Daily PUMA Column - Commentary by Alessandro Machi

Monday, July 19, 2010

The Mel Gibson tapes.

I've only heard a portion of one or two of the Mel Gibson tapes. It appears something was done to the tapes that is not "natural". "Not natural" could be something as simple as calling Gibson from a sound studio with the intent of recording the dialogue, the unfairness of that being entrapment AND more importantly, mismatched audio quality between the two people speaking. If she is going to record the conversation, both sides of the call should be of similar quality, otherwise I believe that can be considered manipulation.


It is also possible that some editing or re manipulation of the audio or the pacing of the audio was done as well (see above, hee hee hee).

However, one thing I would advise people who have gotten all caught up in this "thing" is to take a moment and reflect on how did these two people find each other, court each other, and woo each other during the beginning stages of their relationship?

I have a feeling that Mel Gibson is no different now than he was at the beginning of the relationship. The difference being back then both sides were interested in a relationship and now perhaps one or both sides is not interested in continuing.

Obviously if Gibson actually punched her he is a fool, a big time fool. One aspect to being verbally aggressive is to do it as a way of venting anger that could otherwise go physical. If Mel did both verbal abuse and then physical abuse, then he is a big time dunce.

If Gibson's anger stems from the belief that he realizes he has been played, then that needs to be considered, but once again, would not condone the physical abuse at all.

I don't like all the focus being on these tapes and none being on the beginning of the relationship, the two aspects need to be analyzed in conjunction with one another before judgements are ultimately passed.

Saturday, July 17, 2010

A Note about Mountain Sage Blog.

Most definitely Mountain Sage is not a PUMA blog, actually has a link to "Stupid Pumas" on there. I just seem to recall they were pro Hillary Clinton at one point. It appears that Mountain Sage believes the only PUMA's are stupid ones.

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

How TV Land could affect the 2012 presidential campaign.

It became pretty obvious to Hillary Clinton supporters during the 2008 democratic nomination process that Hillary Clinton was the only major presidential candidate without a television channel.

We know that MSNBC conspired against Hillary Clinton and for Barack Obama. Fox Television was for the republican candidate while the major networks tried to give the appearance of unbiased reporting. However those same "unbiased" major networks tethered their own female talk show hosts into remaining silent about Hillary Clinton in most instances, and then there was Oprah Winfrey, gasp.

The male television talk show hosts all took more shots at Hillary Clinton than her male political counterparts. Jon Stewart will never admit that he took ratings over truth as it endeared him to his younger skewing audience, and as a result he took it to Hillary Clinton far more than Barack Obama.

Even with all the caucus cheating by Barack Obama's side, with the shady dealings of the democratic higher ups cozying up to George Soros and their back room back stabbing deals against Hillary Clinton, the reason Hillary Clinton could not get that final push to victory was because she had no real television base.

Even most female talk show hosts were afraid to show real support for Hillary Clinton because their audience also skewed younger and most of the female hosts were on channels that supported either Barack Obama or the republican candidate. Which brings me to TV Land. I would love to see a 1/2 hour cutting edge evening news / talk show, sort of like a John Stewart show, that skews towards the older demographic, say 40 years and up.
Hillary Clinton supporters are among the nicest and most caring group of voters and Clinton supporters also don't believe in uncontrolled governmental spending either, yet they have no television base.
If you could poll all the rioters after the Lakers 2010 championship victory, (rioting after a championship victory - unreal) I am absolutely certain that 98% either didn't vote, or voted for Barack Obama in 2008. Without any kind of a nightly television base, the best part of america, Hillary Clinton voters, the kind of voters that don't riot after their team wins a championship, will continue to be under represented in the political arena.

I have had a chance to study TV Land and am amazed at how strongly they promote their own original programming. TV Land also skews towards the ideal audience that presently is NOT being represented politically on television, the Hillary Clinton supporters. If TV Land would have the guts to launch a nightly 1/2 hour political talk show for the older crowd, we could begin to see some true balance in how every political demographic is being represented on television.

Until Hillary Clinton supporters get their own 1/2 hour nightly political news and talk show on television, we will continue to be ignored by the demonic party and disrespected by the repuritanical party.



Saturday, June 5, 2010

Oprah Winfrey's Debt Diet, has Oprah become a crafty woman who focuses on the weaknesses of her fans rather than the tyranny of her rich friends.

Click here to see the most current DailyPUMA article.

