Posted by: Water Modem ||
10/10/2012 21:26 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Again, China wants permamnent + unchallenged or unobstructed PLA access into WESTPAC + NORPAC, has hinged the success of this + its broader
"post-US" agendum on formal reunification wid Taiwan [stalled] - China wants Okinawa + Diaoyus/Senkakus, etc. to cover the approaches to + from its desired future PLA Milbases on Taiwan + of course the East China Sea which it sees as its unique domain.
ION WORLD NEWS [related] > TOKYO GOVERNOR RISKS CHINESE OUTRAGE WID DISPUTED ISLAND CONSTRUCTION PLAN.
I have to respect Ishihara on this as he publicly only wishes to see or do what many in both Japan + China, as well as the rest of East Asia = ASEAN, would like to see accomplished for their countries' specific territorial claims in ECS + SCS - FINALLY, PERMANENTLY + FOREVER.
NO ONE IN JAPAN, CHINA, ANDOR ASEAN SERIOUSLY BELIEVES IN THE CONCEPT OF SHARING THE ISLANDS, I.E. "SHARING/JOINT/COMBINED/MULTILATERAL SOVEREIGNTY". The collective or common focii is modernizing making their economies, + by extension Nations-States, stronger than as present, AMAP ASAP ALAP WHICH THEY DON;T SEE AS BEING ACHIEVED IFF THEY HAVE TO SHARE VITAL RESOURCES.
"SHARED SOVEREIGNTY" + SIMILAR IS FOR AFTER = LATER CONSIDERATION, NOT NOW. The East Asia "pecking order" from the 20th Century + Cold War thru post-9-11 is being changed.
and
* TOPIX > TIMES ARE A'CHANGIN IN NORTHEAST ASIAN WATERS.
HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER = "... And we'll be lucky to just live through it".
[WHERE HAVE ALL THE FLOWERS GONE- EVE OF DESTRUCTION here].
* SAME > US, ROK PLAYING RISKY MISSLE GAME.
* SAME > DISPUTED ISLANDS WID 45 YEARS OF OIL RESERVES SPLIT CHINA, JAPAN.
The reality of the OWG-NWO Govts-Perts consensus being that there is no such consensus, as per "Peak Oil/Energy/Resources", is IMO the greater threat to ambitious, "post-US" China than some tiny East China Sea rocks + their precious seafloors.
* SAME > CHINA TO BECOME "WORLD's SECOND WEALTHIEST NATION", overtaking Japan widin 5 years [Year 2017 or ASAP after]???
#2
Haven't watched Sesame Street since my kids were little. I thought it was OK back then. But if it really is popular it doesn't need a subsidy. Some other network or cable channel will pick it up.
#3
EU6305, screened it for my daughter few years back. Bad grammer, weird situations mostly because of the over acting, Cookie Monster is a bad guy now - entire cast did an intervention for that episode to convince him to be the Apple Lover or some such, school of fairies offshoot is a bunch of hoping emos, tickle my elmo offshoot looks like what I would imagine a mushroom trip, guest appearance people look more like a community service sentence or braggard rights than contributing to an education, the show(s) are horrible and my daughter had attention problems post show so its 86'd.
Now the merchandising, in my best Yogurt voice, is everywhere. Diapers, toothbrush, toothpaste, snacks, toys, cups and plates, school items, at school items, clothing, bedding. If a person were to sit and think about it purely, the brand is as equally recognizable as the Disney and WB product lines. SS > GI Joe + Barbie.
#7
Toddler can ask why mummy and da da want to kill big bird. School book club selection is neohippy crap, poor little scarecrow has no friends type of stuff, clifford is the animated show's turned down storyboards, little engine that could is not about perserverance but about getting free stuff to people, its everywhere around the kids and to pressure the adults as well.
Don't get me started on the rest of PBS programming. They have a show about a dog which ate alphabet soup and now talks, one episode was hired to cheer up Bo, because President Obama was soooo busy with world problem Bo was sad he didn't get to go on walks anymores, so talking dog was brought in to shrink Bo, ends up with a cabinet position to scour the USA and make sure all the animals were happy. Only cats and Republicans gave unhappy responses. I shit you not.
SS could be a success story, off on its own blah blah blah. Instead, rightfully stated, Big Bird is an Albatross, demonstrating that even a wildly successful brand will not leave the government teat, and will in fact fight to stay on for that greasy, fatty, government cheese.
And let me continue. I will drive home the point this is not children's education television, but dumb down babysitting. If they gave a damn about education and or children, they would never have invited Katey Perry on that show. Were her tatas hanging out too much for kids, yeah, but her songs about how young California girls give the best Billy Jeffs lollypop licking is totally out of line, nevermind some of the other drug addled guests they have on. See, appropriate guests do not even cross their mind, surprised that people might object to a half dressed PG rated prawn star who just the previous week was singing grown up songs on SNL and had cream shooting out her tits on MTV. Gee, might be a bit inappropriate for three year olds.
#12
Artic is in line wid both CNN + FOX, whom repor that Moms across America = Amerika are concerned or alarmed about the political attacks agz Big Bird.
#13
I'm rather fond of the Children's Television Workshop, actually. Emily Perl Kingsley - one of its founding writers - was a visionary, and is still a hero to those of us who have children with Down syndrome. However, with that said, that particular group of IPs - Sesame Street, Jim Henson Productions, The Muppets, Elmo, Etc - should *totally* be able to stand on their own two feet financially. If not, call me Ms. Kingsley - I can help!
Posted by: Water Modem ||
10/10/2012 19:55 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Or Dave Chappelle on Sesame Street:
Posted by: Water Modem ||
10/10/2012 19:57 Comments ||
Top||
#16
BP, thats gotta be a comedy show. I just cannot tell anymore.
There is a kids show, named after a smart person. This quartet of kids have a red rocket which goes faster, the faster the kids pat their lap. So I don't know anymore.
Does this remind Republicans of anything -- say, how the RNC managed to nearly miss a dramatic Republican resurgence through poor cash management in the 2010 midterm elections? Keep that in mind while reading how poor fundraising and a greedy presidential campaign has left the Democratic National Committee in the red with just two months to go before a national election:
The Democratic National Committee had more debt than cash on hand when the general election started in September, a troubling fact few people have noticed to this point in the campaign.
We already knew that the Republican National Committee had more than 10 times as much cash as the DNC while the party's were holding their conventions, but a closer look at the DNC's August report shows it also took out $8 million in loans during that month -- which means it had more debt ($11.8 million) than cash on hand ($7.1 million).
Republicans managed to do all right in 2010, although some in the GOP still believe that the haul in both the House and Senate could have been bigger with GOTV help from the RNC. That didn't materialize, as the Michael Steele RNC ran out of cash and gas. Only the intervention of outside groups like American Crossroads rescued the GOP, although the grassroots fervor probably did most of the work itself.
That's not a winning formula for Democrats, for a couple of reasons. First, the outside-group advantage is still with Republicans. Second, voter enthusiasm is already on the side of the GOP, as several polls attest. The need for fully-funded GOTV efforts is more critical for Democrats as a result, and not just in the presidential campaign. In order to protect its incumbents in the House and Senate, let alone make gains, the DNC has to build its own structures to organize effectively in those districts.
Team Obama doesn't have those problems, though -- because they've been strangling the DNC:
The national party committees, in a presidential election year, do benefit from a joint fundraising committee that raises money both for them and for their presidential candidate. But while Mitt Romney's joint committee has sent $86 million to the RNC since March, President Obama's joint committee has sent significantly less -- about $35 million -- to the DNC, including a total of zero dollars in August.
Much more of Obama's total fundraising, which is more dependent on small-dollar givers, has gone to his campaign, while Romney's fundraising, a majority of which comes from big donors, has gone to the RNC. This is because the candidates themselves can only accept up to $5,000 per donor, while party committees can accept just more than $30,000. So while only so much of big-donor money can go to Romney, small-donor money goes almost exclusively to Obama.
That financial reality means the DNC has had to lean much more on its own fundraising, but even there, it has been outraised $176 million to $111 million by the RNC this election cycle -- and $94 million to $51 million this calendar year.
This means that the RNC has a real opportunity to beat Democrats in Congressional races this year. They are better funded, and apparently better organized, than the DNC at that level. That will have an impact on the presidential race, too, but it's most likely to be felt down ballot.
That isn't stopping Romney from taking the offensive and courting Obama voters from 2008, however:
Mitt Romney is putting a new emphasis on visiting counties that voted for President Barack Obama in 2008, as he urges Republicans in swing states to help him push the president's supporters to switch sides.
The change in tactics comes as last week's presidential debate, in which Mr. Romney was widely seen as besting the president, has boosted Mr. Romney's standing in both national and battleground-state polls. A new Gallup survey released Tuesday--its first sounding of likely voters--found that Mr. Romney held a two-point lead among that group, 49% to 47%. ...
Until recently, Mr. Romney had been spending a larger share of his time in Republican-leaning areas, working to boost turnout among his party's core voters. But with the pool of undecided voters now small, Mr. Romney is stepping up efforts to strip Mr. Obama of some of his more tentative supporters.
"I'd like you to go out and find one person who voted for Barack Obama, or maybe two or three or four or five, and convince them to join our team," Mr. Romney told supporters in Denver recently. "I need you to go out and find people and say, 'You know what? It's not working.' "
Rich Beeson, Mr. Romney's political director, said the candidate was spending time campaigning on the president's turf. "We are playing on their side of the 50-yard line," he said.
If the two campaigns are evenly matched on cash-on-hand, the DNC's woes could prove to be an albatross all through the ballot for Democrats. They may not even have enough resources to play an effective defense. Romney's testing them out now, and might force them to wipe out all of their remaining resources on their side of the 50-yard line. The DNC ran out of other people's money. What a nice, shining example of Obama and the Democrats of the last 4 years.
#7
Ya know, if I were a dem money booster, I'd be worried that all Ohbama was doing was trying to get as much money as possible and purposefully lose the election...sort of a golden parachute if you will. Nice, early retirement to his newly completed Hawaiian estate. Nice weather, the call of the ocean, occasional lecture tour. Y'all know how he drops those little hints.
#8
I was thinking the same thing, call it "The Producers Plan" raise a billion dollars spend a few million lose then retire.
One two three, Prisoners of love, blue skies above, can't keep our hearts in jail
Posted by: George Glaigum7976 ||
10/10/2012 18:54 Comments ||
Top||
#9
The unions deliberately withdrew from DNC etc. to fund ads and activity directly, away from the spotlight.
Like the man said, don't get cocky and don't be misled .....
President Barack Obama was a guest at the 1991 wedding of ABC senior foreign correspondent and vice presidential debate moderator Martha Raddatz, The Daily Caller has learned. Obama and groom Julius Genachowski, whom Obama would later tap to head the Federal Communications Commission, were Harvard Law School classmates at the time and members of the Harvard Law Review.
After TheDC made preliminary inquiries Monday to confirm Obamas attendance at the wedding, ABC leaked a pre-emptive statement to news outlets including Politico and The Daily Beast Tuesday, revealing what may have been internal network pressure felt just days before Raddatz was scheduled to moderate the one and only vice-presidential debate Thursday night.
Both Politico and The Daily Beast jumped to ABC and Raddatzs defense. The Huffington Post, a liberal news outlet, joined them shortly thereafter, while calling unusual ABCs attempt to kill the story before it gained wide circulation.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Does this remind Republicans of anything -- say, how the RNC managed to nearly miss a dramatic Republican resurgence through poor cash management in the 2010 midterm elections? Keep that in mind while reading how poor fundraising and a greedy presidential campaign has left the Democratic National Committee in the red with just two months to go before a national election:
