I am not sure, but I AM certain, (???) that the media has a preference for fiscal cliffs as opposed to sequestrations. The funny thing is the sequestration issue in a way is much more significant than the fiscal cliff issue in December…BUT have you heard much about it anyway, anywhere or anyhow? Essentially, sequestration has been sequestered, while fiscal cliffs get catapulted from the smallest recesses of the media centrifuge. I wonder why that is? Could it possibly be because of collaboration between media and government or media and politicians to promote only contentious morphisms that have the capability to embolden some while trampling others? The media has clearly blacked out the sequestration for some reason…perhaps that is because neither party has an advantage to gain or a solution to offer or agree on.
In any case, I have heard next to nothing in CNBC (even though I don’t really like to watch them) other than their ridiculous DOW breakout party. Ohh, and indicentally, has anyone noticed that their parties always come near major tops? …and their mortuary sessions near cataclysmic bottoms?
Well here we are ladies and gentlemen…the sequestration is upon us but the media is not there and its about time to ask why they missed it? Especially when the market is about to fall off a cliff…could not that be a fiscal cliff? CNBC will be right on it…don't worry.
10 Sunday Reads - My easy like Sunday morning reads: • Oral history: Prince’s life, as told by the people who knew him best (StarTribune) • French election explained in fi...
56 minutes ago