Over the past year I have started several blogs that focus on the sinister actions of Chase Bank and Jamie Dimon, along with other banking practices and maneuvers that are helping to create new foreclosures at rate of 10,000 foreclosures a day. These Financial Terrorism Warning blogs include Swarm the Banks, Wall Street Change, Parallel Foreclosure, Daily-Protest, Bloggers against Chase Bank, and Robots Against Chase

Over the past two years I've written over 1,200 articles about the corrupt democratic party leadership (and yes, I'm a registered democrat), and the corrupt banking industry, and it would not surprise me if both asses have the same head. And I did this while still being an always there for them CareGiver for both of my parents, and their pets.

One thing I've noticed about articles focusing on credit card debt, foreclosures, unfair banking practices and such, is there will always be at least one person in the comments section who blames the debtor.

Oprah Winfrey's debt diet may help self absorbed debtors who can't control their spending habits without help, but the help that Oprah Winfrey is providing comes with a huge price to those who have led honest lives and suffered a huge economic calamity and need a break from the rich banksters.

What Oprah Winfrey has done by profiling self obsessed irresponsible spend what they don't have middle class debtors is divert attention away from her rich bankster friends such as Jamie Dimon of Chase bank.

But it's even worse than that, Oprah Winfrey has now given ammunition to those who respond to financial crisis articles and blame all of the debtors for their woes.

The depth of Oprah Winfrey's self absorbed affair with the well to do, celebrities, and anyone famous, while pretending to feel the pain of her "average american" audience, has become an embarrassment.

What saddens me about Oprah Winfrey's debt diet is that it comes off as intellectually progressive. If you follow Oprah's debt diet advice, you might eventually get out of Debt, but what you won't get is Oprah actually taking on the rich banking elite in this country for making the debt battle much much harder to get out of. Oh wait, that would require Oprah actually standing up to a rich scumbag whom Oprah would rather just fawn over and perhaps keep as her own financial resource.
Hey Oprah, how about you get the banksters to also follow your advice. Maybe you could suggest they not screw over honest americans who are losing their homes and the built up home equity they accrued over the years.
Maybe you could actually have Jamie Dimon on your show, along with other banking elitists, and challenge them to not grab every last nickel, including the ones they don't earn, but just get through deceit and questionable late fee and penalty practices, or changing terms on a million customers and denying them the full benefit of their already offered low interest rate loans, as Jamie Dimon did in 2009.
How bad are banking practices, in 2008, Bank of America paid out less money in interest than they collected in penalties and fees! Jamie Dimon acquired WAMU for 2 cents on the dollar, but refuses to lower the principal on any of his homeowner mortgage accounts. Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey, Jamie Dimon, all from Chicago, can it get any sleazier?
In the future, when you see those snarky replies in the comments section about people who are in debt, you can thank Oprah Winfrey for shining a light on the minority of debtors who fit the wasteful profile that the snarksters refer to.

And don't be surprised if Oprah dines aboard Jamie Dimon's private jet while looking down at all the little people she helped save.

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.

Friday, May 28, 2010

PUMA anniversary coming up? Anybody know when PUMA ground zero actually was?

I'm curious as to when ground zero was for PUMA's? Was it around May 30th of 2008, or did it happen prior to that date? I did some google research but was not able to find anything definitive.

If anybody wants to give their opinion please do so in the comments section. There are about three or four versions of PUMA ground zero out there. When contributing an answer, please consider the possibility that there may be other versions out there as well that could be just as valid.

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

How will Arizona know where to deport people?

I'm not really for or against the Arizona immigration bill. I am most definitely offended by California and Los Angeles politicians getting involved in an arizona boycott when California failed to balance their own budget. California has not even come close to balancing their own budget and California politicians should clean up their own act before judging others.

I have also not read the Arizona immigration bill yet so i don't have an opinion for that reason. How will Arizona or the United States know where to send anybody who is either not properly identified, or just refuses to divulge where they are "from"?

I suppose if any american refuses to identify themselves when a police officer asks for Identification we might find ourselves in jail, so I guess the same thing would apply in Arizona. It seems to me that one way to defuse the law is for tens of thousands of "illegal" immigrants to turn themselves in, but not divulge what country they are from.

Possibly one stumbling block to this idea is that Arizona sheriff that keeps suspected illegal immigrants in those tents in 115 degree temperatures and perhaps even higher. Probably a violation of international prison guidelines.


Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Crucial Help for Homeowners Could Never See the Light of Day

Senator Al Franken (D-Minnesota), who in my opinion should be wearing a cape to work every day, introduced an amendment to the Financial Reform Bill that would create an Office of Homeowner Advocate to assist homeowners who have been denied a loan modification through HAMP.

The Franken Homeowner Advocate Amendment, according to the press release, would be funded from existing sources and its focus would be to assist homeowners who believe their mortgage servicer is breaking the rules.


Article by Richard Zombeck.
Posted using ShareThis


Friday, May 14, 2010

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Canceling Agendas make me wonder about the pro-lifers versus the anti-war crowd.

