Sunday, January 30, 2011
PUMAs have been distrustful over Barack Obama's handling of the Tucson shooting and the 2011 state of the union address, and for good reason.
Several PUMA bloggers were upset with the overly upbeat tone of the memorial service for the slain victims of the Tucson shooting. Barack Obama then followed that service up a few days later with a rather PTA'ish type of 2011 state of the union address. The ink is barely dry on the 2011 state of the union fiasco and now we have Egypt erupting in protest.
Besides the suffering of the Egyptian protestors that many of us cannot even imagine, we may personally feel the pinch as the Suez Canal may be affected, and possibly the price of heating oil and such rises almost overnight.
Did we really need to sit through the 2011 insufferable state of the union address given by Barack Obama? I only listened to 15, 20 minutes and then I gave up.
If you were to go back and listen to Barack Obama's 2011 state of the union address from less than a week ago, you would cringe at the childishness of it in a world beset with real problems. I wrote such a piece just before the Egypt rioting started and you can read it here.
As Hillary Clinton stated in 2008, "John McCain has experience, I have experience, Barack Obama has a speech he gave at the 2004 democratic convention".
Apparently, the news is reporting that because Barack Obama is president of the United States, we are not being included as the Great Satan this time around, plus, Egypt is more of an ally than Iran was in 1979.
One thing I wonder is, no matter what we do, won't the religious fundamentalists simply choose to support the opposite?
Posted by Alessandro Machi at 10:39 PM
Labels: and for good reason., PUMAs have been distrustful over Barack Obama's handling of the Tucson shooting and the 2011 state of the union address
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Is NBC changing from their despicable 2008 political news fraud that they perpetrated on democratic voters? Meet Harriet's Law, um, Harry's Law.
Hmmm, should we go with Harry's Law...
Or should we go with Harriet's Law?
Hey Guys, pretend we have holsters and are about to draw our guns, would you watch then?
The good news is MSNBC recently parted ways with Keith Olbermann. The additional good news is at the same time, NBC released a new show by David E. Kelley called "Harriet's Law", um, make that "Harry's Law", starring Kathy Bates. Yes, a female in the lead of a legal drama. Ok, it's been done before, but Harriet is more "matronly", and that is what makes Harry's Law a win for humanity.
You mean a matronly female lead actress can carry a show??? Yep. But wait, we'll fool everybody into thinking it's a guy, so that they at least tune in, by calling the show Harry's Law. Then we'll play whack a mole with Harriet in the first few minutes so the guys we fooled into tuning into the show, will like the whack a mole aspect and stick around.
You'll have to see the series premiere to get the meaning of whack a mole.
So the good news is, NBC has approved a show about a matronly lead actress, and the slight down side is they were afraid to call the show Harriet's Law, and instead went with Harry's law. But that is more of a knock on my male idiot brethern who would never even give a show called Harriet's Law a chance, but would tune in to see a show called Harry's Law. (already branded by the "Dirty Harry" Clint Eastwood movies of the past 30 years).
If you watch Oprah, and don't watch Harry's Law, you are a dope. Cut the Oprah watching time down and make time for Harry's Law. The show even has a Hillary Clinton / Barack Obama angle to it. Harriet has to save a young Barack Obama type from being a three time convicted felon, and takes him under her wing for guidance. Ah, if only...
Now if some start up news show other than Fox or MSNBC could see the wisdom in advertising on Harry's Law and catering to the nice people of the world, the people who voted for Hillary Clinton, we could start a real movement, and real change.
Posted by Alessandro Machi at 12:46 PM
Labels: Harry's Law., Is NBC changing from their despicable 2008 political news fraud that they perpetrated on democratic voters? Meet Harriet's Law, um
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Barack Obama's 2011 State of his Own Mind Address, what won't be in it are things that matter most to millions of americans, their homes.
Because I probably will never learn the myriad of rules, regulations and ploys about how the banking industry operates, my approach to homeowners rights has been, what does and does not make sense when it comes to homeowners rights.
1. Non judicial foreclosure was on the top of my list of ridiculousness. Allowing private business to take back a home, AND USE LOCAL POLICE TO DO IT, without mediation beforehand seems outrageous to me.
#2 Securitizations that result in the changing of terms from the original mortgage agreement should not be valid. There can be no change in terms from the original agreement without the expressed, written consent of the homeowner.
Nothing can change on a mortgage agreement. Nothing can change in regards to penalties, fees, the ease with which one can speak to a representative, the representatives ability to correct the problem, the amount of time a payment needs to be process, the reinvestor suddenly having rights over the home owner's right to re-finance, none of that can change from when the mortgage deal was first struck.
#3 HAMP, the government cannot lure people into taxpayer funded programs, then actually punish them with a credit rating reduction and acceleration of loss of their home, ALL BEFORE THEY CAN EVEN APPLY FOR THE TAXPAYER FUNDS. This may be a violation of the Federal Hobbs Act, the extortion clause, using a government position to steal property under the color of right, EVEN IF IT IS ANOTHER ENTITY THAT RECEIVES THE STOLEN PROPERTY.
#4 Foreclosing on homes that have built up equity that would have allowed the homeowner a few more years time to ride out their own life situation that may involve unemployment or caretaking for a family member.
Real caretaking for another family member requires being there in person and not by proxy. This usually means staying unemployed by choice so the family member can caretake for another family member.
The government is actually advocating caretakers lose their homes even if the family has built up sufficient equity in their home that would allow them to glide through a caretaking situation.
Being unemployed while caretaking for a family member means no loan of any kind can ever be approved because the caretaker is unemployed, even if their home has decades worth of equity in it that cannot be taken out because of their caretaking / unemployment status.
#5 The down payment should not be lost in a foreclosure, but rather a significant portion should be applied towards continued living in the home, or as a walkaway check if the homeowner agrees to leave. Loss of the down payment creates additional incentive for the banks to foreclose on a homeowner.
None of these points will be brought up by Barack Obama tonight in his state of his mind address. What will brought up are all the ways that Barack Obama glorifies his Munchausen's disease by proxy in which our economy could grow again if only small businesses could be loaned money.
Posted by Alessandro Machi at 11:35 AM
Labels: Barack Obama's 2011 State of his Own Mind Address, their homes., what won't be in it are things that matter most to millions of americans
Saturday, January 22, 2011
I did a review of "Fairly Legal", the television show here. The butt shot during the promo sets women back a few decades since the show goes to great lengths to create a quirky, intelligent, pretty and independent women, then throws it all in the dumper with the butt shot.
The gratuitous shot of the butt is more noticeable on television at 30 video frames per second. Here on the internet, you're only seeing 15 frames at most and the impact is not quite as noticeable, butt, it's there, and it sets back women because its too many notes, and in this promo, its out of tune.
Posted by Alessandro Machi at 5:47 PM
Friday, January 21, 2011
Too bad they are not repeating Keith Olbermann's swan song show, I would dearly loved to have taped it. Go work the soup lines you freak, and see what you helped wrought on the american people by helping to elect a democratic fraud who to this day will stand up and mock people in lower economic circles than himself, while bowing to those with more money so he can get elected again.
With great power came great irresponsibility, maybe you can play a set piece on Conan Obrien's show.
May you travel the path of a can kicked down the road, only without the sound and fury.
Posted by Alessandro Machi at 7:25 PM
Labels: Keith Spamma Jamma Blabberon Olbermann QUITS. Millions of smart democrats are very, very happy today.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Barack Obama wants to sell China Cars, Planes, and software.
Cars, unless they are new age cars that can recharge themselves via solar and wind energy and are ultra light so they need less energy to operate per mile driven, is somewhat pointless. Conventional cars will just require more of a diminishing supply of petroleum. Planes, requires petroleum. Software, I wonder what language the software would use.
I don't think Barack Obama gets it when it comes to exports.
We need to create and improve alternative energy efficiency within our own borders, then transport that technological miracle all over the world.
Friday, January 14, 2011
The democratic party will never be the same as long as king Whack a Noodle Keith Olberman and Queen Whack A Noodle Arianna Huffington rule the roost. Apparently, it's ok when Whack a Noodle Progressives say and wish for terrible things to happen against Sarah Palin, because, well, it just is.
Posted by Alessandro Machi at 10:42 PM
Thursday, January 13, 2011
The above fox article titled "House Democrats who voted against Pelosi could suffer Politically" was posted two days before Giffords assassination attempt.
Gabrielle Giffords was one of 19 democrats who had just voted AGAINST Nancy Pelosi having been selected as minority speaker of the house for the democrats at the end of the last term. It was the largest number of no votes in the past 15 or 20 years for an incoming speaker, maybe longer.
So when Nancy Pelosi visited Gabrielle Giffords in the hospital, WITHOUT Gabrielle Gifford's permission, Pelosi was completely out of line.
If Nancy Pelosi was actually present when Giffords opened her eyes for the first time, the mention of Pelosi being in the room was one of the most conniving, contrived moments of narcissistic glory grabbing by Pelosi, a moment that should have never happened because Giffords did not give Pelosi permission to be there in the room.
As a matter of fact, aren't only family members supposed to be allowed by a critically injured victim's bedside?
This Pelosi glory grabbing incident is right out of the trashiest soap opera scenarios imaginable.
The person who gave our soap opera diva a public no confidence vote just two or three days earlier is suddenly, tragically injured, and the diva who was publicly denounced by the victim shows up in the hospital room of the victim. Are you kidding me?And then, just as suddenly, the victim opens their eyes for the first time, and the diva scrams with the message everybody was waiting to hear, Giffords opened her eyes for the first time while she was visiting.
This is just utter crap. I seriously hope that Giffords clocks Pelosi one when she gets better. Maybe Giffords opened her eyes out of fear that Pelosi was there to finish the job.
When two opposing forces are thrown together in a situation where one is completely at the mercy of the other, that is not the time to glory grab, EVEN IF IN FACT GIFFORDS DID OPEN HER EYES FOR THE FIRST TIME.
The fact that Pelosi is not humble enough to understand that, the fact that Barack Obama then had to mention that Pelosi was there when Giffords opened her eyes, points to two either very very narcissistic personalities, or two people with something to hide.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Katalusis asks Arianna Huffington the big question, how can you ask for more than politeness when your own blog attacked Hillary Clinton in 2008.
Katalusis writes... "Arianna Huffington's post titled "Arizona Shootings: Our Moment of Silence Needs to be Followed by More than Just Lowered Voices" would be more credible if one didn't recall the viciousness of her blog's attacks on Hillary Clinton during and after the 08 primary, not to mention the denigration of Bill..."
Need more convincing that Arianna Huffington takes NO ACCOUNTABILITY for her PAST ACTIONS while lecturing us all about the present? CLICK HERE.
Posted by Alessandro Machi at 2:41 PM
Labels: how can you ask for more than politeness when your own blog attacked Hillary Clinton in 2008., Katalusis asks Arianna Huffington the big question
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Incredibly bad timing for Judge John Roll who was murdered at the Congress on your Corner, Gabrielle Giffords event.
The final time line may reveal if the Gabrielle Giffords assassination attempt that has taken the lives of several other innocent bystanders was actually meant as a double hit on both Gabrielle Giffords and Federal Judge John Roll.
Is it possible this was a lie in wait double murder attempt and the unknown "person of interest" knew Judge John Roll was coming and only signaled the shooter to go out and shoot when Judge John Roll had arrived at the event?
Otherwise, why did the shooter wait to shoot Giffords? I don't know how these events are run, should we assume that while the event is being set up that Giffords is not even there? Or, is Giffords there for the final hour before she is to speak while the sound crew is finishing setting up their sound reinforcement gear?
If Giffords was there before hand, what did the attacker wait to shoot Giffords? This then brings up the question how long the shooter was lurking around before the attack.
If Gabrielle Giffords had been there for any length of time, and Judge John Roll shows up and a short time later the shooting happens, it makes me wonder if both Giffords and Roll were being targeted.
The Giffords and Roll connection has to do with immigration.
