Daily PUMA Column - Commentary by Alessandro Machi

Showing posts with label Michael Moore. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Moore. Show all posts

Saturday, April 3, 2010

Should I be Paranoid? I'm being blocked from updating my websites, and my stat counting account is no longer counting my blogs.

For the most recent DailyPUMA article, please click here.

Click here for more info about the freezing of many PUMA blogs back in the summer of 2008.

My domain provider claims there are no problems with their site, yet I cannot navigate it. Below, my stat counting service has gone zero, yet it does not seem to be a system wide failure. I base that on not being able to find anyone complaining about the counter being down.


Two totally different functions on two totally different websites that I rely on stopped working around 24-48 hours ago. I've tried clearing cookies, cache, rebooting, software updating. Should I be paranoid?

I've heard this could be a result of the 64 bit and 32 bit worlds not cooperating with each other. If that is the case, then Apple may be the leading culprit. In an effort to look good and beat their deadlines, Apple released their snow leopard platform at 64 bit while apparently offering little to no backwards compatibility for the 32 bit world.

The 32 bit vs 64 bit incompatibility may be really serious stuff, but nobody, I MEAN NOBODY, will say snap about Mac on the internet, except me. 

The Michael Moore issue is really huge as well. Moore got involved in the 2008 democratic nomination to blast Hillary Clinton during several press conferences yet never said peep about his own state of Michigan not having their delegate votes count.

Moore also said nothing about Illinois MOVING ITS 2008 DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY DATE UP SEVEN WEEKS to the beginning of February specifically to help Barack Obama. Michigan moved their 2008 primary date up FOR A REAL REASON, to serve notice that their state was hurting financially and they wanted to be heard, instead their votes were blocked.

I've taken shots at Apple recently, and at Michael Moore, in both instances I was being 100% truthful and accurate with my complaints. Anybody else having internet issues? So anyways, is it just coincidence that two services that I have used for a long time are not working now, or should I be paranoid? I am going to assume it is just coincidence, however, why can't these service providers leave press releases or announcements whenever these problems come up?

So I guess my new question is, should I be personally paranoid, or just paranoid because of what appears to be an increasing lack of universal cooperation between competing computer platforms?
(Edit note update Feb. 08, 2014, I should have prefaced this article with the information that during the heat of the Obama / Clinton 2008 democrat nomination turmoil, I had three political blogs frozen for a few days simply because someone flagged all three accounts within a manner of seconds, the flagging came from the same IP address from a company called Masergy communications.)

Monday, March 29, 2010

The Hypocrisy, Stupidity, and Inconsistency of Michael Moore during the 2008 democratic presidential nominee race.

Something happened in 2008 that is still being covered up, and covered up big time. I believe it involves Hollywood and the promise of distribution deals to anyone who publicly backed Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton.

As exhibit A, I would like to point out the utterly bizarre behavior of Michael Moore during the 2008 presidential election. You would think a man who built his early career success by portraying his own state as dying and destitute because the unions had been crushed by Roger Smith of General Motors, would fight for his state's right to move their democratic primary date up.

You would further think that since Illinois DID MOVE UP their 2008 primary date by SEVEN WEEKS to help Barack Obama, Moore would be complaining about Illinois getting preferential treatment while his own beloved state of Michigan was being disqualified from the voting process!

When one factors in that Michigan moved their primary date up out of economic desperation, how could Michael Moore not fight for his own state? 


Sequestering the vote tallies from Florida and Michigan until the beginning of February as a form of "punishment" was the logical solution. However, that would have made Barack Obama look foolish for taking his name off of the ballot in Michigan, and we couldn't have that now, could we?  


Instead, Obama and two other democratic presidential candidates purposely waited until the last day to legally withdraw their names from Michigan so they could then criticize Hillary Clinton for staying on the Michigan ballot. While some can claim that a brilliant political ploy, if Hillary Clinton had taken her name off of the Michigan ballot first, Obama would have stayed on and cajoled and ridiculed Hillary Clinton for thinking it was all about her, and that she was so confident of victory that she didn't care about Michigan or its people.


In 2008, it was ok to portray Hillary Clinton as making a foolish political gambit, but never Barack Obama.

When Michael Moore put that one short video clip of Hillary Clinton interacting with Republicans in his documentary as a way of blaming her for Health care not being passed in 1992, I began to wonder what Moore's real agenda was. Healthcare not passing during Bill Clinton's first term had NOTHING TO DO WITH HILLARY CLINTON, and everything to do with how upset republicans were over losing to Bill Clinton after George Bush had had a 91% approval rating in early 1991. For Moore to skip over that reality is very disconcerting.

A documentary film maker who first profits over his own states demise, but then won't fight for his own state regarding the 2008 democratic primary makes me wonder just what other evil lurks in Michael Moore's pysche. Was the Hillary Clinton clip purposely put into Moore's documentary to help set her up as being "polarizing"? Did Moore get any distribution deals for going against his own state and Hillary Clinton?

Speaking of deals, did you know that the VERY FIRST COMMERCIAL that MSNBC ran after Hillary Clinton's suspension speech WAS A COMMERCIAL FOR THE STATE OF MICHIGAN. If Hollywood wants to support one political side versus another, that is their right, but when Hollywood actually sabotages one democratic candidates chances to win the party nomination without full disclosure, in my opinion they have a crossed a line of ethics I cannot accept.

Friday, March 5, 2010

An open letter from Michael Moore, pointless pontificating puffery.

Michael Moore was a big part of why Hillary Clinton lost Michigan in 2008. To make matters worse, Mr Puffers then put his foot in his mouth and verbally attacked Hillary Clinton because she voted for George Bush's war while Barack Obama merely voted present. How can I ever trust Michael Moore when he supported an unvetted candidate who is stealthily supported by the banks, BIG TIME!

The best thing Michael Moore can do is start the healing within the democratic party by apologizing to Hillary Clinton. I won't print the vapid and insane email that Michael Moore sent out to his readers out of respect to everybody's time. ANYTHING is more valuable than reading the email that Michael Moore sent out.

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Just What does it take to be a PUMA?

As time goes on, the PUMA movement appears to be simultaneously expanding, and also dissipating.

DailyPUMA thinks it is important to review and remember what the original PUMA flash point was that caused many different but formerly democratic support groups to declare themselves PUMAs, albeit their own unique brand of PUMA.

In my opinion the flash points that created PUMA were generated by media bias against Hillary Clinton. The media, led by Keith Olberman, Chris Matthews, MSNBC, Arianna Huffington of Huffington Post, Daily Kos, and then in rapid succession, Time Magazine, Newsweek, The Atlantic Monthly, Move ON, Media Matters, CNN and most definitely a few others as well, began slamming Hillary Clinton with crazy accusations while simultaneously not vetting Barack Obama.

The media consortium mentioned above ALL began putting a decidedly pro Barack Obama slant on their news reporting, while also creating an anti Hillary Clinton slant as well. Money may have played a really big role in the media bias against Hillary Clinton as the Barack Obama campaign was able to dole out a lot of money to the media and the internet in the form of advertising revenue.

Unfortunately, a certain, significant percentage of Barack Obama's donations may have been illegally gathered. Besides Barack Obama's campaign spending gargantuan amounts of money all over the media and the internet, the ill gotten donations were also used to entice SEVERAL DOZEN high profile politicians and celebrities to strategically give their support to Barack Obama even as Barack Obama's numbers were sliding over the final 10 weeks of the democratic nomination contests.

PUMA's were outraged that democratic political higher ups and the media would choose to "pre-favor" one democratic candidate over another, especially when the newly "unfavored" candidate (Hillary Clinton) had waited for her chance and patiently absorbed a couple decades of political interactions in such an amazingly divergent set of surroundings.

Does anyone recall ever hearing the media reporting that celebrities and democratic icons wanted the american people to choose with their vote the next democratic nominee?

All I remember hearing and seeing from the media was the pomp and circumstance of the next celebrity or politician being trotted out in support of Barack Obama. Many of these endorsements were timed to give the media an excuse to IGNORE significant Hillary Clinton primary wins.

Being married to Bill Clinton and an active participant in his political career had made Hillary Clinton uniquely qualified to view how political processes worked on a state level, and then on a federal level as well. Then to round out her own qualifications, Hillary Clinton served in the senate as well.

What was most painful for myself to witness was Hillary Clinton actually winning more delegates than Barack Obama from all of the democratic primary contests, even when the the votes of Florida and Michigan were excluded.

Knowing that caucus contests use 88% less voters to determine each delegate, and that the caucus contests appear to be easier to both cheat AND also keep away certain demographics, is something I will not forgive the democratic party for, since it flies in direct opposition to the stated democratic tenet of "fair reflection".

So more than a year later, where does that leave all PUMAs? PUMA's now support so many diverse beliefs and causes that it would probably be difficult to get them to agree to any one thing in mass.

However, I believe that it is important for anyone who believes they are a PUMA to at least agree on a couple of key points, the biggest key point being that Hillary Clinton was both unfairly treated by the media and the democratic party in 2008, and that we should STRONGLY consider peace based retribution against those who really had no business trying to derail Hillary Clinton in 2008 but did so just so they could grab their moment of glory and possibly better position themselves for some kind of business or financial reward as well.


If anyone on the list were to ever to publicly admit to putting financial gain or business opportunities as the reason they backstabbed Hillary Clinton, then they could be removed from the "don't support list".

It's really that simple.



Monday, September 28, 2009

A REQUEST/DEMAND regarding NOT publicizing Michael Moore's Movie on your blog unless you also mention Moore's betrayal of Hillary Clinton last year.

(Edit update Oct. 6th, 2009). It dawned on me a few days ago that it is easier to just leave a comment in the comments section reminding us all of Michael Moore's "past". Daily PUMA is however beguiled that a couple allegedly pro Hillary blogs don't put a dailypuma link on their blogs yet do put links to blogs that have shown very tepid "support" for Hillary Clinton.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DailyPUMA is asking/requesting/demanding/notifying that any PUMA doing an article about Michael Moore's new movie that does not also devote some time in the same article to Michael Moore's betrayal of Hillary Clinton last year, will have their blog removed from Daily PUMA for 60 days. And it will be up to you to ask to be re-added, and of course, you will be, as long as you ask after 60 days. (Edit note, change in plans, your blog will probably be moved to the far left column of DailyPUMA)

If you are a PUMA and jump on the Michael Moore bandwagon while pretending he was not one of the reasons Hillary Clinton did not get the nomination last year, you are an idiot. If you don't care that Michael Moore helped prevent Hillary Clinton from getting the democratic nomination in 2008, then you're not really a PUMA anyways.
If PUMA's don't mobilize now and boycott Michael Moore over his supremely idiotic reasons for not just staying on the sidelines last year, but his actually actively campaigning against Hillary Clinton in 2008, being a PUMA will simply have little meaning.

PUMA's won't have any real political influence if they don't exercise it when it needs to be exercised.

If PUMA's discuss Michael Moore's new movie without mentioning his betrayal of Hillary Clinton last year, then PUMA's have become posers who cry victimhood about Hillary Clinton while doing nothing to stop the several idiots that stole the nomination from Hillary Clinton in 2008.

Unacceptable.

Daily PUMA has already removed one blog, (Edit note, change in plans, blogs that clearly show they are PUMA-lite or less will probably just be moved to the left column) but I'm sure the blog owner does not care since they haven't had the courtesy to ever put up a Daily PUMA link anyways.

Just in case some of you are chuckling because Daily PUMA only gets a few hundred hits a day...The real reality is that Daily PUMA gives out 10 to 20 times more hits than it receives.

That means up to 4,000 hits a day get "shared" among DailyPUMA blogs because of DailyPUMA, perhaps that means 100,000 hits a month are being doled out by Daily PUMA to other PUMA blogs, one million hits a year that come FROM DailyPUMA to other PUMA blogs.

It would be nice to be listed on all the blogs DailyPUMA supports but that is up to the blog owners. Just beware that the few blogs that don't carry a DailyPUMA blog are helping to suffocate your own PUMA blog.

As the library of DailyPUMA articles grows, DailyPUMA receives a significant amount of non PUMA's to its sites every day. As a result, all of these first time readers get exposed to all the other PUMA blogs.

Let's not forget why PUMA's were founded. They were founded because of the blatant mistreatment Hillary Clinton received from the media and the many who had no business taking a position, and who may have taken a position against Hillary Clinton specifically to gain financially or politically from the ill gotten financial endless pit Barack Obama attached himself to.

Do the right thing, don't let Michael Moore get away unscathed.

Sunday, September 27, 2009

Will you Join DailyPUMA in Boycotting Michael Moore's new movie?

I'd like anyone who reads DailyPUMA and considers themselves to be a Hillary Clinton supporter to consider boycotting Michael Moore's new movie, which I won't even name.

Just as it was a "difficult" decision for Michael Moore, (who "loved" Hillary Clinton prior to stabbing her in the proverbial back) to denounce Hillary Clinton, it is also a tough decision for me to to boycott Moore's new movie.

In a future article, I WILL break down every one of Moore's reasons for "changing" from a pro Hillary Clinton stance to an anti Hillary Clinton stance in 2008, and then refute ALL of the points he used to come to his decision.

Please consider boycotting Mr. Moore's movie. If you can see it free, legally, by all means do so.

If you review and publicize Moore's new movie, you probably help him profit. If we can focus instead on how Michael Moore betrayed Hillary Clinton in 2008, and could possibly have been a tipping point at a crucial time in the 2008 democratic race, we can show that there are consequences to trying to swing a political race for what might have been ulterior motives, and most definitely was based on very flawed "logic".

If there were no ulterior motives, maybe, just maybe, Moore could have consulted with others who could have easily debunked EVERY ONE OF HIS REASONS for not only not supporting Hillary Clinton, but for actually being part of the reason Hillary Clinton did not get the nomination.

Best Quality VHS to Digital Transfers

Best Quality VHS to Digital Transfers
Serious Customers Welcome.

Share Gadget

10,000 Dollar Grant! Another Great Find from FABULOUSLY40.com

10,000 Dollar Grant! Another Great Find from FABULOUSLY40.com
Would this be a good way to win funds for Louisa's Law ?