Rush Limbaugh says it is imperative that Republican Politicians feel your pain!

Friday, October 8, 2010, 10:42am pacific coast time I heard Rush Limbaugh say to his radio audience that it is imperative that Republican politicians empathize with their constituents. This is code speak for, "I feel your pain", the all time number one Bill Clinton quote that Rush Limbaugh ridiculed a multitude of times on his show when Bill Clinton was president. Rush would even do an impersonation of Bill Clinton while saying "I feel your pain".

Now Rush is saying that empathy is how Republicans can win in November of 2010 and also win back the presidency in 2012.

Not to be outdone, Barack Obama spoke glowingly of the Clinton record from the 90's at a Thursday, Oct. 7th, 2010 Bowie State University speech in Bowie, Md. First, Barack Obama praised the huge surplus Bill Clinton left behind and that the republicans then squandered.

More amazingly, Barack Obama then warned his audience that the Republicans were outspending the democrats by as much as a 7-1 margin in some political races and that the money was coming from secret sources, including both corporate sources AND sources from outside of the country, and that this type of funding must not be allowed in the future. Barack Obama actually stated that we cannot have unknown sources of money manipulating american elections. Yes, Barack Obama actually said this at this speech.

Before Barack Obama gave his speech, while he was reviewing the statements about secret funding sources, was he really able to do it without thinking that he did the exact same thing in 2008, first to defeat Hillary Clinton, then John McCain? When Barack Obama spoke glowingly of Bill Clinton's budget surplus legacy, and he knew that Hillary Clinton would have probably done an even better job, did Barack Obama tingle all over knowing that he had defeated the better candidate?

What type of person can first dismiss another's record, then revere it two years later?

What type of person can first do unethical, illegal funding tactics, then two years openly blame others for doing the same thing?

I was starting to view Barack Obama as a president that simply wanted everything to run through his hands so he could get maximum credit for any resulting success. But the Bowie, Maryland speech has revealed a sociopathic side to Barack Obama that frustrates me for the condescending nature it reveals about our president.

For being such a slim president, Barack Obama sure is willing to pull pilfer anything from the talking points buffet table at any time, for any purpose.

Edit note (I started this article on Friday as draft, but did not finish and publish it until around noon on Saturday, yet the publish date claims I wrote it on Friday.) Google should fix this bug.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

Zogby Poll, The Clintons, and Barack Obama,

When Hillary Clinton was being railroaded by the media and George Soros's money to get out of the 2008 democratic race, I made internet pleas for a Rich Hillary Clinton supporter to pay for a poll about who would handle the economy better between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

That poll never happened, but this poll did happen 20 months later (aka a month ago). This is more typical Hillary Clinton bashing and manipulation. Rather than do a poll when it mattered back in 2008, the poll is done 18 months later. The distinction between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in the public's eyes in 2010 has weakened because Hillary Clinton works on Barack Obama's "team".

What is so evil about this poll is it does not address the 10,000 homes being foreclosed upon everyday in the United States. Does anyone not believe that Hillary Clinton would have done SOMETHING that WORKS this far into a Hillary Clinton administration versus a Barack Obama administration.

So the question I have is, WHO paid for this Zogby poll? Why didn't this poll come out 22 months ago, when it would have mattered?

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

The Selfishness of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and Healthcare Reform.

If healthcare reform was so important to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, why didn't they back Hillary Clinton in 2008?

When Bill Clinton wanted Hillary Clinton involved in Health Care discussions with the republicans back in 1992, the talks failed not because of Hillary Clinton, but because of how Bill Clinton won the presidency.

Don't be fooled by Michael Moore's insipid video in which he shows a short clip of an exchange between Hillary Clinton and the Republicans back in 1992 as if to imply that Hillary Clinton ruined health care reform back then. That was typical Michael Moore serving up a hackneyed innuendo that is nonsensical.