Apparently Judge John Roll approved the right for illegal crossers into Arizona to sue ranch owners who may have had conflicts with the illegal crossers. I wonder if it is possible for the shooter to not have known who Judge Roll was, rather the "person of interest" may have known that Roll was coming.
This would read right out of a CSI episode where someone allegedly collaterally killed was actually a target as well. Of course it's important to know this because it would help establish the level of sophistication related to this attack.
If I were a judge, and I had to rule on a case as controversial as giving the right to sue to illegally crossing people over private property, I would probably have sided with the ranch owners up to a point.
Yet it seems that no matter which way the judge ruled, he might have had either the Mexican drug lords upset with him if he had ruled that illegal crossers could not sue american ranch owners, or internal american groups mad at him if he ruled in favor of suing american ranch owners. Truly a lose lose type of case for a judge to rule upon.
Was it really just a coincidence that Judge Roll had arrived just before the shooting occurred?
Posted by Alessandro Machi at 3:05 PM
Labels: Gabrielle Giffords event., Incredibly bad timing for Judge John Roll who was murdered at the Congress on your Corner
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Congress on your Corner results in terrorist attack against Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.
American citizens can also be terrorists. When a politician is willing to put on a "Congress on your Corner" public event in a supermarket in the middle of her political district, and is shot for her efforts, the person who did the shooting is a terrorist.
If it was a man who did the shooting, I find it even more troubling. If the shooter has a demonic axe to grind, do it against your own sex, coward. You can read more here.
Donna Brazile chimed in with the most obnoxious message one could imagine, it actually sounded like Brazile was describing her own despicable behavior in 2008 when she said "The increasing levels of incivility, intolerance and a political climate that favors those who threatens, bully others must end. I am so sad".
That is pretty much what Brazile did in 2008, at one point actually threatening to riot in the streets if Barack Obama did not win the democratic nomination.
Posted by Alessandro Machi at 12:41 PM
Labels: Congress on your Corner results in terrorist attack against Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Congress on your Corner.
Friday, January 7, 2011
Basically, if you go to spokeo dot com, and type in your own name, there is a chance that you will see a surprising amount of information about you, including photos of your home, your income, your marital status, your age, perhaps relatives as well.
If you are listed and do not want to be listed, you can opt out by clicking on the privacy tab at the bottom of the web page. First you cut and paste your own URL name search, then follow the directions after clicking on the privacy tab located at the bottom of the page.
Edit update: Sat. Jan 08, 2010 (9:28:00) It is patently ridiculous to equate this shooting with anything to do with the economy, jobs, or even the home foreclosure situation. Politicians who reach out to the community and actually put themselves within reach of the public should be respected for their willingness not to hide in Washington or their presumably expensive homes.
Based on where the shooting took place, to imply that the imbecile who shot into a public crowd represented others is crap. Politicians who are approachable should be respected, cowards found guilty of shooting politicians who are reaching out to the public should be put to death within a year.
Monday, January 3, 2011
It's nice to replace the prior Oprah story with someone more important and spiritual, but I'm saddened I was only able to meet Robin in the late summer of 2008 during a Los Angeles area Hillary Clinton meet up. However, I happily bought a PUMA shirt at that meeting and wore it several times.
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Oprah Winfrey's trip to Australia while thousands of americans are thrown out of their homes at the same time, explain it to me Oprah.
I recently caught an episode of Oprah Winfrey to see what makes Oprah tick these days and found the answer in a quote by Oprah.
"Never tear others down, always build yourself up, Never tear down, always build up". -Oprah Winfrey
There is a ton of wisdom in that quote, and that's where the problem lies. Oprah's "Never Tear Down, Always Build Up" is such a solid philosophy that it becomes too easy to follow that advice 100% of the time.
One thing I have learned in life is that there may not be a true failsafe philosophy that works 100% of the time.
If Oprah follows her own wisdom 100% of the time, it requires Oprah believing she can only improve people if they want to build themselves up. Again, another solid foundational premise. However, there are times when what someone really needs is for someone else to help them fight an aggressor so that the aggressor backs off, or at the vert least treats the aggrieved person, fairly.
