In the last two days there has been a lot written about how Hillary Clinton dismissed millennials as cellar dwellers. Here is the actual audio.
YouTube - [LEAKED AUDIO] Hillary Clinton Calls Sanders Supporters Basement Dwellers.
What has not been discussed is more important. At 2:32 she says that in order to have a revolution the Democrats have to have control of the senate and the house of representatives. We have had the Democrats in control of both and nothing changed. We have had the Republicans in charge of both and nothing changed. A vote for any establishment candidate means nothing changes. The worst comment she made is at 2:44 she says the way to take back the house is to redistrict in order to give an advantage to Democrats. Another word for redistricting is gerrymandering and it is illegal. Redistricting is just another way of denying people the power of their vote. It is anti-democracy.
Saturday, October 1, 2016
Millenials and Clinton
I am going to tell you a secret, Hillary Clinton does not get the youth vote. Nope, millennials do not like her, trust her or believe she will create jobs for them. That last part is the key, millennials know they are getting screwed and they know the status quo does not benefit them. Her response to them is to say that they live in their parents basements (yes, she is actually on tape saying that) or that millennial men are Bernie bros who go to his events just to get women. Wow.
Here is the issue for millennials and it is not college tuition. The issue for millennials is whether or not there will be good jobs for them that they can retire from, that is the new American dream. They don't dream about a three bedroom house with a white picket fence and three children, they dream about a job that lets them live in an apartment by themselves and not need roommates, they dream about being able to promote if they work hard. They dream about having a decent future and being able to retire someday. I don't consider that outrageous or privileged. Hillary is not offering that or even coming up with plans that are aimed at that.
The above is why millennials went for Sanders or Trump; but, not Hillary or Jeb. The media is owned by six multinational corporations and they have never cared for Sanders, millennials or Americans. The millennials were the first to complain about the trade agreements and protest them, they were ridiculed by the media. The millennials were the founders of the Occupy Movement and the media made fun of them. The millennials voted for Sanders and Trump and the media made fun of them. Tonight I watched both Seth Meyers and Stephen Colbert make fun of millennials for not supporting Hillary, yeah, good luck in the ratings long term, they will remember your mocking them. Contrary to what these two idiots think, millennials know they are getting screwed and they are right that Hillary won't even attempt to change that as she is a corporatist. Hey, Meyers, Colbert, you are now officially whores of the corporate media, you know, that thing you used to make fun of until you joined it to make millions. No wonder you side with politicians who have also sold their souls.
By the way, did you know that Hillary had called for a wall to be built between Mexico and the United States? Yep and a very liberal person named Jimmy Dore even posted the video and he intends to vote for Hillary. If you want to see where she said it go to 1:50 into the video, that is the first video of her talking about it, wait a minute and you can see the second one where she actually says a wall.
Remember the real focus in on the media. Lets talk about them a little bit more. Lets start with this video of celebrities telling who you can and cannot vote for, not who they support but who you cannot vote for.
YouTube - IMPORTANT - Save The Day.
Here is the issue for millennials and it is not college tuition. The issue for millennials is whether or not there will be good jobs for them that they can retire from, that is the new American dream. They don't dream about a three bedroom house with a white picket fence and three children, they dream about a job that lets them live in an apartment by themselves and not need roommates, they dream about being able to promote if they work hard. They dream about having a decent future and being able to retire someday. I don't consider that outrageous or privileged. Hillary is not offering that or even coming up with plans that are aimed at that.
The above is why millennials went for Sanders or Trump; but, not Hillary or Jeb. The media is owned by six multinational corporations and they have never cared for Sanders, millennials or Americans. The millennials were the first to complain about the trade agreements and protest them, they were ridiculed by the media. The millennials were the founders of the Occupy Movement and the media made fun of them. The millennials voted for Sanders and Trump and the media made fun of them. Tonight I watched both Seth Meyers and Stephen Colbert make fun of millennials for not supporting Hillary, yeah, good luck in the ratings long term, they will remember your mocking them. Contrary to what these two idiots think, millennials know they are getting screwed and they are right that Hillary won't even attempt to change that as she is a corporatist. Hey, Meyers, Colbert, you are now officially whores of the corporate media, you know, that thing you used to make fun of until you joined it to make millions. No wonder you side with politicians who have also sold their souls.
