Quantcast

Is America now officially a Banana Republic where the president and those behind him control the media and the election outcomes too?

tncdel 2012/11/22 16:45:08
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • severio 2012/12/28 22:18:26
    Other [tell us].
    severio
    NEVER ,EVER WE WILL BE FREE OF GUNS ,THIS COUNTRY STILL LIVE IN THE ERA OF COWBOYS ,AND INDIANS, WE BECOME THE JOKE OF THE WORLD ,SHAME ON THOSE FUNDERS SO CALL ,FATHERS,PUT IN THE CONSTITUTION ,SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT TO OWN GUNS,IS CRAZY ,AND STUPID, THAT WAS BEFORE , NOW IS SHAME ON US ,IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING NOW ,,TAKE THIS DANGEROUS AMENDMENT OUT OF THE CONSTITUTION
  • micha77 2012/11/27 21:25:03
    YES [comment as you wish].
    micha77
    Yep. Barry should start dressing like a fruit salad generalissimo and look more like the part he has been playing.
  • askmike micha77 2012/12/03 03:17:22
    askmike
    That is knee slapping funny. Tell us another funny story.
  • Ashley 2012/11/26 14:37:36
    Other [tell us].
    Ashley
    Not sure of this yet.
  • Hotcho 2012/11/23 18:33:13 (edited)
    NO [explain why not].
    Hotcho
    Yes, But it is a Rotten Banana
  • RobertChristopherLaity 2012/11/23 12:21:28 (edited)
    NO [explain why not].
    RobertChristopherLaity
    +2
    "Officially" NO!!
    Obama has NO legal Authority as a usurper. Americans need only defend themselves and ARREST THE BASTARD for Treason.
    Mel the Witch,YOU give up too easily. "We the People" have a DUTY to do everything in our power to defend our Freedom and Liberty,from writing letters to our Reps to DYING to preserve America for our "Posterity".
  • MLS RobertC... 2012/11/27 08:05:41 (edited)
  • Lady Whitewolf 2012/11/23 11:04:37
    NO [explain why not].
    Lady Whitewolf
    +1
    Reality much?
  • RobertC... Lady Wh... 2012/11/23 12:32:16
    RobertChristopherLaity
    +2
    Obama is a Traitor. A wolf in Sheeps Clothing. Being a "whitewolf" you should recognize this.
    Perhaps you are protecting your own,you Obamatoid?
  • Lady Wh... RobertC... 2012/11/23 14:25:54
    Lady Whitewolf
    +1
    Maturity much?
  • Hotcho Lady Wh... 2012/11/25 23:23:42
    Hotcho
    +1
    Idiot Much?
  • AL 2012/11/23 09:11:16
    YES [comment as you wish].
    AL
    +1
    LOL! Is there really any question now?
  • CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY 2012/11/23 05:53:12
    YES [comment as you wish].
    CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY
    +1
    I'm glad I'm old. You 20 and 30 somethings are in for one helluva surprise ............
  • mac9 2012/11/23 05:42:55
    YES [comment as you wish].
    mac9
    +2
    But we can stop it. Get pissed and stay involved. Defeat all liberal agenda.
  • Icanbean Arschloch 2012/11/23 05:13:02
    Other [tell us].
    Icanbean  Arschloch
    It's a serfdom.
  • Jesse-Tired of Liberal Lunacy 2012/11/23 02:27:42
    YES [comment as you wish].
    Jesse-Tired of Liberal Lunacy
    +1
    Absolutely. It's obvious except to those who wear blindfolds
  • realist 2012/11/23 02:00:10
    YES [comment as you wish].
    realist
    Several years ago, a trio of researchers working for the Inter-American Development Bank set out to help solve a sociological mystery. Brazil had, over the course of four decades, experienced one of the largest drops in average family size in the world, from 6.3 children per woman in 1960 to 2.3 children in 2000. What made the drop so curious is that, unlike the Draconian one-child policy in China, the Brazilian government had in place no policy to limit family size. (It was actually illegal at some point to advertise contraceptives in the overwhelmingly Catholic country.)