Oprah's philosophy of "never tear down, always build up", does not work in a triangular situation where a group or individual needs help battling an unfair foe. In Oprah's fantasy world come to life, it appears Oprah avoids triangular confrontations no matter how badly mismatched the two sides are.
Oprah is a fountain of success, come along and watch Oprah's fountain florish and it may just wash upon you as well.
The Oprah Winfrey show I recently saw was Oprah's behind the scenes 25th anniversary show. I cringed at one point when Oprah glowingly talked about how reliable one of her producers was for coming to work every day even while that producer had family members dying from cancer.
The pain that I saw in that producers eyes while Oprah floated her own fountain of success a little higher by raving about the producers loyalty to her, was a pain I can relate to. Except I did the opposite to what the producer did, I kicked out the Oprahs from my life specifically because they were so self absorbed.
So it appears that part of floating one's own fountain of success higher and higher is to forget those whose personal situations cut into their devotion towards your fountain of success. Doesn't the U.S. just wreak of that attitude ever since Barack Obama became president?
Just ask Haiti.
Haiti is still struggling a year after their horrific earthquake. Apparently the United States has held hostage a majority of the funds that were already pledged to Haiti. So where did Oprah Winfrey just go for December of 2010? Oprah Winfrey went to Australia and apparently paid the way for a few hundred of her studio audience members as well.
The sad part is, Oprah has fed her own fountain of success to such an extravagant level that skipping Haiti and going to Australia was an obvious fountain swelling decision.
Could you imagine if Oprah had bellowed to her own studio audience in that big booming yell she seems to have grown fond of..."You're all going on a trip with meeeeeeee........ (the audience is giddy beyond belief)....toooooo
A trip to Haiti is one fountain sucking trip probably not in Oprah's future anytime soon. So while americans are being foreclosed on in record numbers and the promise of a foreclosure freeze usually means americans will be put out in the snow, and perhaps as many as a million homeowners were screwed over by Parallel Foreclosure......Haiti is undergoing massive suffering that could have been alleviated if the money already donated had actually gone to Haiti,
An interesting irony, Oprah Winfrey left Australia just as the northern part of Australia was hit with rain of literally biblical proportions. Oprah arrived in the U.S. just after tornados devastated several communities in several states on New Years Eve.
Is it Oprah's responsibility to save the world? That's a hard one to answer. However, once Oprah Winfrey injected herself into the 2008 presidential race, she kind of should do more than just keep filling her own fountain of success, no?
In the case of Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey to this day believes she helped unleash Barack Obama's fountain of success while not breaking down Hillary Clinton's fountain, and there in lies the delusional danger of never tear down, always build up.
Nor will Oprah do anything but continue to support Barack Obama no matter how badly he intentionally bungles the foreclosure issue while pretending to be the good guy hamstrung by the same Wall Street fellows that are also his pals and even part of his cabinet.
Years ago Oprah Winfrey was tried in Texas for slander against the cattle industry. From what I have read, Oprah was a trembling wreck, fearful that she could go to jail. It was not until Oprah Winfrey met up with Dr. Phil was she able to conquer her own fear her impending trial.
At one of Oprah's presumably weakest moments in her life, it took triangulation to rescue her, courtesy of Dr. Phil.
Dr. Phil DIRECTLY HELPED Oprah Winfrey battle a specific enemy.
If Dr. Phil had pulled an Oprah, he would have waited until after Oprah battled her lawsuit demons to help Oprah fill her fountain of success, even if Oprah's fountain had been from jail.
Even though Oprah Winfrey benefited from triangulation Winfrey seems less likely to save others through triangulation. It appears Oprah's solution to how one should live their life is to avoid triangulation at all costs. If you need triangulation, don't ask Oprah for help until you become a devoted follower of hers who does not need saving. In essence give to the Romans what belongs to the Romans, give to Oprah when you are ready to focus your energies on Oprah.
When Jamie Dimon of Chase Bank inflicted unknown harm and financial devastation towards a million of his own credit card customers, not only dod Oprah Winfrey look the other way, but Oprah Magazine actually DID BUSINESS with Chase Bank.
CHECK OUT HILLARY CLINTON FORUMS