1992 was an abomination for the republicans. George Bush had a 91% approval rating right after the desert storm war of 1990-1991. The 1991 republicans were so giddily looking forward to the 1992 presidential elections and another four years of George Bush that they could not contain their premature celebratory glee. Rush Limbaugh laughingly called the seven 1992 presidential democratic candidates the "seven dwarves". Rush Limbaugh ridiculed the individual democratic candidates as well, calling Paul Tsongas "Paul Tax On Gas".

Republicans were also looking forward to a bigger 1992 presidential victory margin than Ronald Reagan had achieved against Jimmy Carter and then Walter Mondale in the 80's. Then Bill Clinton happened, and the republicans disgust at losing to a hic from Arkansas was apoplectic. From George Bush and on down the line, the embarrassment the republicans felt was boundless.

All of these early 90's events conspired to doom healthcare in 1992. The idea that it was Hillary Clinton's persona that killed health care in 1992 was preposterous. The 1992 republicans were not humbled, they were ANGRY. Sister Theresa could not have passed health care in 1992.

The Michael Moore Hillary Clinton slam is just another of the typically stupid Michael Moore documentary claims that are starting to pile so high I am beginning to wonder why I ever liked the guy.

As for Nancy Pelosi, how come 16 years later is Pelosi so bent on NOT SUPPORTING Hillary Clinton in the 2008 democratic nomination?

Are Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid so devoid of common sense they can't even understand what actually happened in 1992? Would it have been so awful to have Hillary Clinton, 16 years later, charm the pants off of the republican party and actually include them in the health care reform talks to the point where neither democrats or republicans could take full credit for health care reform and instead would admit to the reform being bi-partisan?

Would it really have been so bad to give Hillary Clinton her first real shot at passing health care in 2009? Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have got to lose their re-election bids, please, for the sake of the democratic party, please let it be so.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

Bill Clinton is the only president to have a higher approval rating at end of his Presidency than beginning, and highest overall exit rating as well!

Bill Clinton is the only president to have both a higher popularity when he left office then when he arrived, and, Bill Clinton also has the highest approval rating of any president on their final day in office. But that was not good enough for Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, who felt the Clintons were "polarizing". Nancy Pelois and Harry Reid MUST GO.

-Alessandro Machi

Click here to go to original graph source. Click on image to Enlarge Graph.

Most presidents ended their terms on huge downward slides. Only a few ended their terms either steady or going up...but since 1946, only one president has had a higher approval rating at the end of their time in office then their first day in office, and that president was Bill Clinton. And of course, Bill Clinton also had the highest approval rating of any president on their final day in office.

Now I understand why the democratic party betrayed Bill and Hillary Clinton and their "polarizing ways" in 2008, it was the cheeseburgers that Bill Clinton had eaten that one day in the future might clog Bill Clinton's arteries while doing charitable work in Haiti.

Pelosi and Reid MUST GO.

I found the graph at HillBuzz and I like to credit my sources.

However, I may have been the first to have noticed that Bill Clinton is the only president to have a higher rating on their final day in office then their first, and that Bill Clinton's final approval rating was the highest of any president ever.

Too bad HillBuzz seems somewhat reluctant to return credit when due or print my Hillary Clinton comments in their comments section.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

PUMAS wish Bill Clinton Well.

You can check the right two columns of DailyPUMA for Bill Clinton Health Updates. Thank you.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

How to Avoid the Race Card Game by Really Trying.

When discussions about political candidates bog down because of accusations of racism, the vetting of candidates becomes an almost impossible task. I believe there are ways to reduce accusations of racism when the charges of racism relate to the vetting of any political candidate.

If we limit our judgement about a politician's racial associations to people with the same ethnicity as ourselves, we limit the use of the race card.

In the case of Barack Obama and the 2008 democratic nomination race, and then the presidential race, when caucasians started criticizing Barack Obama for his non caucasian associations, they defused their own complaints about Barack Obama by giving Barack Obama supporters an excuse to use the race card.

African Americans can criticize Barack Obama and his associations with other African Americans if they believe the associations are unacceptable. It does not matter if a caucasian does not like Louis Farrakhan, what matters is if an association with Louis Farrakhan bothers african americans.

A caucasian can criticize Barack Obama for hanging out with caucasians that are of questionable character, such as Jamie Dimon of Chase bank.

When Jessie Jackson made his infamous comment about Barrack Obama and his alleged condescending speaking style towards african americans, the private comment at a public event was "caught" by a live microphone. If Jessie Jackson had been a different ethnicity then Barack Obama, there could have been accusations of racism over those remarks.

However, because an african american, (Jessie Jackson) was talking about another african american (Barack Obama), racism was never charged and the issue died down relatively quickly.

When the Clintons were charged with being racists in early 2008, what they could have done differently to deflect these ridiculous charges was to rely on their own african american supporters to defend both of them, and to also educate the Clintons on the racism nuanced line that they may have been unknowingly crossing.

The moment the Clintons spoke about historical african american politicians and how those politicians experiences related to Barack Obama, the Clintons opened themselves up to the possibility of the race card being used even if the assertions were ridiculous.

James E. Clyburn, a South Carolina congress person, rather than defend Bill Clinton against charges of racism, told Bill to shut up. Clyburn's "shut up" comment revealed himself to be a closet Barack Obama supporter.

Commenting about political relationships outside of one's own race is one sure fire way to bring race card game into a political battle and should be avoided.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

Lets Get Ready to Rumble! Not! Bill Clinton and George Bush do the right thing and cancel their Los Angeles and New York "Cage Match Debates".

Apparently an overzealous promoter kept amping up the PR regarding two panel discussions that was to feature Bill Clinton and George Bush. Instead of the two former presidents meeting to discuss issues based on their presidential experience, the promoter of the event chose to publicize there appearance as a "debate" between two former presidents.

If this is true, than the promoter is an idiot in my opinion. It makes me wonder how they rose to such a position of importance that they could be trusted to promote such an important event.

I wonder if the promoter was envisioning a G. Gordon Liddy vs Timothy Leary series of debates between Bush and Clinton. If so, how could anyone be that misguided, and disrespectful of our two former presidents?

Click on this sentence to read the entire story at the LA Times.

One could argue that their appearance fee was "too low" at 150,000 dollars each. But I don't think that was it at all. I just think they realize how easily the press capitulates to stupid PR angles and decided not to be a part of it.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

David Letterman owes Bill Clinton an apology, but does David Letterman and CBS owe even more than that?

If we could establish a time line of David Letterman's co-worker trysts and his late night stand up "comedy" routines at the expense of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky during the Clinton presidency, would we not find an absolute level of Letterman hypocrisy that would just make one's jaw drop?

Is it acceptable on any level to tell jokes about another when you yourself are doing the exact same thing but have kept your own indiscretions quiet? Is it acceptable to profit from such activity? Is it legal to profit without at the very least, putting a "disclaimer" on Letterman's show that warns the audience that the joke teller host who is making fun of others does not necessarily imply that the host's morals are any better?

If David Letterman had "come out" during the Clinton Administration and admitted he was doing the same thing as Bill Clinton was accused of doing, would any future jokes about Bill Clinton by David Letterman have had a different result?

Did David Letterman and his parent company, CBS, by having no morality disclaimer broadcast during Letterman's show, commit fraud by not disclosing his own relevant personal behavior when he was actually profiting by ridiculing others for that same behavior? Isn't it fraud to not disclose behavior patterns that might LIMIT the effectiveness of a show's host to make fun of others when the humor might be muted because of their own personal behavior?

If Letterman had admitted he behaved the same as those he regularly made fun of, he still could have told the same jokes, and they may have been funny, however, the audience laughter would have been more squarely directed at David Letterman himself, rather than those named in the joke.

Did not David Letterman and CBS allow the telling of jokes for profit with the implied belief that the joke teller, David Letterman, was above the very behavior he was ridiculing? I think the answer is yes and I wish someone would sue the pants off of them.

And then there's Sarah Palin and Letterman's Verbal Attack on her family...

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

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 you want to believe yourself to be a PUMA, then please, study the "unethical players of the 2008 democratic race", people like Michael Moore, Bill Richardson, Keith Olbermann, Arianna Huffington, Al Gore, John Edwards, George Soros, the list goes on and on, and DON'T SUPPORT THEM, ever.

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.

Thanks to Common Ground for preserving the infamous HILLARY CLINTON BACKSTABBED THREAD.

Please Download the Chase Bank Protest Protest Flyer for FREE, and then all that needs to be done is just give a few copies out, it is really that simple.

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.

Paul Krugman in the tank for Barack Obama? Krugman states that Bill Clinton did not oversee any economic recovery in the 90's!

I just put the question mark at the end of the headline because I don't have "proof", but when Krugman says things like... "Bill Clinton was able to run on "the economy, stupid'- well into an alleged economic recovery"....

Huh? So Bill Clinton did nothing in his two terms that helped the economy? I don't trust Mr. Krugman, it seems every piece is "Barack Obama's economic plan, good", no matter what the economic data is that is coming out.

Can an economy really recover when the job market is down AND the american people are being charged 15-25 billions dollars EVERY MONTH in interest on their credit card debt?

HOW YOU CAN HELP! MAKE A DAILY-PROTEST.com sign and put it where others will see it. Daily-Protest.com signs can be placed in a storefront window, a bulletin board at work, or a countertop. Raise curiosity and awareness about how Chase Bank is harming a LOT of of their BEST customers by making a Daily-Protest.com sign.

What Did Bill Clinton Do to Hurt You Republicans in the 90's that you STILL CARRY A GRUDGE against the Clintons TODAY, and perhaps FOREVER.

After reading some conservative republican blogs vilifying Hillary Clinton over her reaction to an inappropriate question asked of her in Congo, plus others who are always quick to pounce on Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton any chance they get, I have this question for all of you, what did Bill Clinton really do to you PERSONALLY in the 90's that was so hateful and vile?

What did Bill Clinton actually do that affected YOUR OWN PERSONAL LIFE in such a horrible way that it justifies automatically hating both Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton for the rest of their lives?

Is the Republican scarlet letter that you proudly hoisted upon Bill Clinton's forehead what you cling to to validate your own less lived life, really the best you got?

Do those republicans who live in Frumpville USA, really judge others? Really?

Are you so sure that if your whole life didn't revolve around social/political events in which adults of both sexes spent weeks planning their wardrobe, hair, make up and perfume, all in an effort to leave a lasting impression on you that one time they get to meet you; that you too would absolutely have remained loyal to all the same values that can so easily be honored in your own private life while strolling around in baggy clothes while unkempt, unwashed, unshaven for days on end?

Can you really name something that Bill Clinton did to you in the 90's that caused you hardship? Before you bring up NAFTA, you do realize that that was done in part to help stem the flow of immigration into the United States by providing some type of economy for Mexicans, in Mexico. And of course, lets not forget that the republicans backed NAFTA as well.

The same republican witch hunting hate machine that tried to grind Bill Clinton's presidency to a halt in its first two years, were at it again in his final two years as president. Are you willing to admit that it was pure Republican hatred and jealousy that froze President Clinton from accomplishing more in his final two years in office. Are you proud that your Republican leaders felt it was more important to attack Bill Clinton on personal matters rather than focus on more important issues related to security and terrorism? You do recall that anytime President Clinton tried to focus on important issues, republican politicians accused him of trying to take focus away from their witch hunt of Bill Clinton.

As president, Bill Clinton was willing to use the best idealogy from both sides of the political landscape, and his reward from the republican side was "How Dare You STEAL our ideas and take credit for them". Even the democratic side was initially upset when there was the inevitable loss of senate seats after Mr. Clinton's first two years in office.

I'm now a believer that the politicians that draw anger from both sides of the political spectrum are probably those who hold the interests and well being of america on par with their own.

I am sick and tired of republicans thinking it is OK and par for the course to simply hate the Clintons forever, without even knowing why, or to hate the Clintons without being able to name one thing that Bill Clinton did to them personally in the 90's that requires the Clintons be lambasted for life.

Bill Clinton doesn't need your forgiveness, if anything, you should be asking Bill Clinton to forgive you for your ongoing hatred against a family that brought some sense of stability to the 90's, and did nothing to you personally that deserves a life long grudge in return.

As for Hillary Clinton, when you see all the snarky media males gang up on her, just because, take a moment and fight for her, it's what an OBOT does when Barack Obama comes under fire.

HOW YOU CAN HELP! MAKE A DAILY-PROTEST.com sign and put it where others will see it. Daily-Protest.com signs can be placed in a storefront window, a bulletin board at work, or a countertop. Raise curiosity and awareness about how Chase Bank is harming a LOT of of their BEST customers by making a Daily-Protest.com sign.

Hillary Clinton in the Congo being asked what Bill Clinton thought, as Marisa Tormei said in My Cousin Vinnie, "It's a bullshit question".

It's a bullshit question, Marissa Tormei from my Cousin Vinny correctly replies. Ironically, if Hillary Clinton had said that, she would have been skewered by the press. Before you can see the one minute video clip you have to state you are over 18 years of age. It is my opinion that you don't have to answer with the exact year you were actually born if you feel that is being invasive, just as long as you are 18 years of age or older.

If anyone would like to take a moment and respond in the comments section with what Hillary Clinton "should have said" during that Congo Question and Answer session when she was asked by a male member of the audience "What Bill Clinton thought about China and the World Bank's involvement in Congo", that would NOT have been turned against her by either the media or by political pundits, please, educate me. Otherwise, "It's a bullshit question".

But prepared for me to demonstrate how the media would have spun your response to put Hillary Clinton down no matter what her response would have been.

One more gripe, I could not find this scene on Youtube. Just one more example of how amazing women's scene don't end up on youtube.

HOW YOU CAN HELP! MAKE A DAILY-PROTEST.com sign and put it where others will see it. Daily-Protest.com signs can be placed in a storefront window, a bulletin board at work, or a countertop. Raise curiosity and awareness about how Chase Bank is harming a LOT of of their BEST customers by making a Daily-Protest.com sign.

DailyPUMA Slightly shifts some blogs from the inner right column to the outer right column.

In case you are used to looking at one column for a specific blog, I noticed that the inner right column was "descending" topics at a much faster rate than the outer column over the first several hours. This was due in part to my adding some new blogs in the past couple of weeks to the inner column.

If I shifted your blog to the outer right column it was entirely to help ensure that your blog wasn't descending too fast by being in the inner right column.

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

Two blogs were recently dropped for their "handling" of the Hillary Clinton Congo incident. Their criticism of Hillary Clinton's response to the what would Bill Clinton think question revealed them to be PUMA's that are not for Hillary Clinton. I am not against criticizing Hillary Clinton, but when it is so obviously either another media attempt to "put her in her place", or a republican led assault, then why go along if you really are a PUMA?

The Media treatment of Hillary Clinton is basically one of the primal tenets that caused PUMA's to be born, no?

I will also issue this request, If ANYONE can come up with what Hillary Clinton should have said when she was asked "What Bill Clinton thought about China and the World Bank's involvement in Congo" question, that would not have resulted in Hillary Clinton being skewered by the media or her political opponents, please, put it in the comments section.

I don't believe an answer exists that would have allowed Hillary Clinton to get away unscathed from that question. It is what used to be known as a "wife beating" question.

In the earlier days of our court system, lawyers would ask an opposing defendant, plaintiff or witness "if they STILL beat their wives".

No matter how one answers the question, they are made to look as if they beat their wife at one time or another. That is the type of situation that Hillary Clinton was put in, in Congo.

HOW YOU CAN HELP! MAKE A DAILY-PROTEST.com sign and put it where others will see it. Daily-Protest.com signs can be placed in a storefront window, a bulletin board at work, or a countertop. Raise curiosity and awareness about how Chase Bank is harming a LOT of of their BEST customers by making a Daily-Protest.com sign.

Lost in Translation, why Hillary Clinton was annoyed by a question directed towards Bill Clinton.

Hillary Clinton has made the news shown testily responding to what was a dumb and insulting question. The question was dumb because it was directed towards Bill Clinton, who was not at the question and answer session.

But what gets lost in translation is that Hillary Clinton, although on a stage with curtains behind her, just like what you might see at any town hall meeting in the U.S., WAS INSTEAD IN THE CONGO!

Can anyone of us even begin to imagine how annoying it must have been to travel halfway around the world, then travel within the Congo, arrange a public forum, and then be asked a question about what Bill Clinton thinks?

In retrospect, it might have been funny if Hillary Clinton had pulled out her cell phone, hit the old speed dial, and then talked to her husband right then and there and relayed the question.

But who knows how that would have played out. I could see Jay Leno then joking that now we know who Hillary Clinton would have called at 3am if she had become president and there was an emergency.

It seems as if we expect our politicians to never show contempt in public under any circumstance, but then we complain that politicans are phony.

I'm glad Hillary was annoyed and showed it, that's the best way to alleviate stress brought on by having to answer a stupid question in a public forum. Unfortunately, being a woman will cause the media and all the male late night host comedians to now ridicule Hillary Clinton rather than the questioner.

If it had been a male politician responding to a dumb question, these same male late night host comedians would have probably gone after the questioner instead. Remember John McCain and the woman who thought Barack Obama was a muslim and an Arab. John McCain responded something to the effect, "no he's an american". The unsaid snub being that if Barack obama were Arab that somehow that would have been a bad thing. Who took the media hit, McCain, or the woman? Saturday Night live made fun of the woman, and that clip was played over and over by the mainstream media over the next couple of days.

Lets take this one step further. The best way out of the situation, is to prevent it from ever happening. If Hillary Clinton was able to control each and every question that was asked, could she have achieved a better result? As we know now, controlling questions is a privilege reserved for Barack Obama press conferences. If Hillary Clinton had tried controlling each and every question, and been caught doing it, she would have been ridiculed by the media, for being controlling and manipulative.

The conclusion is, there was no way out until female members of the media GROW UP and stand up to the men and defend female politicians.

I seriously hope Rush Limbaugh keeps his trap shut about this incident, or at least has the decency to go the Congo first before opening his yap. As it stands now, NewsMax has already turned this into a Hillary versus Bill issue, when it was not.

The REAL REASON HILLARY CLINTON was in CONGO WAS to ADDRESS the ISSUE of RAPE. CLICK HERE to READ ABOUT it.

HOW YOU CAN HELP! MAKE A DAILY-PROTEST.com sign and put it where others will see it. Daily-Protest.com signs can be placed in a storefront window, a bulletin board at work, or a countertop. Raise curiosity and awareness about how Chase Bank is harming a LOT of of their BEST customers by making a Daily-Protest.com sign.

Bill Clinton asked to not cross Picket Line.

No on Prop 8 advocates urge Bill Clinton not to Participate.

Bill Clinton is supposed to speak this Sunday (see link above) at a hotel in which the hotel owner donated 125,000 dollars towards the passage of Prop 8. From what I understand, Bill Clinton's reason for speaking is that it was an organization that hired him to speak, not the hotel.

Ideally, a list of whom Prop 8 is targeting should be given to Bill Clinton or his people so in the future he can make his decisions on where he speaks with more information.

Did the gay community really back Hillary Clinton during the democratic campaign? I seem to recall that around 10%, maybe even as high as 15% of all democratic delegates were gay, yet when it came time to fight for Hillary, I just don't recall any delegate group fighting for Hillary, gay or otherwise.

Bill Clinton to Share 200,000 World Wide Foundation Donors to a Campaign that never disclosed it's own Donors.

Wow, Bill Clinton to share 200,000 worldwide foundation donors with Barack Obama. It's like hugging a shark while it feeds on your arm.