    What could explain such a steep drop? The researchers zeroed in on one factor: television.

    Television spread through Brazil in the mid-sixties. But it didn’t arrive everywhere at once in the sprawling country. Brazil’s main station, Globo, expanded slowly and unevenly. The researchers found that areas that gained access to Globo saw larger drops in fertility than those that didn’t (controlling, of course, for other factors that could affect fertility). It was not any kind of news or educational programming that caused this fertility drop but exposure to the massively popular soap operas, or novelas, that most Brazilians watch every night. The paper also found that areas with exposure to television were dr...











































    &&






    &

    Several years ago, a trio of researchers working for the Inter-American Development Bank set out to help solve a sociological mystery. Brazil had, over the course of four decades, experienced one of the largest drops in average family size in the world, from 6.3 children per woman in 1960 to 2.3 children in 2000. What made the drop so curious is that, unlike the Draconian one-child policy in China, the Brazilian government had in place no policy to limit family size. (It was actually illegal at some point to advertise contraceptives in the overwhelmingly Catholic country.)

    What could explain such a steep drop? The researchers zeroed in on one factor: television.

    Television spread through Brazil in the mid-sixties. But it didn’t arrive everywhere at once in the sprawling country. Brazil’s main station, Globo, expanded slowly and unevenly. The researchers found that areas that gained access to Globo saw larger drops in fertility than those that didn’t (controlling, of course, for other factors that could affect fertility). It was not any kind of news or educational programming that caused this fertility drop but exposure to the massively popular soap operas, or novelas, that most Brazilians watch every night. The paper also found that areas with exposure to television were dramatically more likely to give their children names shared by novela characters.

    Novelas almost always center around four or five families, each of which is usually small, so as to limit the number of characters the audience must track. Nearly three quarters of the main female characters of childbearing age in the prime-time novelas had no children, and a fifth had one child. Exposure to this glamorized and unusual (especially by Brazilian standards) family arrangement “led to significantly lower fertility”—an effect equal in impact to adding two years of schooling.

    In a 2009 study, economists Robert Jensen and Emily Oster detected a similar pattern in India. A decade ago, cable television started to expand rapidly into the Indian countryside, where deeply patriarchal views had long prevailed. But not all villages got cable television at once, and its random spread created another natural experiment. This one yielded extraordinary results. Not only did women in villages with cable television begin bearing fewer children, as in Brazil, but they were also more able to leave their home without their husbands’ permission and more likely to disapprove of husbands abusing their wives, and the traditional preference for male children declined. The changes happened rapidly, and the magnitude was “quite large”—the gap in gender attitudes separating villages introduced to cable television from urban areas shrunk by between 45 and 70 percent.

    Television, with its more progressive social model, had changed everything.

    A 2011 paper found that when An Inconvenient Truth appeared in a town—here, again, an uneven pattern allowed for experimentation—purchases of carbon offsets rose by half. The effect disappeared over time, as you’d expect from a single film that wasn’t followed up.


    Now how does this apply.

    Wikidpedia houses info supporting the following.

    - Al Jean of the Simpsons team admitted in an interview that; "We [the show] are of liberal bent.". In the DVD commentaries, creator Matt Groening and the majority of people who work on the show state several times that they are very liberal; There has been no debate the Simpsons expresses political agenda (1st most watched cartoon of all time). Also Futurama (the 4th most watched cartoon of all time) has never had debate over containing political agenda.

    - In August 2006, Parker, Stone, and Sullivan headlined a conference in Amsterdam hosted by the libertarian monthly magazine Reason. During an on-stage interview with Reason editors Nick Gillespie and Jesse Walker, Stone and Parker reaffirmed their discomfort with labels while acknowledging that their political views could be described most accurately as libertarian and rejected the direction of the Republican Party that they described as "more government and more Jesus. There has also been southpark episodes showing parodies of the tea party. (South Park is the 2nd most watched cartoon of all time).

    - Seth MacFarlane provides large donations to the Liberal party and actively admits firm support; there has been no debate Family Guy expresses political agenda (6th most watched cartoon of all time); and of course the Cleveland show and American dad (both newer shows)3.

