If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might think that Nancy Pelosi, the Obama Administration, or any liberal special interest group had something to do with Michael Jackson's death. I mean really, they are about to drive energy prices through the roof with their little cap and trade ponzi scheme, legalize 20 million illegal imigrants (--I mean new Leftist voters), and socialize healthcare. Not to mention doing their level best to isolate ourselves from the demonstrators in Iran dying in the streets and make it hate speech for Christians to discuss Biblical teachings on homosexuality.
If the mainstream media, or as Rush calls them now, the State Run Media, were independent and not just a wing of the liberal establishment, we might actually have seen some debate on some of these issues. However, since they obviously weren't going to cover them anyway, we can rest assured that our government would never assassinate a mega pop star like Michael Jackson to take refocus the SRM off of any of these isssues...
...right?...
...Hillary has been MIA lately with all that has been going on in Iran, and aren't the Clinton's experienced at making problems disappear? I hope I can sleep tonight with the black helicopters flying outside my window...
It drove me even more nuts today to hear that Michael Savage (who even by my standards is a bit over the top) was taken off the air for wall to wall coverage of MJ's death, and Hugh Hewitt wouldn't shut up about it all afternoon, even when his audience is begging him to do what he can to defeat these bills that will be made into law in the next few weeks. He claims that should he not talk about it, he will lose ratings. I don't think he understands his audience, even when they are explicitly telling him they don't want to hear it. Like anyone is going to tune into the Salem Radio Network to hear Hugh Hewitt's coverage of Michael Jackson. Come on if you cared, why wouldn't you just go to your local FM pop or R&B radio station? Luckily for my half hour drive time, I have other options besides the arrogant Mr. Hewitt.
Thanks to Roger Hedgecock for fighting off the Man and staying true to the cause, and thanks to the Heritage Foundation, American Solutions, and the Sunlight Foundation for calling spades, spades!
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Monday, June 8, 2009
Who else is making money on Obama?
I know the unions are making money, and the banks that have been bailed out, but there is also another level of marketing of Obama, and I don't think it is just the same old buy it for nostalgia reasons.
I was at Costco the other day. And besides the children's books, memorial Michelle and Barack books, there are also CD's of election music and liberal bands who supported Barack in the election. Now on facebook, there is an add, where I, for the low, low price of $325 can buy the same watch that Barack Obama wears. On the CD, there is actually a credit for some Elect Obama group. So my question is, does Obama make any royalty off of these items? Is this to put money back in the coffers for the 2012 campaign, or to pay off the inaugaration parties? There is an insidious marketing machine there, and it is not just mainstream/state run media in the ideasphere...
I was at Costco the other day. And besides the children's books, memorial Michelle and Barack books, there are also CD's of election music and liberal bands who supported Barack in the election. Now on facebook, there is an add, where I, for the low, low price of $325 can buy the same watch that Barack Obama wears. On the CD, there is actually a credit for some Elect Obama group. So my question is, does Obama make any royalty off of these items? Is this to put money back in the coffers for the 2012 campaign, or to pay off the inaugaration parties? There is an insidious marketing machine there, and it is not just mainstream/state run media in the ideasphere...
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Thoughts
I have to recommend Thomas PM Barnett's new book, Great Powers. I don't think enough people are out there thinking in this grand strategic way, and not many are doing it as succinctly and easy to read as Dr. Barnett.
Some thoughts:
Grand Strategic Thinking makes a lot of stuff small stuff. Things that a lot of people get all up in arms about like Human Rights Violations in China...small stuff for the grand strategist.
ORCON - one of the things I hate about blogs it the continuous repetition of the same stuff. I suppose it is necessary to market ideas and spread the good ones around, but I hate that my twitter feed is a bunch of people posting the same things over and over. I can't follow all these people if I get spammed Heritage Foundation posts from 19 different sources.
Happy Mother's Day!
Some thoughts:
Grand Strategic Thinking makes a lot of stuff small stuff. Things that a lot of people get all up in arms about like Human Rights Violations in China...small stuff for the grand strategist.
ORCON - one of the things I hate about blogs it the continuous repetition of the same stuff. I suppose it is necessary to market ideas and spread the good ones around, but I hate that my twitter feed is a bunch of people posting the same things over and over. I can't follow all these people if I get spammed Heritage Foundation posts from 19 different sources.
