's donations may have been illegally gathered. Besides Barack Obama's campaign spending gargantuan amounts of money all over the media and the internet, the ill gotten donations were also used to entice SEVERAL DOZEN high profile politicians and celebrities to strategically give their support to Barack Obama even as Barack Obama's numbers were sliding over the final 10 weeks of the democratic nomination contests.

PUMA's were outraged that democratic political higher ups and the media would choose to "pre-favor" one democratic candidate over another, especially when the newly "unfavored" candidate (Hillary Clinton) had waited for her chance and patiently absorbed a couple decades of political interactions in such an amazingly divergent set of surroundings.

Does anyone recall ever hearing the media reporting that celebrities and democratic icons wanted the american people to choose with their vote the next democratic nominee?

All I remember hearing and seeing from the media was the pomp and circumstance of the next celebrity or politician being trotted out in support of Barack Obama. Many of these endorsements were timed to give the media an excuse to IGNORE significant Hillary Clinton primary wins.

Being married to Bill Clinton and an active participant in his political career had made Hillary Clinton uniquely qualified to view how political processes worked on a state level, and then on a federal level as well. Then to round out her own qualifications, Hillary Clinton served in the senate as well.

What was most painful for myself to witness was Hillary Clinton actually winning more delegates than Barack Obama from all of the democratic primary contests, even when the the votes of Florida and Michigan were excluded.

Knowing that caucus contests use 88% less voters to determine each delegate, and that the caucus contests appear to be easier to both cheat AND also keep away certain demographics, is something I will not forgive the democratic party for, since it flies in direct opposition to the stated democratic tenet of "fair reflection".

So more than a year later, where does that leave all PUMAs? PUMA's now support so many diverse beliefs and causes that it would probably be difficult to get them to agree to any one thing in mass.

However, I believe that it is important for anyone who believes they are a PUMA to at least agree on a couple of key points, the biggest key point being that Hillary Clinton was both unfairly treated by the media and the democratic party in 2008, and that we should STRONGLY consider peace based retribution against those who really had no business trying to derail Hillary Clinton in 2008 but did so just so they could grab their moment of glory and possibly better position themselves for some kind of business or financial reward as well.

If you want to believe yourself to be a PUMA, then please, study the "unethical players of the 2008 democratic race", people like Michael Moore, Bill Richardson, Keith Olbermann, Arianna Huffington, Al Gore, John Edwards, George Soros, the list goes on and on, and DON'T SUPPORT THEM, ever.

If anyone on the list were to ever to publicly admit to putting financial gain or business opportunities as the reason they backstabbed Hillary Clinton, then they could be removed from the "don't support list".

It's really that simple.

Thanks to Common Ground for preserving the infamous HILLARY CLINTON BACKSTABBED THREAD.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

A REQUEST/DEMAND regarding NOT publicizing Michael Moore's Movie on your blog unless you also mention Moore's betrayal of Hillary Clinton last year.

(Edit update Oct. 6th, 2009). It dawned on me a few days ago that it is easier to just leave a comment in the comments section reminding us all of Michael Moore's "past". Daily PUMA is however beguiled that a couple allegedly pro Hillary blogs don't put a dailypuma link on their blogs yet do put links to blogs that have shown very tepid "support" for Hillary Clinton.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DailyPUMA is asking/requesting/demanding/notifying that any PUMA doing an article about Michael Moore's new movie that does not also devote some time in the same article to Michael Moore's betrayal of Hillary Clinton last year, will have their blog removed from Daily PUMA for 60 days. And it will be up to you to ask to be re-added, and of course, you will be, as long as you ask after 60 days. (Edit note, change in plans, your blog will probably be moved to the far left column of DailyPUMA)

If you are a PUMA and jump on the Michael Moore bandwagon while pretending he was not one of the reasons Hillary Clinton did not get the nomination last year, you are an idiot. If you don't care that Michael Moore helped prevent Hillary Clinton from getting the democratic nomination in 2008, then you're not really a PUMA anyways.

If PUMA's don't mobilize now and boycott Michael Moore over his supremely idiotic reasons for not just staying on the sidelines last year, but his actually actively campaigning against Hillary Clinton in 2008, being a PUMA will simply have little meaning.

PUMA's won't have any real political influence if they don't exercise it when it needs to be exercised.

If PUMA's discuss Michael Moore's new movie without mentioning his betrayal of Hillary Clinton last year, then PUMA's have become posers who cry victimhood about Hillary Clinton while doing nothing to stop the several idiots that stole the nomination from Hillary Clinton in 2008.

Unacceptable.

Daily PUMA has already removed one blog, (Edit note, change in plans, blogs that clearly show they are PUMA-lite or less will probably just be moved to the left column) but I'm sure the blog owner does not care since they haven't had the courtesy to ever put up a Daily PUMA link anyways.

Just in case some of you are chuckling because Daily PUMA only gets a few hundred hits a day...The real reality is that Daily PUMA gives out 10 to 20 times more hits than it receives.

That means up to 4,000 hits a day get "shared" among DailyPUMA blogs because of DailyPUMA, perhaps that means 100,000 hits a month are being doled out by Daily PUMA to other PUMA blogs, one million hits a year that come FROM DailyPUMA to other PUMA blogs.

It would be nice to be listed on all the blogs DailyPUMA supports but that is up to the blog owners. Just beware that the few blogs that don't carry a DailyPUMA blog are helping to suffocate your own PUMA blog.

As the library of DailyPUMA articles grows, DailyPUMA receives a significant amount of non PUMA's to its sites every day. As a result, all of these first time readers get exposed to all the other PUMA blogs.

Let's not forget why PUMA's were founded. They were founded because of the blatant mistreatment Hillary Clinton received from the media and the many who had no business taking a position, and who may have taken a position against Hillary Clinton specifically to gain financially or politically from the ill gotten financial endless pit Barack Obama attached himself to.

Do the right thing, don't let Michael Moore get away unscathed.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

Will you Join DailyPUMA in Boycotting Michael Moore's new movie?

I'd like anyone who reads DailyPUMA and considers themselves to be a Hillary Clinton supporter to consider boycotting Michael Moore's new movie, which I won't even name.

Just as it was a "difficult" decision for Michael Moore, (who "loved" Hillary Clinton prior to stabbing her in the proverbial back) to denounce Hillary Clinton, it is also a tough decision for me to to boycott Moore's new movie.

In a future article, I WILL break down every one of Moore's reasons for "changing" from a pro Hillary Clinton stance to an anti Hillary Clinton stance in 2008, and then refute ALL of the points he used to come to his decision.

Please consider boycotting Mr. Moore's movie. If you can see it free, legally, by all means do so.

If you review and publicize Moore's new movie, you probably help him profit. If we can focus instead on how Michael Moore betrayed Hillary Clinton in 2008, and could possibly have been a tipping point at a crucial time in the 2008 democratic race, we can show that there are consequences to trying to swing a political race for what might have been ulterior motives, and most definitely was based on very flawed "logic".

If there were no ulterior motives, maybe, just maybe, Moore could have consulted with others who could have easily debunked EVERY ONE OF HIS REASONS for not only not supporting Hillary Clinton, but for actually being part of the reason Hillary Clinton did not get the nomination.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

Time for MEDIA MATTERS to allow people to respond to their propaganda.

(Edit update - Sept.30, 2009) lol, apparently media matters does have a blog. Not once in the time I have received email from them can I recall a blog ever being mentioned, whenever I clicked on their article links, it always takes me to a Media Matters page that has no place to comment)

Media Matters style of slinging out their own version of the truth, but having no place for us every day folk to respond, has kind of become old school, has it not?

I would consider the legitimacy of their points of view more often if I knew we all could at least have an opportunity to add our own comments, in a comments section, at the bottom of their articles, somewhere on the internet.

Isn't it time, Media Matters, to come out of your ivory tower and actually allow people to respond to your viewpoints?

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

More Proof of the Chicago Elite involving Oprah, Chase Bank, Jamie Dimon & Barack Obama conspiring to steal the 2008 nomination from Hillary Clinton.

CLICK TO ENLARGE.

This article is not necessarily a huge piece of evidence in the takeover of the democratic party by the Chicago elite, but it is disturbing nonetheless.

During the 2008 democratic campaign Oprah Winfrey magazine created a "contest with no prize money" and apparently conspired with what I believe to be the greediest, most narcissistic bank on the planet, Chase Bank, to pull off the bank heist.

Could the ensuing "costs" to run what looks like a sham contest have been used to to divert tax deductible savings to Barack Obama's campaign?

Oprah Winfrey holds a nationwide contest and the four prizes are free consultations with a bunch of financial planners from Chase Bank??? Are you kidding me?

NO PRIZE MONEY, JUST A CONSULTATION? What kind of a prize is that? A consulting prize from the richest woman on the planet with no prize money attached?

The Oprah Winfrey / Chase Bank contest was run in 2008. May I ask who was paid to sift through all the applications? What kind of suspicious tax deductions were created by deducting all the hours it took to run a contest that offers no prize money?

What did it cost to create this Oprah Winfrey / Chase Bank contest? What did it then cost to promote the contest, evaluate each and every one of the 9,000 applicants, cull the list down, interview the final 100, cull the list some more, interview the final 10, and then figure out who the final four contest winners would be?

Is it not income tax fraud to deduct thousands upon thousands of dollars in costs for a prize devoid of cash? Isn't this how the ACORN led Barack Obama crowd runs? Bill out time for a suspicious endeavor and then pretend it was actually worth something and use it as a huge tax deduction?

I would guess that deductions were probably flying all over the place on both Oprah Magazine and Chase Bank's part. What if you found out that the total tax deductions reached a million dollars, and that a check for a hundred thousand dollars was then magically donated to ACORN?

I'm just saying what if, I have no proof, but doesn't it just sound like the way things are done among the rich and elite? Create a contest that creates a ton of tax deductions, then trickle down an incredibly meager prize to the "winners", all the while patting themselves on the back for reaching down to the little people.

This is the same Oprah Winfrey that gave out FREE KFC chicken dinner COUPONS while people were being run out of their homes because of non-responsive banks, the kingpin being CHASE BANK!

I believe Oprah Winfrey is a greedy fraud. Yeah she cares, yeah she can put out a good TV show, but the insidious sinisterness of how she colluded with Chase Bank during Barack Obama's 2008 campaign looks like meddling beyond being a talk show host and delving into an area she does not belong.

I believe if someone cracks the books they will find huge cost deductions related to what I think was a sham contest.

So what did it cost to actually put such a contest on? Is it ethical to create a contest that costs a heck of a lot more to run then the worth of the prizes, when the prizes are basically worth nothing more than somebody volunteering a couple hours of their time?

A contest in which the "grand prize" is four women receiving free financial consultation from Chase Bank, are you frickin kidding me? How about Oprah throw in some cash so the Chase Bank "experts" actually have something to discuss with the winners!

Just how many tax deductions were created for a contest that involved no cash going to the "winners"? The Oprah Winfrey contest reminds me of the Arianna Huffington led conference in which women can be told by a man how to live more fulfilling lives.

Maybe if Arianna Huffington had not meddled in the 2008 democratic nomination process in which Huffington completely favored one candidate over a FEMALE candidate, women would not be feeling so badly about themselves....

...Was HuffPo biased toward Obama? After the site reported that Obama said "bitter" working-class Americans "cling to guns or religion," HuffPo co-founder Ken Lerer, who himself said to be unhappy about the story, rushed to talk with angry Obama campaign operatives. That would be the same Lerer who convened a fundraiser for Obama at his apartment the year prior, when he was still CEO of Huffington Post. It's worth at least asking whether the Clinton campaign's accusation that the site was a "conveyor belt" for pro-Obama propaganda was more than mere campaign flackery.Also, why did HuffPo delay covering the latest scandal stories on Democratic politician John Edwards, despite having broken some of the earliest ones?

The linked article about Huffington asks if evidence exists about Huffington's bias, well, yes, and here is the link.

In this instance, Oprah basically pays her staff to run a "contest" that gives four woman ADVICE! FROM CHASE BANK!

How dare these two democratic party saboteurs, Oprah Winfrey and Arianna Huffington, TELL ANYBODY how they should feel when their very own political principles are so shady and shody they actually shot down the first viable female presidential candidate in the history of this country, and probably did it for FINANCIAL GAIN.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

My condolences to Atlanta and to Georgia on their 100 year rain that has caused massive and unexpected flooding.

Insurance companies and the media tend to take the position that people who don't buy flood insurance in flood regions sort of get what they deserve. However, what about when a flood happens in an area that is not deemed a flood risk, such as Atlanta?

Maybe you live in an area that has never been flooded before.

What if a flood hit and you didn't carry flood insurance? Are you totally at fault? Or, were you being a responsible homeowner by carrying other types of insurance that were more likely to hit in your area, such as fire, quake, theft, perhaps you were even damage from high winds and rain storms.

But what if you just weren't covered for non-stop raining that went on for a week and then caused massive flooding?

What if the damage was not caused by the rain falling on your home, but by the massive runoff that then flooded your home?

What if the flooding was exacerbated because the area where you live had "flourished" and the additional cement and roadways that covered more and more soil caused rain runoff to not get as easily absorbed into the ground thus reducing the risk of flooding?

Is it "fair" if an insurance company happily ensures denser and denser population growth but then denies responsibility for the resulting greater and greater flood probability from rain running off of paved over earth?

Or, can the insurance company argue that because an area was absolutely considered not likely to flood, that the flood insurance policy was soooo cheap it was affordable by all?

If you have a flood insurance experience please contribute an answer in the comments section.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

The Candy Man Can, and therefore, The Government Can As Well, watch this youtube video to see for yourself.

This pretty much is a home run youtube video about government spending.

Thanks to Jason Rines from The Burning Platform for posting this Gem.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

ZOMBIES MARCH on Iowa City!

One wonders if the 500 zombies spotted on Saturday in Iowa City were actually attendees to a political gathering of presidential wannabees.

There are unconfirmed and undefined allegations that presidential wannebees created cascading sound waves of incoherent babble that turned unsuspecting casual observers into marching zombies, either that or the march served as a tribute fundraiser to a gentleman who died from the flesh eating disease, necrotizing fasciitis, earlier in the year.

As was asked in the comments section, do zombies actually march, or do they just meander?

(lol, meander on Washington, that just sounds too funny).

HOW YOU CAN HELP! MAKE A DAILY-PROTEST.com sign and put it where others will see it. Daily-Protest.com signs can be placed in a storefront window, a bulletin board at work, or a countertop. Raise curiosity and awareness about how Chase Bank is harming a LOT of of their BEST customers by making a Daily-Protest.com sign.