It seems to me that as a general rule, the pro-life crowd tends to be pro-war, and the pro-choice crowd seems to be anti-war. Besides the obvious irony of pro-lifers being pro war, and pro-abortion/choice being against war, don't these two issues war and abortion, cancel each other out from a taxpayer point of view?

Do large enough voting blocks of people truly believe that their tax dollars should not go abortions, but should go to war? Do large enough voting blocks of people truly believe that their tax dollars should go to pro-choice, but not to war?

Isn't it pretty obvious that these two sides viewpoints cancel each other out and that even if we followed their wishes and only applied their taxes to what they wanted, the net result would somewhat similar?

Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Illegal Immigration idea???

To earn citizenship, all entering immigrants would work for two years on BOTH U.S borders as border patrol guards. This would allow the U.S. border patrol to drop back and flank them. If the U.S. Border Patrol finds people crossing the border and getting past the first line of defense, the ones trying to earn their citizenship, then those on the border would be relieved of duty and sent back to their country.

If those on the border do their job, then in two years time they become U.S. citizens AND, they actually have a wad of money (their earnings would be put into a bank account) waiting for them when they finish, minus the necessary deductions.

Before the argument is used that we are all immigrants, lets not, because that belittles the efforts made of the tens of millions of immigrants who went through the front door when they came to this country and subjected themselves to public scrutiny BEFORE ENTERING THE COUNTRY.

The U.S. has become notorious for making its own "legal" citizens WAIT, AND WAIT, AND WAIT when trying to accomplish even the most menial of tasks or requirements. Part of being a U.S. citizen is to wait.

So, if people trying to enter the country had to wait, it would SLOW DOWN the amount of people entering the country while also giving those SERIOUS about being a U.S. citizen a legitimate way to get in. Plus, anyone who spent two years on the border would have earned the respect of any other U.S. citizen, especially the other 300 million who never did patrol the border.

I also envision huge colleges placed on the border. Those who work the border by day can also take courses on a variety of subjects in the late afternoon. I would love the classes to be free even for those coming from Mexico who just want an education.

This could be in incredible public works program that benefits everybody involved. Then all the liberals in our country could put up or shut up and actually volunteer to teach classes for a semester.

Friday, April 23, 2010

Raise my taxes! Protesters call for action to prevent state budget cuts - Metro-east news - bnd.com



It is pointless to call Rush Limbaugh a racist if the democrats are involved in such idiotic protests such as the one above. If Rush Limbaugh is a racist for pointing out the Raise My Taxes protest on his radio show, then thank God that Rush Limbaugh is a racist.

Idiot democratic party demogogues, die! If you look at the article, take a moment to click on the word "RECOMMENDED" to help buzz the article up.


If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Can Sarah Palin still run for Governor of California?

I would love to see a poll as to how viable Sarah Palin would be for governor of California. Would Sarah Palin have to be a write in? Could Sarah Palin run as an independent? How long does she have to be a California resident before she would be eligible?

A California governship would complement Sarah Palin's resume nicely if first she ran the biggest state in the land, Alaska, than the most populous, California. I would love to see what Sarah could do in California, and it would be a great pre-test to determine if she could run the country.

More importantly, Palin Governing California would either confirm or rebuke the East Coast and West coast media snark bias that Palin deals with on an almost daily basis.

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

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?


Friday, April 9, 2010

West Virginia 2010 Coal Mining news disaster updates from West Virginia News Sources.

I tried the other day to find bloggers who lived near the 2010 West Virginian coal mining disaster. It was kind of a frustrating experience as I just could not come up with right search words. All of the articles were AP and I wanted something directly from the source.

I was able to just now use a super quick AP television update to figure out new search words and I found this local news source here.

If you have bookmarked this article, you might also want to bookmark www.dailypuma.blogspot.com and you will then see the most up to date dailypuma articles.


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.

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Nicolette Sheridan files suit against Desperate Housewives

Might be worth visiting this Yahoo article and voting on the comments that are being left. If the creator of Desperate Housewives, Marc Cherry, was smacking the female actors around he should be called on it. I found the comments being left are interesting and mixed in are the typical male juvenile "Leno" and "Letterman" type jokes, joking about the incident. So far the crass comments are being voted down.

I don't understand why Sheridan waited as long as she did to file her lawsuit. Could it be that Sheridan figured she would land another show so why make waves? But when nothing came up, maybe she figured why forgive and forget if the producers won't hire her?

If Sheridan's accusations are true, I hope she wins, and if her accusations are true, it would make sense to vote on the Yahoo comments being left as I absolutely believe the comments section vote tallies ARE BEING WATCHED by the movie industry.