Happy Mother's Day!
Monday, February 16, 2009
Bill Press and the Fairness Doctrine - Did Atlas Shrug?
I heard Bill Press on the the radio the other day promoting the Fairness Doctrine, or something like it. Supposedly, according to Hugh Hewitt, the guy is actually a pretty good talk radio host, but no station will carry him as talk radio is dominated by conservatives, and Bill is a liberal.
I was kind of shocked when he said that he just needed a chance, and he could be just as successful as conservative talk radio hosts, but yet he wanted the government to insinuate itself on his behalf to get more markets opened up to him. This just about made me sick to my stomach to hear, as it is no kidding straight out of Atlas Shrugged, where the men who can't run a company leverage their relationships in Washington to get favorable laws passed for them so that everything is more fair.
I recommend to Mr. Press that he read this book, again if he has before, and see what this sort of attitude leads to.
I was kind of shocked when he said that he just needed a chance, and he could be just as successful as conservative talk radio hosts, but yet he wanted the government to insinuate itself on his behalf to get more markets opened up to him. This just about made me sick to my stomach to hear, as it is no kidding straight out of Atlas Shrugged, where the men who can't run a company leverage their relationships in Washington to get favorable laws passed for them so that everything is more fair.
I recommend to Mr. Press that he read this book, again if he has before, and see what this sort of attitude leads to.
Jason Unmasked!!!
I really like this article from Friday the 13th.
http://tinyurl.com/c88zux
If I were wanting to translate the name Hussein into an American equivalent name, would I be off base in saying that Jason would be a good name?
If so, could I then call the President Barry Jason Obama, to totally Americanize his name?
Isn't Jason the name of the bad guy in the Friday the 13th movies?
Coincidence? I will let the so called Stimulus Package reveal the gory details...
http://tinyurl.com/c88zux
If I were wanting to translate the name Hussein into an American equivalent name, would I be off base in saying that Jason would be a good name?
If so, could I then call the President Barry Jason Obama, to totally Americanize his name?
Isn't Jason the name of the bad guy in the Friday the 13th movies?
Coincidence? I will let the so called Stimulus Package reveal the gory details...
Its about confidence
I have heard the statistic that 58% of Americans are not happy with the so called stimulus package. I listen to my fair share of talk radio, which until it is hamstrung by the Fairness Doctrine, continues to lambaste Obama for his inability to do what he says. My tweeps that I follow are amongst the Right Wing pundits. What I am hearing is that this bill sucks, but I am not hearing a lot about what should be in it.
For instance, Michael Medved today had said that its not that the government shouldn't do something, it is just that what Obama is leading is the wrong thing. Also, I have heard over and over, that it was not the New Deal that ended the Great Depression, it was World War II, which to me is a great talking point until I start thinking about it a bit more. If World War II was the thing that ended the recession, what was it that did it? Didn't the government just spend tons of money on industry to buy tanks, ships, subs, etc? In the Great Depression, supposedly everyone was beaten down, out of work, and the economy tanking. Then all of a sudden, we aren't putting people to work digging ditches, but building tanks, and sending them off to fight. Medved told me the difference was that 16 million people were drafted, and that the government was buying stuff. I then said, well aren't these bail outs going to the same companies, like Ford who were paid to build tanks? He said yes, but that in WWII the Government was buying goods, not just providing loans. He cut me off as I was about to ask about Obama's plan to buy a new green car for every government employee, and why drafting 16 million people was better than hiring them to do jobs like in the New Deal. I can see how the liberals would think that all it will take to get the economy back on track is to hire more civil servants and buy a bunch of stuff from industry. Unfortunately, there is no demand for the stuff that industry is making in the government, China has commoditized most manufacturing, and the green stuff is too expensive to be commercially viable. Maybe these subsidies for Green industry will make that start to work, but is it really cheaper than coal, gas, and oil?
Unfortunately for Obama, he thought that his divine coronation would allow him to lead Congress, but he didn't realize that they are controlled by various special interests which will kill his attempts as bipartisanship, and will prevent him from keeping the pork out of any stimulus package he wants to put through. He just needs to accept that if he wants to move out on his agenda in DC, he is going to have to pay off Congress to get stuff done, just like any other President, unfortunately, he seems to willing to pay, just to show movement, and of course I will end up having to pay for it in the near term, and my kids and grandkids in the long term.
