Daily PUMA Column - Commentary by Alessandro Machi

Thursday, February 21, 2013

Oscar Pistorius has managed to do the unthinkable, he's put physical abusers who don't use guns in a better light.

I didn't think it was possible for those who physically abuse others to be put in a better light, but Oscar Pistorius has apparently succeeded where no one has gone before.

The thing about physical abuse is that the perpetrator actually has to stand close enough to the victim, and actually work at it. What Pistorius did with a pistol (this is not in dispute) could turn out to be far far worse because he might actually get away with his version of events. 

Pistorius shot his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp to death from a short distance and he alleges through a door, then concocted what appears to be a somewhat implausible scenario of events to the police.

However, its Pistorius's word against a victim who can no longer speak for herself, and, a victim who may have no signs of physical abuse, such as bruises or broken bones. Instead we have an allegedly "accidental" shooting victim, dead.  

All it will take is one fool juror (or is it more than one in South Africa?) having just enough doubt to let Mr. Pistorius be found innocent.

It's difficult for a physical abuser to say "it was an accident". Physical abuser's have to rely on something much more difficult to assess for their defense. Did they snap under pressure and just lose it, were they being verbally or physically abused first, and simply over reacted? Either way, if they beat someone, the proof is there (unless of course the person had someone else beat them to set up a person, a scenario shown from time to time in movies).

But Mr. Pistorius used a gun to kill someone, called it an "accident", and suddenly, he actually seems creepier than people that lose control and beat someone.

As for Mr. Pistorius's story, I don't think key points add up. For him to think his wife was in bed, there would have had to be blankets on the bed for her to be under. No blankets, than the presumably white mattress sheets would have easily shown whether someone was in bed or not.

If there were bed sheets on the bed, than why was the fan on? The fan is on to cool the room I presume, so why have blankets?  

Whether or not Mr. Pistorius had his prosthetics on, something else doesn't add up as well. If Mr. Pistorius did not have his prosthetics on, his eye line is much closer to that of the bed and that should have made it easier to see if there was a "bump" in the bed where his girlfriend would be as he passed to go to the bathroom.

If Mr. Pistorius did have his prosthetics on, then that means he took the time to do so, and the emergency in the bathroom was not as dire as he has portrayed it.

Plus, this means he was able to see well enough to grab both his pistol and legs in the pitch of dark, yet not see his girlfriend.

And finally, with gun in hand, and a potential invader in the bathroom, Mr. Pistorius now had the upper hand and could easily have kept an eye on the bathroom door while whispering to his girlfriend to call the police.

Is it possible that Mr. Pistorius had to crash through the bathroom door to dispose of any defensive tool Reeva Steenkamp may have had in her possession?  I hope they check the toilet and the outsides ground very carefully for any flushed or tossed defense weapon.

And finally, even if Mr. Pistorius was 100% telling the truth, I think he should still be found guilty of being an absolutely stupid human who was incapable of communicating with what should have mattered the most to him, Reeva Steenkamp, in what he thought was a life or death situation FOR BOTH OF THEM, not just him.


Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Friday, February 15, 2013

Judge lectures Penelope Soto. then reduces her sentence while never apologizing for baiting her with his "bye, bye" comment.

I actually agree with the judge's concern about Penelope Soto. It appeared she might have been high the first time she appeared in his court room and it did look like she needed a wake up call from somebody. But, the judge baited her with his "bye, bye" comment, a fact that NOBODY in the media noticed with the exception of Daily PUMA.

The latest encounter between the judge and Penelope Soto has the judge "legally" lecturing Ms. Soto with fatherly advice, and then reducing her sentence after she apologizes. 


However, the Judge's "bye, bye" comment in the original sentencing video did initiate and catalyze what then followed. The judge's unwillingness to acknowledge his own baiting "bye, bye" comment most likely caused Soto's response of "adios". The judge was wrong to place blame only at the feet of Soto and I believe somebody above the Judge's pay grade should review his demeanor. 

I find it sad how many other "reporting agencies" have simply parroted the headline about a girl flipping off a judge, when it was actually more truthful that the judge baited the girl first.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Culturally Insensitive Judge universally applauded for bullying 18 year old Penelope Soto.



(Wednesday, Feb. 6, 2013 update... Apparently the judge is hispanic, although he sounds Irish to me. I still think he baited her with his "bye, bye" comment, and the word "adios", is this really an insult all of the time when it is used by itself?  End of Feb. 6, 2013 update)

(Saturday, Feb. 9, 2013 update), Judge was only "funnin" about the 30 day sentence, called the girl back into chambers and freed her after she apologized, and he even said he did not want to be seen as a monster, or something to that affect, proving my point that he was being an asshole. What is amazing to me is how ALL of the news bureaus make no mention of the Judge's disrespectful "bye bye" that PRECIPITATED her "adios" comment. You see how the media just parrots each other?  

I really wish Penelope Soto would sue the judge, and the media for misrepresenting the story as well. The judge EGGED HER ON with his "bye bye" comment, and nobody will admit to that. How can we trust the media to get anything right if they can't even form their own unique opinion on a piece of video but instead just take one interpretation and repeat it over and over? And yes, this is a prime example of a patriarchal moment gone unpunished. End of Feb. 9, 2013 update)

It appears to me that Penelope Soto is either on something, or just plain giggly and goofy, or immature, or some combination of all of the above.

However, the judge seems to start the incident by disrespectfully saying "bye bye" as he waves her away with an arm motion like she's a piece of garbage. 

Ms. Soto responds by saying "adios". 


The judge, in a moment of what I believe is cultural insensitivity, assumes that her "adios" has a bad connotation and takes her "adios" as an insult and begins adding SIGNIFICANT penalties to her sentence.

The phrase "adios" means "I commend you to God". 

Even if Ms. Soto used the phrase in a disparaging way, the judge seeded that moment by first waving his hand and saying "bye, bye" like she was a worthless piece of trash, and that's not setting the proper example for her.

I think the judge should be sanctioned by his peers, suspended, and I hope some savvy lawyer sues the judge for harassment and culturally insensitivity against Ms. Soto.

And Ms. Soto, I hope you grow up, and fast. Ironically, the wrongness of the judge may actually help her grow up faster, but it sure looks like he may have overstepped his judicial boundary to do it. 


Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Monday, January 21, 2013

Musical Political Dissent Causes Lupe Fiasco to be escorted off Stage at Barack Obama's 2013 inauguration concert.

Here is the link to the where I first found this story and below is the official statement from concert organizers and security regarding Lupe Fiasco's war protest song sung at Barack Obama's 2013 inauguration concert...
"Lupe Fiasco performed at this private event, and as you may have read, he left the stage earlier than we had planned. But Lupe Fiasco was not "kicked off stage" for an "anti-Obama rant." We are staunch supporters of free speech, and free political speech. This was not about his opinions. Instead, after a bizarrely repetitive, jarring performance that left the crowd vocally dissatisfied, organizers decided to move on to the next act."

I think that makes a lot of sense.  He said what he said, but then he didn't move on. 

In my opinion, you can't be for peace if you don't conserve energy, recycle, and just think about ways to leave a smaller footprint while still enjoying a full life.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Sunday, December 30, 2012

Get Well, Hillary Clinton.

I now have a new year's resolution, Get Well Hillary Clinton.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Thursday, December 20, 2012

Wow, a once in 26,000 year event just happens to fall on the Mayan end of the world day, amazing.


"However, one curious event will happen on Dec. 21, (2012): The sun will align with the center of the Milky Way galaxy for the first time in nearly 26,000 years. However, scholars insist that not only is there no way the Mayans would have known that, but that this cosmic coincidence will have no negative effects on the earth.

So, how are you celebrating the last day before the sun aligns with the center of the Milky Way Galaxy for the first time in nearly 26,000 years, day?


Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

New poll suggests support for Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential bid


Don't be fooled, Hillary Clinton, unless there is an actual moderate democrat, moderate republican cable news channel in existence, you can be thrown to curb overnight.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Friday, December 7, 2012

Forum Post: Opposition to Glass Steagall in congress | OccupyWallSt.org

So Pelosi championed an apparent wall street congressional minion over Marci Kaptur for the Appropriations committee, business as usual for the rotting stinking head of the democrat party, you know, the party that is for the people.

Wednesday, December 5, 2012

Huffington Pest at it already regarding a Hillary Clinton presidency in 2016.

You feminists who support Huffington Post, eat shit and live.  Huffington Post tries to thwart a Hillary Clinton presidential candidacy in 2016.  Yes, the main article is from Salon Magazine, but it is obviously being heavily promoted on Huffington Pest.


Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Monday, December 3, 2012

The Pro Zimmerman folks don't realize they are curtailing their own rights.

I don't know if Zimmerman is innocent or guilty. What I have observed is that people who are polarized over this issue in either direction simply choose to focus on one particular moment rather than the entire incident.

One faction states... "Zimmerman was on the ground being pummeled, of course he had the right to shoot Trayvon Martin".  

Martin supporters claim that Martin first became fearful because someone was chasing him, possibly Martin's adrenaline kicked in, and he reacted.

Both positions are plausible.

If you were walking down the street, and a complete stranger jogged at you diagonally from across the street, when are you within your rights to defend yourself or take defensive actions?

If Zimmerman wins and is found innocent, your right to react strongly as a stranger approaches you briskly may have been weakened.

If you have ever been robbed, or know someone who has, sometimes the robber casually jogs up to the target, a sort of friendly, non confrontational jog. The first words out of the robber's mouth may even be in a very even, calm tone, such as "I have a gun and I will use it if you don't give me your wallet" (or purse).

My question is, what do you care about more, your right to react to a stranger approaching you in an aggressive fashion before they reach you, or, your right to defend yourself after you have annoyed somebody into attacking you?

I'm more concerned about what my rights are to protect myself when first approached in an aggressive manner by a stranger (which is what it appears Zimmerman did BEFORE he was attacked), moreso than my right to shoot and kill someone that I first pissed off because of my own questionable behavior.

The pro Zimmerman crowd just does not seem to get that.


Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Friday, November 23, 2012

Black Friday, America's version of Running of the Bulls?

Click here to see the most current Daily PUMA article.

I had a feeling that if I googled "Running of the Bulls" Black Friday, something like the youtube video below would pop up.



Isn't it fascinating how opposite sides of the planets behave in an opposite way?  We love dogs and eat cattle, in India, dogs are eaten and cattle revered. 

In the U.S., we condemn the lack of separation of Church and State. In the middle eastern muslim countries, many think nothing of it when church and state merge together politically.

The U.S. generally condemns the running of the bulls, but we do it to ourselves now via Black Friday.  More fun links herehere and here.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Wednesday, November 21, 2012

Move On Dot Org Donald Trump Petition and my response to Move On Dot Org.


Click on Image to Enlarge.


For the record, I did not actually sign the petition, but below is what I wrote up above on the left (ha ha)...

Dear Mr. Trump, 
I am sorry that Move On Dot Org is so bat shit crazy. I think your 5 million dollar offer to Barack Obama in exchange for him offering truthful information about his college days was entirely appropriate.
We were all screwed when Move On dot org, an organization that exists because of how badly Bill Clinton was treated in the late 90's, went out of its way to sabotage Hillary Clinton's presidential chances in 2008. Yet Move On dot org continues to claim that republicans hate women.
When it comes to the Clintons and you, Insanity rules the day at Move on Dot org. You hang in there, Mr. Trump.
However, I'm not happy about internet photos of your sons with their guns and their trophy animals. 
- Alessandro Machi


Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Monday, November 12, 2012

2012 Republicans need a dose of Seinfeld to go along with their contract with God.


Yes the last two republican conventions being shortened because of God Like bad weather conditions, and Hurricane Sandy just before the 2012 presidential elections, ARE A SIGN FROM GOD that republicans need to just slightly change how they think about things.

Otherwise, the classic religious story about the person stuck on a roof after a flood who three times says no when help comes because the person is waiting for a sign from God, only to hear God say, "I sent you help three times, what are you waiting for", has no meaning.

It's called separation of church and state, FOR A REASON. "The Bible says" should NOT be used as a primary reason to have a political conviction. Most of the ten commandments are backed up by law anyways, so there is no need to use the bible to combine church and state.

If we are to believe that a separation in the middle east between their religious beliefs and their own governments is warranted, then it's also warranted in the U.S.

Rather than relying on the bible, this means republicans have to come up with an intellectual reason as to why such politically charged issues such as Gay Marriage should not be legalized. If they can't find a non religious reason to be for or against something, they shouldn't take a position. 
But it also means that if republicans don't use the bible to dictate their political beliefs, they then can't come up with straw hat arguments simply to preserve what they think the bible says about Gay Marriage or some other controversial social issue.
That is the tricky part, to actually have a conviction without it being solely rooted in religion. 

I can find social references in the "Seinfeld" TV series that are absolutely every bit as valid as references to the bible when it comes to real life issues. "The top of the muffin" Seinfeld episode is the an absolutely perfect analogy of non renewable but easier to harvest Petroleum (the top of the muffin), versus renewable energy resources such as wind, solar and ocean tides being viewed as the bottom of the muffin (less tasty). The Seinfeld conclusion, you just can't minimize or pretend that the bottom of the muffin does not exist.

So going forward, if republicans can separate their personal religious views from their political agenda, they become a more reasonable alternative to the whack a noodle democrat progressives who are suffocating the much more reasonable moderate democrats.

I tried searching for the total precinct victories for each 2012 presidential candidate, but was unable to find it. I think republicans probably won more precincts than democrats did in the 2012 presidential race, so to imply the republicans lost by a huge amount would be a mistake.

There is some type of growing disconnect between more rural counties and those with more dense populations. Republicans must reconnect with the more population dense precincts, and do it without relying on the bible.


Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Media Misrepresenting Bill Clintons fiscal record, here is the correction.

While it may be true that Bill Clinton went more center because the republicans had a majority in Congress, it is also true that Bill Clinton LOWERED the annual budget deficit EACH AND EVERY YEAR HE WAS IN OFFICE and was the only president in the past 80 years to do so!

On 2012 election night announcers from various channels keep saying that Bill Clinton attacked the budget deficit during his second term. Nope, not true. Bill Clinton started attacking the budget deficit from his first budget and stayed the course for 8 straight years.

The best Barack Obama may be able to do in the next four years is to not keep running up the debt, but still leave office with a huge debt anyways. Obama did huge damage during the first four years trying to curry favors with those who supported him in 2008, and that move basically averted any chance Obama would have to put a dent in the budget deficit.

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

As the numbers keep coming in after Romney's concession speech, Ohio creeps closer and closer together,(I based this observation on a Fox news graphic that showed Obama and Romney almost tied, but that may have been an erroneous graph) and apparently Florida was slowly going to Obama, but may now be slightly swinging back in the other direction, so why was Romney forced to concede so soon?

If Barack Obama can be declared the "presumptive nominee" in 2008 (a made up phrase to justify Obama getting the nomination over Hillary Clinton when the race was still too close to call), why is Romney forced to give up when two huge states are still too close to call.

Instead of concession speeches, why not give a presumptive concession speech in which one agrees they have probably lost, but they still reserve the right to be eligible for the presidency based on all the votes being counted.

What concerns me is that once concession speeches are given, I wonder if the remaining uncounted votes are actually still accurately counted.


Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by by clicking here.

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 ?