    No other cartoons in the top 10 of all time indicate any primary political swing, or do not include political themes. But for 4 of the top 6 shows to show heavy and unarguable liberal bias, that is concerning. The Simpsons arrived on TV’s in 1989…that’s how long this has had to result in a noticeable effect on the population.

    Now from the following source;
    http://nymag.com/news/feature...

    A member of President Obama’s reelection team recently told New York’s John Heilemann that it plans on painting its opponent as a man out of time—Mitt Romney is “the fifties, he is retro, he is backward.”

    The Screen Guide warned that Communists operate not through open advocacy but by slipping subtle messages into their scripts. “Their purpose,” the Screen Guide wrote of Communists, “is to corrupt our moral premises by corrupting nonpolitical movies—by introducing small, casual bits of propaganda into innocent stories.” Their primary method, according to the Screen Guide, was by portraying the rich in a negative light. It warned the studios not to permit negative portrayals of industrialists. “Don’t spit in your own face or, worse, pay miserable little rats to do it. You, as a motion-picture producer, are an industrialist.”

    Other popular television shows that focus on pushing the ‘progressive’ view of the economy, family, immigrants, war and or other views aligned to a Liberal/Demo mindset.

    - Modern Family
    - Glee
    - Girls
    - Desperate Housewives
    - Any number of 'popular' talk show hosts ie Oprah, Conan, Letterman etc...
    - Pan Am (“Meanwhile, Maggie (Christina Ricci) struggles to balance her liberal politics with her feelings for a pro-war politician.”)
    - Gossip Girl
    - The Big Bang Theory
    - Revenge
    - New Girl
    - The Office
    - Seinfeld
    - Will & Grace; When Joe Biden endorsed gay marriage in May, he cited Will & Grace as the single-most important driving force in transforming public opinion on the subject.
    - Mad Men; An recent episode of Mad Men that included the odd throwaway line “Romney’s a clown,” putatively to describe George Romney, who was anything but.

    The list could go on, but that is enough to draw some fairly stark conclusions unless a comparable list can be developed to show strong Republican alignment.

    Joss Whedon admitted this spring that he had written a scene into The Avengers in which Captain America deplored the “loss of health care and welfare” in America, only to cut it in the editing room. Nicholas Meyer directed a 1983 anti–nuclear war television special, The Day After, and later confessed, “My private, grandiose notion was that this movie would unseat Ronald Reagan when he ran for reelection.”

    René Balcer, the Law & Order producer, told one interviewer that he has laced his show with references to Bush-era abuses like the Patriot Act, but without naming Bush. “Our best shows,” he said, “make people question what’s going on.”

    I’m not even going to make a start on more of the film industry as my point has been made.
    (more)
  • SJG 2012/11/23 00:40:06
    YES [comment as you wish].
    SJG
    +1
    YES, and Obama just made the price of gasoline go down!!!!! He's the blame for everything, he controls the media, he controls the voting and he controls the Martian landings!!!
  • jere.chievres 2012/11/23 00:02:00
    Other [tell us].
    jere.chievres
    For a few mor years.
  • ed 2012/11/22 21:54:03
    YES [comment as you wish].
    ed
    +3
    Just think it's going to get a lot worse around here.
  • john.newell.771 2012/11/22 20:50:25
    YES [comment as you wish].
    john.newell.771
    +4
    Sadly, yes. History is being scrubbed of truth and has been for years.
  • Jim 2012/11/22 20:31:04
    Other [tell us].
    Jim
    +4
    The banana trees were planted by LBJ so, it's been going on for a LONG TIME. Both parties helped grow the Banana Republic. Only now are the bananas overripe and ready to fall from rot.
  • jere.ch... Jim 2012/11/23 00:02:53
    jere.chievres
    +1
    FDR was the worst!
  • Jim jere.ch... 2012/11/23 01:25:04
    Jim
    +1
    It was LBJ, not FDR, who opened up the American social fabric to the Banana Republics around the world. Don't forget it was Carter who caved in to the Mariel boatlift when Castro flushed his toilet on to south Florida. It was Reagan who caved in to the pressure of amnesty for illegals. The Bush Crime Syndicate and the Clintonistas brought us hordes of Indians, Pakis, and others under the H1-B and H2-B visa program.