I think the real thing that turned the economy around was that the Greatest Generation went to war, and united together, then came home with a "can-do!" attitude. I don't really think the money spent was as important as the threat of destruction of the American way of life, and the ability of Americans to step up and smack down that threat in a consolidated and unified effort. After that, their confidence returned, and they felt that they were world beaters. That is the kind of leadership I would like to see out of Obama, or any other person in Washington. Unite us for a common goal, and restore our confidence. You aren't going to do it by spending my son's money today. I think we need to start with industry, and start doing things that are pro-business and not pro-entitlement. Unfortunately, with all this entitlement spending and big government programs, we continue the inevitable slide to socialism.
Barack, draw a line in the sand, listen to the people who really run this country's economy, and move us back to Capitalism, before it is too late.
For instance, Michael Medved today had said that its not that the government shouldn't do something, it is just that what Obama is leading is the wrong thing. Also, I have heard over and over, that it was not the New Deal that ended the Great Depression, it was World War II, which to me is a great talking point until I start thinking about it a bit more. If World War II was the thing that ended the recession, what was it that did it? Didn't the government just spend tons of money on industry to buy tanks, ships, subs, etc? In the Great Depression, supposedly everyone was beaten down, out of work, and the economy tanking. Then all of a sudden, we aren't putting people to work digging ditches, but building tanks, and sending them off to fight. Medved told me the difference was that 16 million people were drafted, and that the government was buying stuff. I then said, well aren't these bail outs going to the same companies, like Ford who were paid to build tanks? He said yes, but that in WWII the Government was buying goods, not just providing loans. He cut me off as I was about to ask about Obama's plan to buy a new green car for every government employee, and why drafting 16 million people was better than hiring them to do jobs like in the New Deal. I can see how the liberals would think that all it will take to get the economy back on track is to hire more civil servants and buy a bunch of stuff from industry. Unfortunately, there is no demand for the stuff that industry is making in the government, China has commoditized most manufacturing, and the green stuff is too expensive to be commercially viable. Maybe these subsidies for Green industry will make that start to work, but is it really cheaper than coal, gas, and oil?
Unfortunately for Obama, he thought that his divine coronation would allow him to lead Congress, but he didn't realize that they are controlled by various special interests which will kill his attempts as bipartisanship, and will prevent him from keeping the pork out of any stimulus package he wants to put through. He just needs to accept that if he wants to move out on his agenda in DC, he is going to have to pay off Congress to get stuff done, just like any other President, unfortunately, he seems to willing to pay, just to show movement, and of course I will end up having to pay for it in the near term, and my kids and grandkids in the long term.
I think the real thing that turned the economy around was that the Greatest Generation went to war, and united together, then came home with a "can-do!" attitude. I don't really think the money spent was as important as the threat of destruction of the American way of life, and the ability of Americans to step up and smack down that threat in a consolidated and unified effort. After that, their confidence returned, and they felt that they were world beaters. That is the kind of leadership I would like to see out of Obama, or any other person in Washington. Unite us for a common goal, and restore our confidence. You aren't going to do it by spending my son's money today. I think we need to start with industry, and start doing things that are pro-business and not pro-entitlement. Unfortunately, with all this entitlement spending and big government programs, we continue the inevitable slide to socialism.
Barack, draw a line in the sand, listen to the people who really run this country's economy, and move us back to Capitalism, before it is too late.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Corporate Social Responsibility
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c4d25c8a-f13d-11dd-8790-0000779fd2ac,s01=1.html
The problem with Green and what Pelosi, Obama, and Reed can't seem to get around. It is more expensive, and people have less money, so their initiall caring for BDF starts to wane. My Strategy Prof in business school has the same bottom line: The most corporately responsible thing a business can do is make a profit. That leads to jobs, economic stimulus, and prosperity for society. Once they rise to a level of income, they can start worrying about buying a $35 Green T-shirt to promote themselves and make them feel better about rumors of exploitation.
Of course who defines exploitation is another issue altogether. When I was in China, I saw construction workers living in what I considered nasty conditions. I was told that free market capitalism actually raised the standard of living for all people, as they were making more money and living in better conditions than they were on their farms in central and eastern China. So maybe Socialism/Communism isn't socially responsible!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)