Monday, April 5, 2010

The 2010 Baseball Season has arrived.

I am looking forward to the 2010 baseball season, however, I have seen an unending amount of hate directed towards my favorite team by alleged hometown "fans" of that team. Have we entered an era where fake anti fans are brought in to divert the cities attention from real baseball issues? Extending the contracts of the younger players before they reach free agency should have been the obvious focal point for both the fans and the sports writers.

Instead, complaints about management were all I was reading about. Very strange indeed.

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.)

Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Sarah Palin and LL Cool J at odds over his "appearance" on Sarah Palin's new show.


Although I think it is wrong of Fox Television to imply that someone is appearing on Sarah Palin's television show now because they did an interview for Fox two years earlier, I also think that the Fox promo that was generated for Sarah Palin's show is solid work. The Promo doesn't try and mislead one into thinking that Sarah Palin actually interviewed LL Cool J.

Hasn't Katie Couric been featured in a past promotion in a similar way to how Sarah Palin is being featured in the Fox Promo of her television show? It would have been interesting if Fox had first sent a promo out to all the people appearing in the promo to see if they approved.

If advance notice had been given, I wonder if LL Cool J would have been so uppity about being included.

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.

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Random Thoughts on Health Care Reform.

Taxing income earners who are making over 200,000 or 250,000 is going to generate enough money to give everybody in the United States health care, really? It seems too good to be true, unless you make over 200,000 or 250,000.
Listener comments heard on KFI-640 AM radio on Monday, March 22, 2010 on the John and Ken Show. "Are those who will be paying more into the healthcare system so others can benefit allowed to get in the face of someone who is overweight and glucking down a bunch of Big Macs, pies, or both?

John and Ken chimed in with "Will Health care simply be "rationed"? You get whatever you want, but you may have to wait months for the procedure". If the same number of services or procedures are offered as before, but now there are another 35 million people eligible for the services, that could lead to dilution of health care services, or, what can also be called rationing.

Will the I.R.S. have more power to see what we spend or don't spend on universal health care? Is it true that buying catastrophic health care only will not be considered adequate health care coverage?
-end KFI comments
I wonder if universal health care will motivate more illegal immigration since I presume both legal and illegal residents will have access. It appears Barack Obama has promised support of universal amnesty to get support from some congress people.

Beneath the surface, most of Barack Obama's "do gooding" appears to leave the elderly behind. As I became involved in my mother's and father's healthcare I realized that it can become a self defeating prophecy to try and do what is required without assistance from another family member.

The elderly will probably just give up on certain treatments if the timeline to get the treatment is increased because of health care rationing.

In my opinion, unless a cap is put on the amount of time one has to wait for treatment, any attempt at health care reform will be tainted since it will mean that those now paying more into the system may actually get worse health care than they had before.


Thursday, March 18, 2010

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.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Barack Obama, Lisa Madigan, LifeLock, and Rush Limbaugh, do the dots connect?

LifeLock was recently fined millions of dollars for misleading statements. Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan appears to have been one of the leading attorneys general in the investigation. Lisa Madigan recently visited the White House as well. The company, LifeLock, which was heavily fined, advertises on the Rush Limbaugh show.

What confused me about this situation is LifeLock apparently offers a huge reward if they fail to protect your identity from identity theft. Has LifeLock reneged on this offer because I read no mention of LifeLock not backing up their own guarantee when the fines were announced. What also is disconcerting is there are other identity theft companies bigger than Life Lock that apparently promise a free credit report, yet there are allegations that the report is not free even though they run television ads claiming it is a free credit report.

So, was LifeLock singled out? Was LifeLock singled out because they advertised on the Rush Limbaugh show? I keep seeing a trend where the biggest, too big to fail companies get all of Barack Obama's love, and the rest of us get "trickle downed", or, nowadays, tinkled down.

I am open to hearing other viewpoints, but please address why it's ok to go after a middling company while leaving the bigger ones alone, that is what I find truly disturbing. If this was retribution against Rush Limbaugh, then it just further proves how disgusting Chicago politics really is. I did find this rebuke of LifeLock and it makes a pretty strong case against LifeLock.

You all do know that Illinois moved its 2008 primary date up to by seven weeks so as to impact the democratic primary race in Barack Obama's favor, yet punished Michigan for doing the same thing. You all realize that if Illinois had kept it's date where it was, Hillary Clinton would have had the lead in early February, not Barack Obama, and that would have made all the difference going into the caucus contests.

The democrat party needs a really really big soul enema in the next elections, and Pelosi and Reid need to be discarded. If you are not comfortable voting Republican, DON'T BE AFRAID TO VOTE THIRD PARTY.

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 ?