    I don't have hard feelings for FDR, simply because he created the economic and regulatory architecture that made the golden age of the Great American Middle Class possible. It's no coincidence that as the New Deal was destroyed over the past 30-40 years, the middle and working classes have suffered and lost ground at the same time.
  • CODE 11 2012/11/22 19:52:22
    YES [comment as you wish].
    CODE 11
    +1
    Up with the Bananas
  • Wayne 2012/11/22 19:37:22
    YES [comment as you wish].
    Wayne
    +2
    Until voter ID is implemented nothing will change. Until insuring every Americans vote is counted nothing will change.
  • scottcleaves 2012/11/22 19:36:28
    NO [explain why not].
    scottcleaves
    +4
    You're jumping to irrational conclusions, like most righties are prone to do. Take it easy, will ya?
  • cheetahlover156 2012/11/22 19:00:24
    YES [comment as you wish].
    cheetahlover156
    +3
    Voter fraud helped a lot.
  • askmike 2012/11/22 18:58:39
    NO [explain why not].
    askmike
    +4
    I think you write the funny Lists of 10 Letterman reads on his shows! Great comedy! Bravo!
  • Cliff 2012/11/22 18:57:47
    YES [comment as you wish].
    Cliff
  • AL Cliff 2012/11/23 09:15:00
    AL
    +2
    Day light come-and Obama go home
  • Embalmer 2012/11/22 18:46:37
    NO [explain why not].
    Embalmer
    +5
    Is this YOU???

    romney loser

    romney loser
  • ruralntex 2012/11/22 18:38:02
    YES [comment as you wish].
    ruralntex
    +2
    GOP speaker Boehner needs to make Obama prove he is eligible for the position before the electoral college outcome is certified. Otherwise they should certify Biden as president.
  • Embalmer ruralntex 2012/11/22 18:49:25
  • ruralntex Embalmer 2012/11/22 19:14:48
    ruralntex
    +2
    http://www.archives.gov/feder...

    Jump to the last paragraph in the Jabuary 6th 2013 section.

    It takes just one Senator and one Rep to object to dissolve the joint electoral certification assembly into the two component parts to decide how to proceed with the objections. Counting the reps and the senate together, the GOP has a 23 vote advantage. They should DEMAND to see documents confirming Obama's eligibility to hold the office. If he does not produce the original documents requested, the joint assembly should reconvene and certify Biden as president.

    http://www.infoplease.com/ipa...
  • Embalmer ruralntex 2012/11/22 19:33:57
    Embalmer
    +2
    Gimme a break.
  • ruralntex Embalmer 2012/11/22 21:15:55
    ruralntex
    +2
    Don't ya just wish this would go away?
  • burning... ruralntex 2012/11/22 22:49:32 (edited)
    burningsnowman
    +2
    It's ironic that Embalmer would reference "Born in the USA" when he defends Obama. A song about how the government sent soldiers off to die for no good reason then let them rot in poverty and unemployment when they came back. That sounds really familiar!
  • askmike ruralntex 2012/11/22 19:01:14
    askmike
    +4
    If you have proof President Obama is not eligible you need to get that proof to The Boner ASAP because nobody else has possession of that proof. And at what point in American history did the Speaker gain authority over the Electoral College?
  • ruralntex askmike 2012/11/22 19:14:30
    ruralntex
    +1
    http://www.archives.gov/feder...

    Jump to the last paragraph in the Jabuary 6th 2013 section.

    It takes just one Senator and one Rep to object to dissolve the joint electoral certification assembly into the two component parts to decide how to proceed with the objections. Counting the reps and the senate together, the GOP has a 23 vote advantage. They should DEMAND to see documents confirming Obama's eligibility to hold the office. If he does not produce the original documents requested, the joint assembly should reconvene and certify Biden as president.

    http://www.infoplease.com/ipa...

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/23 10:28:28

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals