Daily PUMA Column - Commentary by Alessandro Machi

Showing posts with label Arianna Huffington. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arianna Huffington. Show all posts

Friday, May 14, 2010

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Mediate article quotes Giuliani calling Huffington "The Worst Offender" of Personal Attacks

What I find kind of ironic is that Arianna Huffington ran two Shadow Conventions several years ago yet she attacks others, like tea party members, for doing similar things. Pretty good go around on MSNBC's Morning Joe with Joe Scarborough, guests included Arianna Huffington, Rudy Giuliani, Gene Robinson and Mort Zuckerman,

I sure LOVE not spending any time watching these cable news however. I'll take a classic sit com RE RUN like Seinfeld, or Everybody Loves Raymond, Yes Dear, or King of Queens, before I watch the cable news channels. And that won't change until the media admits they messed with Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign to make sure that Barack Obama won.

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.



Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Dylan Ratigan: Americans Have Been Taken Hostage...

Dylan Ratigan: Americans Have Been Taken Hostage Posted using ShareThis
---------------My commentary below-----------

I think it is important to note that the Ratigan column appears on Huffington Post. Huffington Post has already called Barack Obama the "Bank Centric Kid".

Huffington Post is also the internet "news source" that blasted Hillary Clinton on a daily basis during the 2008 democratic primaries and PRAISED Barack Obama on a daily basis. Without Huffington Post's interference, Hillary Clinton most likely would have been the democratic nominee in 2008.

Yet Huffington Post posts the article above that basically blasts Barack Obama and his administration.

It is a shame that we can find three powerful women such as Arianna Huffington, Hillary Clinton, and Sarah Palin, and know that if we put them in a room, they would have virtually nothing in common and unable to build any kind of a consensus of any kind.

Yet if we put three powerful men in a room, the odds are that at least two of them would form some kind of alliance or allegiance on some level. (think back to George Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton and their tour around the world to raise money for Hurricane and Typhoon victims a few years ago. George Bush Sr. was OFFENDED and most likely DISGUSTED that he lost to Bill Clinton after only one term in office.)

Make it a game if you will, find three men in politics that completely annoy each other the way Palin, Clinton and Huffington do. I don't think it can be done.

Put Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Bill Richardson in a room, nope, some kind of alliance would happen between two of those fellows.

What about Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy (assuming he still were alive) and Jimmy Carter, Bill and Ted might work something out, maybe even Ted and Jimmy. Jimmy and Bill, definitely not.

What about Rush Limbaugh, Bill Clinton, and....Bill Mahrer in a room, would the three scorn each other the way Huffington, Palin, and Hillary Clinton most likely would?, Nope, Bill and Bill would get along. Heck, didn't Rush even have Bill on his show once?

It is just kind of galling to me how women seem to neutralize each other and in the process let under qualified men such as Barack Obama slip through to positions not earned.

Sunday, April 12, 2009

Arianna Huffington's new nickname for Barack Obama, The BankCentric Kid, and She's Right, for a Change, ahem.

For the past several weeks, I have had an uneasy feeling about all of those "meetings" Barack Obama has had with Wall Street Bankers and the financial "stall warts" that really don't relate to US.

JOHN ZIEGLER ACROSS AMERICA TOUR
CLICK HERE TO SEE MEDIA MALPRACTICE SCHEDULE


I've never quite felt comfortable with Barack Obama's ability to connect with the everyday person during last year's election because Obama also relied on the corporate elite banker to win the white house. These two groups couldn't be more polar opposite and don't relate to each other.

I do believe Barack Obama deserves a year before he is judged. However, I keep seeing the same type of pattern emerging that makes me wonder if it is going to be pointless to wait a year before judging.

Passing a heavy handed bailout package that has no support at all from the other major political party is what I call a forfeit victory. The other side didn't have enough players to compete effectively, so the game is called without being played and is called a forfeit victory.

WHO CELEBRATES A FORFEIT VICTORY?

In sports, the winning side must be very careful if they choose to celebrate a forfeit victory. In some baseball competitions, a team can get a forfeit victory by being ahead by either 10 or 15 runs. The winner is wise to not openly gloat about their "mercy rule" victory in front of the losing team and instead may wait until later, just as Barack Obama did after the bailout bill passed and celebrated at the white house. However...

If the other side did not have enough players to compete at the start of the game, this too can be called a forfeit victory. I can pretty much guarantee that NOBODY celebrates a forfeit win when the other side can't even field enough players at the start of the game.

When it came to the passage of the bailout bills, one could call that a forfeit victory as well as the Republicans could not even field enough congress people to prevent a "mercy rule" victory.

Barack Obama celebrated his bailout bill mercy rule victories at a white house party replete with 100 dollar a pound wagyu steaks imported from Japan. Welcome to Barack Obama's world, where celebrating a slam dunk victory when the other side could not even field enough players, is a way of life. Not much different than when Barack Obama had his opponents disqualified for technical reasons in past political races. The patterns seem to remain the same and point to someone who thinks he is growing even as he performs the same old tricks he always has.

While Media Matters disputed the 150-170 million dollar estimated expenditures for Barack Obama's Inauguration, was it really necessary to spend that much money while people were actually freezing to death in their homes across the country? What if Barack Obama had budgeted 150 million for the Inauguration, then practiced his budget cutting skills and cut his own inauguration budget to 75 million, and then used some of the saved money to pay the heating bills of people who instead froze to death?

Wouldn't that have sent a clear and loud message that Barack Obama was really going to "change" things? Wouldn't he have instantly mobilized and even won over some of his critics if he could have kept his inauguration budget to one dollar lower than the last inauguration?

Now Arianna Huffington, who IS HILLARY CLINTON'S BIGGEST NEMESIS on the planet, is calling Barack Obama and his administration a bankcentric driven team, and she doesn't like it one bit. Neither does George Soros. Barack Obama's team of rivals seems to be in the habit of looking for the next forfeit in which they can unanimously declare a victory and then celebrate with 100 dollar wagyu steaks. It appears they don't even buy their victory steaks from a US company. Wow.

The latest evidence of Barack Obama's next forfeit victory was his recent statement that little cracks of light are shining through the economic gloom as Wall Street indicators begin to brighten...even as the credit card companies are wreaking havoc on millions of customers who have stellar credit and payment histories!

When the credit card companies begin to steal frequent flyer miles from their most loyal and trustworthy customers, and when the credit card companies begin to increase monthly minimum payments by 150% on their customers who practice smart borrowing habits, can one really state that the economic gloomy clouds are lifting?

Perhaps the better question is, for whom are the gloomy economic clouds lifitng? Certainly not for the almost 2 million Chase bank customers who suddenly have to come up with as much as 500 dollars a month for a credit card bill they have never been late paying in the past or they will lose their super-low interest rate loan.

It seems to me if you believe in the everyday person Mr. President, and feel their pain, (ahem), you would want to harness those people's expectations and enthusiasm and guide them into creating their own success. Instead, I get the sense that the everyday person is really there to feed Barack Obama's world, and not the other way around.

Did you know that you You may be a Toxic Asset and not even know it! The reality that any american who accepted a low interest "until the loan was paid off" credit card offer from Chase Bank and other banks may now been labeled a toxic asset! These customers with low interest loan rates are being isolated for eradication by the credit card companies and is ANOTHER example of a Barack Obama team of rivals forfeit victory. The destruction of these smart consumers now know as toxic assets will generate more profit for the credit card companies as their credit rating gets slashed, thereby ensuring they pay higher interest rates on their debts, which creates more value on Wall Street. Is this the way banks are to operate so Barack Obama can then state that the economic clouds are lifting?

The amount of trustworthy credit card customers who were offered life of the loan, low interest credit card rates is relatively small, perhaps just a couple of million of customers who still have these great rates intact. Yet the bankers can't wait to destroy these customer's credit rating by raising their monthly minimum payment from 2% to 5%, a 150% increase above and beyond what they are already paying, with no opt out clause for the consumer!

If Barack Obama believes that labeling credit card customers with stellar payment histories "toxic assets" as one key to fixing the economy, then that is not the type of economy that needs fixing.

To Arianna Huffington, just what was in it for you to elect the "BankCentric Kid" in the first place since you now condemn his BankCentric approach?

Saturday, January 31, 2009

A New Breed of "Blog", Madame Secretary, comprised of hundreds of former government employees now out of power, run by Newsweek, Gasp.

I guess operation Blog Swarm is in full run mode. Madame Secretary, a blog grudgingly listed on DailyPUMA, purports to follow everything Hillary. Yet it is also a blog bankrolled by our friends at Newsweek. You know, the rag that has Jonathan Alter at the helm, who regularly appears on Keith Olbermann's show to make fun of people who talk respectfully of Hillary Clinton. PROOF.

Creepy aspects to Madame Secretary include naming where Hillary Clinton is set to go. Normally the news reports where somebody has been, or reports where they are just as it happens. There is a safety aspect to this type of news reporting when it involves politicians. But I guess when it comes to Hillary Clinton, it's ok to telegraph where she may or may not be going several days in advance.

And, I guess it's ok to not only telegraph where Hillary Clinton is going, but also to have ads such as the one just below...

Isn't that special.

There are several title tabs on Madame Secretary, and each tab reveals a whole nother blog, and a whole nother cadre of writers. I found SHADOW GOVERNMENT TAB somewhat insulting, considering that it is close to Arianna Huffington's Shadow Convention in name. Huffington and George Soros propped up the shadow convention several years ago in preparation for their assault on Hillary Clinton in the 2008 elections.

Here is their own, partial description of Shadow Government, In parliamentary democracies, the "shadow government" is a group of like-minded policymakers who have served in government before and who now find themselves outside of it. In that spirit, this is a blog about U.S. foreign policy, written by people who've made it before. Our commentary and analysis will reflect our experience in government and the practical knowledge we've gleaned from it (not always the easy way). We'll discuss foreign policy with an intimate familiarity of the imperfections and complications, the trade-offs and unintended consequences that are a fact of life when dealing with the world as it is, not as one wishes it to be. And we'll approach the many hard problems facing the United States today with an appreciation for the limits of our nation's power, but also for its enduring potential to shape events for the better.

Whose paying all of these political journalists who used to work in Washington, or still do, to operate this blog? Their annual budget must easily hit several millions of dollars. Um, a little financial disclosure on where the money is coming from for this obviously money losing venture, please.

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Arianna Huffington of Huffington Post (Meant as Satire Only) Suffers Nervous Breakdown. (Meant as Satire only)

For the latest DailyPUMA article, click here.

Update (10 years later). Of all the DailyPUMA articles I have written over the years, why has this one suddenly gotten a bunch of hits? Context is... I was annoyed back in 2008 at how many entities had to get involved and influence the 2008 Democrat nomination process. Arianna Huffington was one of them. When one considers how difficult the road has been for woman to gain traction in higher positions of power and responsibility, two equally capable women, Hillary Clinton and Arianna Huffington, could find no common ground back then. While it probably was a good thing that we finally had an African American President, Barack Obama in my opinion was, as Arianna Huffington would later state,  "a bankcentric president", and who, in my opinion, screwed over millions of baby boomers when he cut them off from taking out a Home Equity Line of Equity if they had lost their job.  End of update, Sat. Oct. 4, 2019)

(The following is Hostile Satire).

It appears that Arianna Huffington never got over her own failed attempt at a TV show eleven years ago called Beat the Press. (I admit it was a great idea for a TV show, however I think Arianna needed either more than one co-host, or a different co-host). Perhaps unable to deal with the stress of other woman gaining more notoriety than herself, Arianna Huffington appears to have lost it. Has the continued success of both Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin ruined Rock Huffington? (now that's funny, no?).

As both Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin continue their successful political careers, the best Arianna Huffington can do is stay in the background, write an occasional book, get ignored, and stew about it.

It is believed that Hillary Clinton's desire to have her biggest detractors removed from Barack Obama's team as terms of her accepting Secretary of State have set Ms. Huffington into orbit.

Just last week Huffington was allegedly seen arguing with Keith Olbermann's make up person about adding a graying mustache and silver streaks to her hair so she could "do the news".

Cowering in the corner as Huffington attempted to apply silver mustache and matching silver branded hair to herself, Olbermann, known to rant at anything in a female form, decided the best course of action was to flee the station as he yelled, Scooby dooooo to the rescue.

Once Huffington was talked out of her desire to host Olbermann's show, she headed over to Rachel Maddow's set threatening to reveal that Maddow is Olbermann's altered ego, if she didn't get air time.

Huffington's takeover of the Maddow show lasted one night and was a resounding disaster. Only able to speak at half the speed and 1/5th the clarity of Maddow, Huffington held the Maddow show crew hostage for the entire hour as she shook her fist at the camera repeatedly and chortled througought the show, "I'm better than all of me put together."

Things would only get worse after Sarah Palin's interview in front of a Turkey "processing" plant which has set off additional bizarre behavior by Huffington. In a final fit of what can only be described as "I'm melting"... Huffington Post has run the following headline in an effort to derail the appointment of Hillary Clinton to Secretary of State...



One can only wonder who would give this person Venture Capital Funding to continue more of this same kind of petty garbage. (ouch, now that hurt).

Update: July 4, 2023). It's such a shame that the women of 2008 could not all get together and be on the same team because even though it may have been time for a black President, Obama's tenure ended Moderate Democrat Politics, literally, and what used to be tenable differences between Republican and Democrat policies have eroded into conflict far fiercer in tone and emotion.

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 ?