By the way, did you know that Hillary had called for a wall to be built between Mexico and the United States? Yep and a very liberal person named Jimmy Dore even posted the video and he intends to vote for Hillary. If you want to see where she said it go to 1:50 into the video, that is the first video of her talking about it, wait a minute and you can see the second one where she actually says a wall.
Remember the real focus in on the media. Lets talk about them a little bit more. Lets start with this video of celebrities telling who you can and cannot vote for, not who they support but who you cannot vote for.
YouTube - IMPORTANT - Save The Day.
There are other people who think they can demand that you vote for someone.
USA Today - USA TODAY's Editorial Board: Trump is 'unfit for the presidency'. Here is a quote from the article, "Whatever you do, however, resist the siren song of a dangerous demagogue. By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump."
Geez, isn't it nice to have so many celebrities and people in power telling you who you are not allowed to vote for? Now here is the real question, who the hell are these people to say who we can and cannot vote for? Do they not believe in democracy? I do not tell my friends who wish to vote for Hillary that they cannot or attempt to shame them, that is tyrannical behavior. I don't even bother telling people who like Hillary about all of her crimes or flaws.
It is funny how the most "liberal" of us are the most dismissive of millennials, of the young people who will have to live in this country when we die off. Those in power seek to leave them a country where only college graduates have good jobs and few middle class people will be able to afford college. If you don't have connections you will not get an even halfway decent job. That is what millennials are being left with. Oh, I forgot and the people competing for those jobs will be from other countries because the Democratic party believes in open borders today.
Here is the amusing part. The mass media is killing itself because it is alienating it's future viewers, the millennials. It is a shame, when we had a diversified media and news was not entertainment, it thrived. Now that six companies own 90% of our media we only hear the same talking points as are used by the establishment and the young people have noticed. Goodbye heyday of newspapers. Goodbye heyday of broadcast news. Goodbye sensible diversity. Monopolies destroy true freedom of thought and action.
Wednesday, September 28, 2016
Why Control of the Internet is Being Turned Over to the United Nations.
Even the right wing media misses the real point. I will point out the real issues and facts. By the way, it is not actually being turned over to the U.N.
Breitbart - FCC Commissioner on Internet Oversight Switch: ‘If You Cherish Free Expression,’ ‘You Should Be Worried,’ This Is ‘Irreversible’. So an FCC commissioner doesn't want to see control of the internet given to ICANN because it has members from foreign countries. What nonsense.
Yahoo - Internet caretaker ICANN to escape US control.
When I began this blog I wrote about ICANN. When I began this blog one of the groups that worked form me was a systems group and I used to ask every new employee if they knew who owned the internet and not one of them ever knew or had heard of ICANN. They would instead tell me nobody owned the internet and look at me as if I were stupid. I would then tell them that the United States government owned the internet and they would not believe me. Guess what, the United States government still owns the internet. The federal government created the internet (ARPnet originally) and owns the parts that make it work. The same is true for GPS by the way, it uses 3 satellites all owned by the military.
If you in any way wish to understand the world you should understand who owns the internet. ICANN does NOT own the internet. ICANN controls the internet because it has a contract with the federal government to do so. Without the contract from the government ICANN has NO right to do anything. It doesn't even have the right to assign domain names, it's number one job.
Here is the real issue for the establishment. The first amendment applies to the federal government, ICANN only has a say over the internet because they are given that right by the government. This means that the internet must follow the rules set forth by the federal government and the government must follow the constitution.
The two biggest issues the establishment is interested in are controlling what is said over the internet and forcing everyone to have a unique public identification that uses the internet. Some seem to believe that by turning over the internet to ICANN it can then be purchased by other countries or more likely American companies who will then profit from this public infrastructure that was created by your tax dollars.
The FCC wants to keep control over the internet; but, it does not control the internet. That is a power grab. Investors want to control the internet because they could charge lots of money and force you to follow their rules or pay them a fee for using the internet. The questions about who controls the internet are about money and power and the government wants to turn those things over to others rather than keep it under the control of the federal government because you can vote to change what the government does.
Breitbart - FCC Commissioner on Internet Oversight Switch: ‘If You Cherish Free Expression,’ ‘You Should Be Worried,’ This Is ‘Irreversible’. So an FCC commissioner doesn't want to see control of the internet given to ICANN because it has members from foreign countries. What nonsense.
Yahoo - Internet caretaker ICANN to escape US control.
When I began this blog I wrote about ICANN. When I began this blog one of the groups that worked form me was a systems group and I used to ask every new employee if they knew who owned the internet and not one of them ever knew or had heard of ICANN. They would instead tell me nobody owned the internet and look at me as if I were stupid. I would then tell them that the United States government owned the internet and they would not believe me. Guess what, the United States government still owns the internet. The federal government created the internet (ARPnet originally) and owns the parts that make it work. The same is true for GPS by the way, it uses 3 satellites all owned by the military.
If you in any way wish to understand the world you should understand who owns the internet. ICANN does NOT own the internet. ICANN controls the internet because it has a contract with the federal government to do so. Without the contract from the government ICANN has NO right to do anything. It doesn't even have the right to assign domain names, it's number one job.
Here is the real issue for the establishment. The first amendment applies to the federal government, ICANN only has a say over the internet because they are given that right by the government. This means that the internet must follow the rules set forth by the federal government and the government must follow the constitution.
The two biggest issues the establishment is interested in are controlling what is said over the internet and forcing everyone to have a unique public identification that uses the internet. Some seem to believe that by turning over the internet to ICANN it can then be purchased by other countries or more likely American companies who will then profit from this public infrastructure that was created by your tax dollars.
The FCC wants to keep control over the internet; but, it does not control the internet. That is a power grab. Investors want to control the internet because they could charge lots of money and force you to follow their rules or pay them a fee for using the internet. The questions about who controls the internet are about money and power and the government wants to turn those things over to others rather than keep it under the control of the federal government because you can vote to change what the government does.
Media Bias for Fun and Profit.
Yahoo - CNBC - Secret Service pays $1.6 million to Trump to protect him: Politico. Read the article and experience the bias. Hillary Clinton rents the plane she travels on and the federal government pays for the Secret Service to be on that plane. So far the federal government has spent $2.6 million for the Secret Service to protect her. Trump owns his plane and the Secret Service has only spent $1.6 million to protect him. Yet, the one who is attacked is Trump.
YouTube - Primetime Live - Hillary Clinton Jan. 30 1992 Primetime live Bill Clinton and Gennifer Flowers infidelity. This is Hillary in her own words back in 1992. She refers to one of the women who it turns out did have a 12 year affair as a liar and dishonest. She should be asked what she thinks of Bill Cosby. I bet she would vilify him; but, Bill Clinton is held to a different level as is she. Heck, she called Bill Clinton's mistresses bimbos and now complains that Trump called Rosie O'Donnell names.
The Washington Post - Dear readers: Please stop calling us ‘the media.’ There is no such thing. Here is a quote from the article, "As I understand your use of this term, “the media” is essentially shorthand for anything you read, saw or heard today that you disagreed with or didn’t like. At any given moment, “the media” is biased against your candidate, your issue, your very way of life." Lets start with the obvious, "The media" refers to mass publication of any type. You have the written media, visual media and audio media. The fact that all of the news media is owned by six companies means we should probably refer to it as the corporate owned, oligarchic media.
MSN - Investor Place - Why would Disney even want Twitter? Yes, Disney (one of the six corporations that owns 90% of the media in America) wants to buy Twitter and investors cannot figure out why. The answer is simple, to control what you read and hear.
Washington Post - U.S. owes black people reparations for a history of ‘racial terrorism,’ says U.N. panel. Hey, maybe they will make England pay the Irish for starving 25% of us to death or This is just silly and everybody knows it, it is meant to create racial problems and separate people. Divide and conquer is still the approach, always has been and always will be.
Independent - World’s first baby born with controversial new ‘three-parent’ technique. Actually I wrote a few years ago about how there were over 150 babies with three parents using a very similar technique. The new technique is not controversial, the fact that it is done at all is what is controversial.
The Washington Post - Enabler or family defender? How Hillary Clinton responded to husband’s accusers. The question is not about how Hillary may have tried to work things out with Bill, it is about how she treated and what she said about the women. Personally, I blame my wife for her adultery, she owed me better and took an oath. The men she slept with were just slime; but, broke no promises to me, same goes for the Clintons.
YouTube - Primetime Live - Hillary Clinton Jan. 30 1992 Primetime live Bill Clinton and Gennifer Flowers infidelity. This is Hillary in her own words back in 1992. She refers to one of the women who it turns out did have a 12 year affair as a liar and dishonest. She should be asked what she thinks of Bill Cosby. I bet she would vilify him; but, Bill Clinton is held to a different level as is she. Heck, she called Bill Clinton's mistresses bimbos and now complains that Trump called Rosie O'Donnell names.
The Washington Post - Dear readers: Please stop calling us ‘the media.’ There is no such thing. Here is a quote from the article, "As I understand your use of this term, “the media” is essentially shorthand for anything you read, saw or heard today that you disagreed with or didn’t like. At any given moment, “the media” is biased against your candidate, your issue, your very way of life." Lets start with the obvious, "The media" refers to mass publication of any type. You have the written media, visual media and audio media. The fact that all of the news media is owned by six companies means we should probably refer to it as the corporate owned, oligarchic media.
MSN - Investor Place - Why would Disney even want Twitter? Yes, Disney (one of the six corporations that owns 90% of the media in America) wants to buy Twitter and investors cannot figure out why. The answer is simple, to control what you read and hear.
Washington Post - U.S. owes black people reparations for a history of ‘racial terrorism,’ says U.N. panel. Hey, maybe they will make England pay the Irish for starving 25% of us to death or This is just silly and everybody knows it, it is meant to create racial problems and separate people. Divide and conquer is still the approach, always has been and always will be.
Independent - World’s first baby born with controversial new ‘three-parent’ technique. Actually I wrote a few years ago about how there were over 150 babies with three parents using a very similar technique. The new technique is not controversial, the fact that it is done at all is what is controversial.
The Washington Post - Enabler or family defender? How Hillary Clinton responded to husband’s accusers. The question is not about how Hillary may have tried to work things out with Bill, it is about how she treated and what she said about the women. Personally, I blame my wife for her adultery, she owed me better and took an oath. The men she slept with were just slime; but, broke no promises to me, same goes for the Clintons.
Monday, September 26, 2016
The First Presidential Debate: Trump vs Clinton.
Meh. The immediate online polls gave it to Trump; but, the polls are still going on. As for me, I saw nothing that will change anyone's vote. There was nothing in the debate that is going to make Hillary voters now vote for Trump or Trump voters now vote for Hillary. Yes the media is going to drown on about who said what; but, the reality is that tens of millions of people watched it and the people who did watch it are the most likely to vote. I personally do not know of one person who is really undecided, the only thing they are undecided about is whether or not to vote at all.
For my part, I am disappointed that more did not happen. I was watching for the amusement factor and found too little amusement and only predictability. If you ask me my opinion of how the two acted, my answer is also boring. Hillary continued her personal attacks and Trump responded in kind; but, made an attempt to stay on track more than she. In politics you are taught to ignore the question and answer the one you want. They actually teach people in government to do that same as they teach people in private industry.
If this debate actually changed anyone's vote comment and tell me who you were going to vote for, why and what changed your mind in this debate. I don't see too many comments coming in answering that because the debate changed nothing in my humble opinion.
UPDATE:
It is now the day after the debate. News organizations that like Trump scored it a win and those that like Hillary scored it a win for her. Meaningless. The media likes to focus on what it calls momentum. The reality is that momentum means more in the early primaries where electability is an issue. At this point in the game both Clinton and Trump have shown that they can get votes as tens of millions have voted for one of the two.
The media analysis of the debates has focused on "who won"; but, the real question that is not being reported is still the same. Did the debate make you change who you are going to vote for and the answer is no.
For my part, I am disappointed that more did not happen. I was watching for the amusement factor and found too little amusement and only predictability. If you ask me my opinion of how the two acted, my answer is also boring. Hillary continued her personal attacks and Trump responded in kind; but, made an attempt to stay on track more than she. In politics you are taught to ignore the question and answer the one you want. They actually teach people in government to do that same as they teach people in private industry.
If this debate actually changed anyone's vote comment and tell me who you were going to vote for, why and what changed your mind in this debate. I don't see too many comments coming in answering that because the debate changed nothing in my humble opinion.
UPDATE:
It is now the day after the debate. News organizations that like Trump scored it a win and those that like Hillary scored it a win for her. Meaningless. The media likes to focus on what it calls momentum. The reality is that momentum means more in the early primaries where electability is an issue. At this point in the game both Clinton and Trump have shown that they can get votes as tens of millions have voted for one of the two.
The media analysis of the debates has focused on "who won"; but, the real question that is not being reported is still the same. Did the debate make you change who you are going to vote for and the answer is no.
Sunday, September 25, 2016
False Arguments From Hypocritical Idiots
Not very long ago many conservatives lost their minds because the courts said businesses could not discriminate against gays when making cakes. Certain religious fundamentalists flipped out. They said that people should not be forced to make things that violated their religious beliefs. Todd Starnes is one of the people who felt that way.
Right Wing Watch - Todd Starnes: Colorado Cake Case An Assault On Religious Freedom.
How is it okay to penalize people for not engaging wanting to make a cake they see as bigoted and promoting those who don't want to make cakes for gays when both are just businesses? I see the same hypocricy when it comes to school prayer, people are okay with prayer in school, or so they say; but, would flip out if a Satanist was conducting the prayer. The rights you give or deny others eventually work against you too, that is called fairness.
Right Wing Watch - Todd Starnes: Colorado Cake Case An Assault On Religious Freedom.
How is it okay to penalize people for not engaging wanting to make a cake they see as bigoted and promoting those who don't want to make cakes for gays when both are just businesses? I see the same hypocricy when it comes to school prayer, people are okay with prayer in school, or so they say; but, would flip out if a Satanist was conducting the prayer. The rights you give or deny others eventually work against you too, that is called fairness.
Saturday, September 24, 2016
9/24/16 Where We Are Headed
The Washington Post - The GOP has become a pity party for white males. The wealthy have always considered the working class to be reprehensible and dirty, the unwashed masses is how they used to refer to them. Now the establishment and corporate media have a new way of saying it. If you are working class then you are hateful, scared, stupid and just don't understand that you have to be in high tech to be successful. The vilification of Trump supporters is very much akin to how the French monarchy dealt with their citizens until the whole system was taken down. Democracy means being concerned about all citizens and not just your betters. Many Republicans did not vote for Romney because he disregarded half of our citizens. Hillary's mistake and the corporate media is in thinking that working class Democratic voters do not know that she considers them deplorables and useless too.
The Washington Post - At U.N., Obama offers a defense of a liberal world order under siege. Obama will be gone soon; but, you should remember that Obama did not create multinational corporations or globalization, he is just another proponent of it.
Bloomberg - Get Ready for Freeways That Ban Human Drivers. Here is one of the most important paragraphs from the post. "This week, technology industry veterans proposed a ban on human drivers on a 150-mile (241-kilometer) stretch of Interstate 5 from Seattle to Vancouver. Within five years, human driving could be outlawed in congested city centers like London, on college campuses and at airports, said Kristin Schondorf, executive director of automotive transportation at consultant EY." This is the second most important paragraph in the post, "To speed the transition, governments may give drivers financial incentives to replace their cars with autonomous vehicles, similar to the Cash for Clunkers program offered in 2009 to get gas guzzlers off the road, Google’s Medford said. Insurance companies also could nudge people out of the driver’s seat by charging a higher premium to operate a car manually, Schondorf said."
Yahoo - How the government plans to make your self-driving car safer. Yes, the Federal government will get involved in making rules regarding self-driving cars. In the end it will be done with a carrot more than a stick. States will only be given money from the Federal Transportation Fund if they follow the same rules for self driving vehicles.
Federal Department of Transportation - Federal Automated Vehicle Policy. If nothing else, go to page 37 and read how the Federal government views the relationship between the fed and states when regulating driving. About 3 or 4 years ago I pointed out that City streets were now being considered as part of the national highway system. That was an unusual step historically; but, as I pointed out at the time was part of a longer term plan.
Where are we headed? We are being led to a place where only the entranced win and where being born means not having a chance, no medical care, no real education and being born into a world where you agree that someone else already owns everything. If you are born today you cannot just go into the wilderness and take unused land and work it, you have to buy that land from someone else. You start out with less and have to pay to even compete whereas they start with the advantage. That is what we are leaving our children, the illusion that you can inherit by right more than the other guy, that you can inherit advantage.
The Washington Post - At U.N., Obama offers a defense of a liberal world order under siege. Obama will be gone soon; but, you should remember that Obama did not create multinational corporations or globalization, he is just another proponent of it.
Bloomberg - Get Ready for Freeways That Ban Human Drivers. Here is one of the most important paragraphs from the post. "This week, technology industry veterans proposed a ban on human drivers on a 150-mile (241-kilometer) stretch of Interstate 5 from Seattle to Vancouver. Within five years, human driving could be outlawed in congested city centers like London, on college campuses and at airports, said Kristin Schondorf, executive director of automotive transportation at consultant EY." This is the second most important paragraph in the post, "To speed the transition, governments may give drivers financial incentives to replace their cars with autonomous vehicles, similar to the Cash for Clunkers program offered in 2009 to get gas guzzlers off the road, Google’s Medford said. Insurance companies also could nudge people out of the driver’s seat by charging a higher premium to operate a car manually, Schondorf said."
Yahoo - How the government plans to make your self-driving car safer. Yes, the Federal government will get involved in making rules regarding self-driving cars. In the end it will be done with a carrot more than a stick. States will only be given money from the Federal Transportation Fund if they follow the same rules for self driving vehicles.
Federal Department of Transportation - Federal Automated Vehicle Policy. If nothing else, go to page 37 and read how the Federal government views the relationship between the fed and states when regulating driving. About 3 or 4 years ago I pointed out that City streets were now being considered as part of the national highway system. That was an unusual step historically; but, as I pointed out at the time was part of a longer term plan.
Where are we headed? We are being led to a place where only the entranced win and where being born means not having a chance, no medical care, no real education and being born into a world where you agree that someone else already owns everything. If you are born today you cannot just go into the wilderness and take unused land and work it, you have to buy that land from someone else. You start out with less and have to pay to even compete whereas they start with the advantage. That is what we are leaving our children, the illusion that you can inherit by right more than the other guy, that you can inherit advantage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)