The Comedy of Larry Johnson, a staunch Hillary Clinton supporter in 2008 who now makes his living demonizing Hillary Clinton.

Sigh, first it was back stabber Dick "Moron" Morris. Now it's Larry C. Johnson, a formerly staunch Clinton supporter who now apparently sings a different tune perhaps based on whomever can generate enough income for him to be a stay at home keyboard tuff guy.

Read some of his wikipedia "highlights". This guy is a piece of work catering to those with Hillary Clinton Derangement Syndrome.  This stuff is unbelievable. Before your mouths open in amazement over how Larry C. Johnson advised the powers that be that there was no discernible threat to U.S. safety just prior to 911, (holy crap), and his pro Hillary Clinton stance in 2008 which has since completely reversed and also includes another crap sandwich attack against John Kerry in 2013, oh heck I have no ending to this sentence.  You can "enjoy" Larry C. Johnson's blog on the left. 

You Hillary Clinton supporters, you have to realize that losers like Dick Morris and Larry C. Johnson probably do what they do because they need the money and if hating on Hillary Clinton pays the bills, then so be it. You see the tweets this twit sends out of his blowhole attacking Hillary Clinton. And you should also see how much he loved Hillary Clinton back in 2008.

2001[edit]

After Johnson's testimony to the special forum at the U.S. Senate, Gary J. Schmitt, executive director and CEO of the Project for the New American Century, refers in the Daily Standard (blog) to an op-ed piece Johnson wrote two months prior to the 9/11 attacks, claiming that Johnson argued that the US had little to fear from terrorism.^[13]

In an editorial entitled "The Declining Terrorist Threat" published in the New York Times on 10 July 2001, Johnson says:

Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.^[14]

Ten days after the 9/11 attacks, after quoting the above passage, Timothy Noah concludes a post in his "Chatterbox" feature at Slate: "Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong."^[15]

Johnson defended himself against such attacks:

The rightwing is resurrecting an op-ed I wrote in July 2001. I stand by the full article. It is still relevant today. I am accused, incorrectly, of ignoring the threat of terrorism. In fact, I correctly noted that the real threat emanated from Bin Laden and Islamic extremism. President Bush, for his part, ignored the CIA warning in August 2001 that Al Qaeda was posed to strike inside the United States.^[16]

After September 11, Johnson appeared several times on Fox News to address the question of military action against terrorism. On 14 November, he defended the FBI's proposal to interview 5,000 students in the U.S. suspected of having information relevant to the September 11 investigations:

I think they should talk to everyone that they feel they have a need to talk to. I mean, look, this is war. This is not a legal proceeding. This isn't the O.J. Simpson trial. The folks that attacked us -- they murdered Americans. And we've got to recognize that in wartime, we should do things differently.^[17]

2008: "Whitey" tape hoax[edit]

In 2008, Johnson emerged as a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton and a strong critic of Barack Obama. His blog, NoQuarterUSA, became a rallying point for Clinton supporters wary of Obama's qualifications to be president. On May 16, 2008, Johnson posted an item entitled, "Will Barack Throw Mama From the Train?" which alleged that a tape existed of Michelle Obama "railing against 'whitey' at Jeremiah Wright's church."^[25] Johnson claimed that Republicans were in possession of the tape and it "is being held for the fall to drop at the appropriate time." In a subsequent post, Johnson claimed that Obama's appearance had occurred when she was on a panel with Louis Farrakhan. He also explained that he himself had not seen the tape, but had spoken with "five separate sources who have spoken directly with people who have seen the tape."^[26] The Obama campaign's "Fight the Smears" website denied the rumor, saying, "No such tape exists. Michelle Obama has not spoken from the pulpit at Trinity and has not used that word."^[27]

No tape was ever released, nor has any other evidence emerged of Obama using the word "whitey". On October 21, 2008, Johnson said that, according to one of his sources, the McCain campaign "intervened and requested the tape not be used."^[28]

2013 war crime accusation against John Kerry[edit]

In 2013, Johnson falsely accused John Kerry of war crimes in Vietnam, alleging that Kerry had "raped some poor Vietnamese woman."^[29] To support his claim, Johnson used a YouTube video^[30] that contained audio clips from a 1971 debate on The Dick Cavett Show between John Kerry and John O'Neill. The original interview^[31] audio^[32] was altered to piece together words that Kerry spoke at different times during the debate, falsely making it sound as if he said, "I personally raped for pleasure." When the falsehood was exposed by a reader of Johnson's blog, Johnson deleted the article without apology.^[33]

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

Wah, Wah, Wah, Poor Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton has most of the Super Delegates and it's just not Fair, wah, wah, wah.

During the February 2008 democrat race, also known as the Plains States democrat caucuses (held in republican leaning states), caucus delegates went for Barack Obama by a 2-1 margin over Hillary Clinton even though state polling done just prior to the caucuses showed Hillary Clinton either tied or leading Barack Obama. Age, weather conditions, time of the caucus events, along with younger voters happily tricking trusting older voters into leaving events prematurely or dragging them out so long that the older folks simply left helped ensure an Obama victory in the Republican leaning Plaines state caucuses.

But during the 2008 democrat race, whenever democrat voters got to walk into an actually primary with an actual voting booth and voter's could choose when to vote from  morning, afternoon and part of the early evening, Hillary Clinton actually got more votes than Barack Obama. 

What Hillary Clinton's overall winning margin in democrat primaries is hard to exactly know, I estimate the overall winning margin to be around a 51.5% to 48.5% margin in primary  contests where voters actually voted like they do on election day. In the swing states the margin was more likely a 53% to 47% in favor of Hillary Clinton. Barack Obama had a huge primary voting edge in Illinois, South Carolina, North Carolina and a couple more states, whereas Hillary Clinton actually had closer victories in almost all of the swing states, just not with a wildly higher margin of victory that is less of importance as to actually winning each state.

During the democrat caucus month of February 2008 the over significance applied to Barack Obama winning republican leaning caucus states by non "fair reflection" winning margins of 2 - 1; along with the moving forward of the Illinois primary date from the usual late March date to the very first Tuesday in February 2008, enabled  Donna Brazille to cry racism because super delegates were all for Hillary Clinton even though Barack Obama was, ahem, winning caucus contests in republican leaning states where the caucus vote counts are actually done on pieces of paper, at night, and over a pro-longed period of time, which favors younger voters. Lets not forget that Michigan and Florida was punished for moving its voting date up, but Illinois was not, but that wasn't racist, apparently.

Donna Brazille demanded that the super delegates follow the will of the republican leaning caucus voting state's voters, versus being the "deciders" who actually tip the scale for which ever candidate they want to win. Brazille's premature antics resulted in an entirely too fast and too soon mass exodus of super delegates from Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama. 

But once the plain state caucuses in republican leaning states were over, a funny thing  happened. Hillary Clinton got over 55% of the popular vote the rest of the way. Based on the momentum going forward, the super delegates should have had the right to switch back to Hillary Clinton. However, if the super delegates had swung again back to Hillary Clinton, Donna Brazille would have once again cried racism. According to Donna Brazille, the super delegates should now stay the course and decide the democrat nominee even though Hillary Clinton was handily defeating Barack Obama after the February Plain's caucuses were finished.

So lets review 2008, because of a series of February 2008 caucus victories in republican leaning states, it was racist for super delegates to continue to stay with Hillary Clinton, but when the voting began in more mainstream states that actually use the voting booth to tabulate ALL the votes, and  Hillary Clinton was pulling the plurality of votes, it would have then been racist for the super delegates to switch their vote back to Hillary Clinton.

Flip to 2016 and the "woe is Bernie" meme in regards to the Super Delegates has begun anew.  It has just barely started but you will see it come to life in the next few days to the next few weeks, with the usual hostile progressive media groups leading the charge, MSNBC, Huffington Post, Fox will get in on it, so will CNN, and all of them will once again paint Hillary Clinton as gaming the system for already having most of the super delegates locked up.

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

Why Hillary Clinton treads lightly when responding to Bernie Benedict Sanders Inane accusations about Wall Street and Hillary Clinton.

People just don't get how Jesus-like Hillary Clinton has become as she continues to be shrapnelized by the media, neo cons, neo liberals, and now Bernie Sanders as well. Bernie Sanders has become so clueless about the 2008 presidential democrat nomination race I would never accept him as an alternative to Hillary Clinton for president in 2016. If Bernie Sanders cannot remember as far back as 2008 and the parallel foreclosures that stole over a million homes from the middle and lower class, he's not qualified to be president now.

During the 2008 democrat presidential nomination race Hillary Clinton offered a 90 day home foreclosure moratorium during the home foreclosure crisis. Barack Obama did not. Wall Street was concerned that investors would not be able to immediately get back their money from MBS, (mortgage backed securities) if Hillary Clinton became president because all Hillary Clinton wanted to do was keep people in their homes. Imagine that, a politician who wants Wall Street to honor their MBS's rather than further tank the economy via parallel foreclosures. Wall Street wanted to profit when they created fraudulently rated MBS's, then Wall Street wanted all of their investor's money out by foreclosing on over a million homeowners, which basically destroyed the foreclosed upon's credit rating for up to two decades even when the foreclosed upon were paying for mortgage insurance!

Wall Street backed Barack Obama behind closed doors because Barack Obama was going to, and did, allow parallel foreclosures for any sucker who applied for a mortgage modification. Parallel Foreclosure is as it sounds, as a bank is "attempting" to modify an existing mortgage, the bank can secretly begin foreclosing on that same homeowner! Parallel Foreclosure also explains why mortgage modification applicants  had to keep resubmitting their paperwork, it was a stall tactic to ensure the foreclosure papers were processed.

But it would ridiculous to solely blame Barack Obama. The ENTIRE congressional wing, the governors of every state, and the MEDIA played even bigger roles in pretending that constitution busting Parallel Foreclosures were either no big thing, or just non-existent.

Where was Bernie Sanders in 2008 regarding Parallel Foreclosures? If Bernie Sanders was protesting Parallel Foreclosure as being unethical and even constitution busting back in 2008, then Bernie knows it was Barack Obama who was complicit to Wall Street, not Hillary Clinton. If Bernie Sanders does not know about parallel foreclosure in 2008, then he's a social activist fraud who was oblivious to over a million homeowners losing their homes to parallel foreclosure tactics. 

Either way, Hillary Clinton stayed above the fray back in 2008, and once again, now, by not taking Bernie Sander's  Wall Street bait and revealing the truth because it could hurt Barack Obama's legacy, all of congress, and even the media! The very entities that won't give her a fair shake now (with the apparent exception of Barack Obama) are the entities that allowed parallel foreclosure to thrive back when homeowners needed help the most. 

Hillary and her Jesus Like behavior of staying above the fray allows Bernie Benedict Sanders to taint her with a false flag label of being a minion to Wall Street when the opposite was true in 2008 and continues to be true today as well. 

At some point in the near future, Bernie Sanders needs to answer why he didn't fight for a million homeowners in 2008 the way that Hillary Clinton did.

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

Hillary Clinton is the Modern Day Version of Jesus Christ.

My biggest complaint about Hillary Clinton Supporters is they may be the only group in the world who would stand obliviously and idly by as sinister evil doers attack her in a myriad of Byzantine manners. It's almost as if Hillary Clinton supporters are cheering her on from the back, believing if they push hard enough and long enough from behind they can help their idol Hillary Clinton conquer any and all sinister actions the gutless among society will attempt, never for a moment considering actually getting in front to help clear her path and protect her from a never ending stream of media shrapnel.

Lets not forget the Shoe Throwing Incident in Las Vegas where the entire Pro Hillary Clinton audience remained seated as a shoe barely sailed by Hillary Clinton's head. Not only did the audience of Pro Hillary Clinton forces do nothing more than gasp, the same group of crazies who supported the throwing of the shoe then accused Hillary Clinton of creating the shoe throwing incident for sympathy. And its those same group of crazies who would have stomped to death any shoe thrower at a Donald Trump rally.

There was an orchestrated Iowa Caucus assault against Hillary Clinton that included Move on Dot org naming Bernie Sanders as the only democrat choice, Arianna Huffington  surrogate Camille Paglia attacking the Clinton name on Salon, ongoing attacks from the usual conservative rags, Fox and CNN purposely stacking their political analysts with virtually no Hillary Clinton supporters while allowing LIES to be told about what happened in the 2008 democrat race. 

Even local Supermarkets were cluster bombed by Globe Weekly and it's Freedom of Speech busting anti-Hillary Clinton headline. Globe ragazine was actually allowed to display a HEADLINE STATING AS FACT that Hillary Clinton WILL be put in jail for the rest of her life. Has even one Hillary Clinton supporter gone to their local supermarket and either ripped up Globe magazine or protested loudly and vigorously to the supermarket owner to get that ILLEGAL piece of tripe off the newsstand. 

The National  Enquirer does the same thing as the owner is good friends with Donald Trump.

Freedom of speech ends when it states a future scenario as being 100% fact, and that's exactly what Globe ragazine did. Where was the outrage among Hillary Clinton supporters. Why won't the FTC step in and stop the illegality of reporting the future as fact?

The sad fact is that Hillary Clinton's supporters don't fight for Hillary Clinton, they fight to get the closest spot in line so they can worship Hillary Clinton from as close a distance as possible. The sad fact is that Jesus Christ's supporters didn't fight for Jesus Christ, they fought to get the closest spot in line so they could worship Jesus from up close. 

This Wimpish behavior won't get the job done.

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

Hillary Clinton wins 2016 Iowa Caucus, and CNN has some really sucky Hillary Clinton Bashers.

Yeah, Hillary Clinton, wins the 2016 Iowa Caucus even as she faces relentless attacks from both neo conservatives and neo liberals and Media outlets like Fox and CNN who are doing their darndest to keep bringing up overblown, exaggerated issues even when she wins.

Now its time for the New Hampshire Surprise where Bernie Sanders allegedly has twice the popularity of Hillary Clinton.

And CNN, get some better on air people and please cut the 2008 revisionism in which your on air idiot forget her name claimed Barack Obama won in a runaway when Hillary Clinton actually won 58% of the vote once the REPUBLICAN state democrat caucuses concluded. What a dolt she was.

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

I was going to make my second donation to Hillary Clinton's Campaign, but...

I donated once before to Hillary Clinton's campaign for what for me was a big chunk of money. This time I was going to make a more modest donation. But when I clicked on the link from the email I received and then checked the amount, it then asked me to fill in all of my personal info.

I already get double or triple of the same messages from different email accounts, if I put my personal info down once before must I do it every time I make a donation? 

Am I going to be put on ANOTHER e-mailing list and then get duplicates in the mail for the Hillary Clinton campaign?  For once I would hope there is someone from the Hillary Clinton campaign that would actually answer my questions in the comments section.  

I don't understand why when I respond to an email that even mentions me by name that my personal info (not including the credit card info) isn't going to be auto completed since I already made a prior donation.

(Updated May 06, 2016) Not that it matters but I have made a couple of additional donations since posting this article. My questions were never answered and I could never get my password to update.

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

Excellent Explanation on why Hillary Clinton is a better choice than Bernie Sanders.

Well worth the read, this article logically explains why Hillary Clinton is a better candidate than Bernie Sanders.

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

More Ridiculous nonsense over Top Secret Emails and Hillary Clinton.

So the email controversy goes like this.  

Unsecured emails were sent by Hillary Clinton and some claim they contained information that would later be classified as classified.

"How did we find out about the unsecured emails"?

Hillary Clinton told everyone 4 years later.

"If the emails were unsecured, shouldn't we see them and judge for ourselves if they should have been unsecured"?  

If the unsecured emails were deemed to have classified information, no, you can't see them BECAUSE THEY ARE CLASSIFIED.

"But if I can't see the unsecured emails that might have had classified information, then how do I know what the content was"?    That's EXACTLY the point, you don't know and therefore there was no breach.

You will only know what the content of the unsecured emails was if the emails are released to the public. If the emails are released to the public, THEN THE EMAIL'S WERE NO BIG DEAL, if the email's are not released to the public, then you aren't supposed to know about them and you will only find out the content IF THEY ARE LEAKED BY SOMEONE OTHER THAN HILLARY CLINTON. The emails would have to be LEAKED NOW for you to know what the classified information was.  

But what if some hacker figures out how to go back in internet time and find the unsecured emails. Well, I guess that is the plan, isn't it, to make as long as possible of a whining sound until some hacker gets so sick of the nonsense they go back and find unsecured emails that nobody would have known about if not for the Rat Fucking Constricted Republican neo conservatives bellowing about it forever.

Only rat fucking Republican heho's used for inbreeding with real rats will keep prolonging this issue as long as possible because they have Clinton Derangement Syndrome.

Do  you rat fucking Republican heho's know what is a real email scandal? A government official directly sending classified secrets to other government officials from other countries FOR PERSONAL GAIN in which they PERSONALLY gain. 

But But, the Clinton foundation. What if Hillary Clinton says  hello to a foreign dignitary and later on that dignitary gives money to the Clinton foundation and that is used to save lives around the world? 

Well, then you have your next rat fucking scandal, don't you.  lol.  

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

Joe Biden's "Hillary Clinton late to the Income Inequality fight" comment is Incomprehensible.

When Joe Biden says Hillary Clinton is "late to the Income Inequality fight", That's Joe being Joe. 

HIllary Clinton lost the 2008 democrat nomination to Barack Obama specifically because she was not going to cowtow to Wall Street and their home mortgage gambling shenanigans. 

Hillary Clinton had already proposed a 90 day moratorium on all home foreclosures until a solution could be worked out. President Obama's mortgage solution included Parallel Foreclosure in which any homeowner requesting any type of mortgage restructuring would also have foreclosure proceedings commence by the same bank that was allegedly helping to restructure the home mortgage. Parallel Foreclosure is why many homeowners were asked to keep resubmitting the same paperwork over and over by the bank allegedly helping them to avoid foreclosure so the banks could buy time until the foreclosure action was consummated. 

Agreeing to a Parallel Foreclosure policy was the price of the Democrat nomination in 2008 and Hillary Clinton did not go along with that deal, Barack Obama did. So for Mr. Biden to now say that Hillary Clinton is "late to the game" regarding income equality is "Joe being Joe" and displays an insane level of obtuseness on the part of Joe Biden.

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

Occupy Wall Street, Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire when they claim that Move On Dot Org has been a tool for the Clintons.

It is amazing how quickly ignorant, people can become about the not so distant past, aka the 2008 Democrat Nomination. Here is a Move on dot org recruitment letter by Occupy Wall Street to its members….

Friends –

Last August, we asked you who you planned to support in the 2016 election. The results were overwhelming: Nearly 3/4's of you (74%) responded that you plan to vote for Bernie Sanders. Since then, Bernie has ramped up his anti-Wall Street rhetoric even more: renewing calls to break up the banks, limit ATM fees, take on inflated student loan debt and establish nationwide interest rate caps.

Today at 12pm EST, MoveOn.org begins their nationwide endorsement poll – and we can “hack” it for Bernie by signing up for free to vote.

We know: MoveOn.org is a tool for the Democratic party, and hasn't always been on our side. They have operated like clicktivism is more important than on-the-street-action. They’ve been too slow (or unwilling) to take on the big fights – let’s change that. Bernie brings an independent fervor to the party, and this endorsement could propel him into the White House. The possibility of that happening is exciting enough for the 99% that we think it's worth 2 minutes of your time to sign up for free before noon to vote. (Plus, you can always unsubscribe later on if all those emails annoy you!) 

MoveOn has been the voice for the Clinton Dynasty which it was created 17 years ago to defend. Today, though, we have a chance to close the books on the Clinton-Bush era and bring in a strong, independent democratic socialist voice:we think it's time to #MoveOnToBernie! 

And keep fighting, comrades.

The OccupyWallSt.NYC Team 

End of Occupy Wall Street Missive.   End of Occupy Wall Street "missive" to its "comrades" quote.

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

For the record, Move on Dot Org has NEVER supported the Clintons. Move on Dot Org is a progressive group and Occupy Wall Street's claim that Move on Dot Org is a front for the Clinton is a manipulative, ignorant, lie. 

See, THEY ALL LIE, even the alleged truth speakers. 

I would happily help Hillary Clinton win the democrat nomination but it would cost her campaign one million dollars. The progressive millennials may be Hillary Clinton's undoing and I know how to get them in her camp, and for a million dollars I would share the information with Hillary Clinton or her people. Expect a strategically timed smear involving email gate, the Move on dot org vote supporting Bernie Sanders, and a possibly too close loss or even victory in New Hampshire to help amp up unwarranted opposition to Hillary Clinton in her quest for a democrat nomination. 

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

Joseph Cannon of CannonFire Recovering from a Medical Experience.

As the founder of Daily PUMA I don't come here for the Daily PUMA articles, but rather for the written works of others that are RSS fed onto Daily PUMA. Probably my favorite writer is Joseph Cannon, of CannonFire, who apparently is recovering from a serious medical situation. You can learn more about Joseph's situation here and to wish him a solid recovery.

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

Should Hillary Clinton and the Democrats invite some of the Republican Presidential Candidates to the Democrat Debates?

The obvious answer is NO, no way should the democrat candidates or democrat party invite any of the republican candidates to the democrat debates or any debate before each party has an official nominee. That's the obvious answer. 

I wonder what the public would think of the democrat party for extending an opportunity to basically give some republican candidates a free shot at the democrats when the democrats might have little to gain.

Do we maybe live in a world where people recognize and admire those who have the lead but still give chances to those who would take them down in an instant? 

Might giving such an opportunity be the genesis to more tolerable relations between the two parties?

Why should the democrat party stay too comfortable when many americans are living paycheck to paycheck?

The only thing missing from the Republican debates is a metal cage surrounding the debaters. Might be a nice gesture to allow a few of the cage match republican debaters a chance outside of the cage.

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

The Real Email Scandal the Democrat Party needs to deal with.

I won't disclose my financial situation but I finally made a contribution to Hillary Clinton's campaign recently even though I could not afford it. (ha ha). Yes, it was ego driven, I wanted my name put on the wall in the Clinton campaign headquarters. Make a contribution, get your name on the wall. Yes a clever idea, although I don't think the wall is going to be big enough. I also wanted to make sure I EARNED my name on the "Wall of Acclaim" so I made a donation that was many many many times higher than the minimum donation of 5 dollars.

The problem is I keep getting emails asking me to contribute. I just gave a contribution and the democrat email system has no way to riffle out those who just made a donation from those who haven't, and that annoys me. If the democrat email system can't parse out those who just contributed and acknowledge their contribution in future emails, they begin to create ill will among their contributors. I almost sent a second contribution to the Wall of Acclaim thinking the first one did not take. But then my credit card bill came and the credit card I have been diligently trying to pay off went north for the first time in over a year, and frankly it made me wince.

If I were the democrat party I WOULD QUIT SELLING my email lists to an incongruous group of needy people all asking for money and all oblivious to how many others have already asked me for money.

I have some amazing campaign ideas that if sold to either the Republican party or the Democrat party would win them the presidency in 2016, but I have decided I am not going to give them away. If I don't see meaningful change in how the democrat party handles their email messaging, I may actually consider selling my ideas to Donald Trump simply because my ideas would actually help seniors and the economy, which in turn helps everyone else. Sometimes actually having ideas matters more than asking for money to become president.

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

When Hillary Clinton Lashes out she's called nasty names, when Donald Trump Lashes out he Gains in Popularity and also becomes the First Conservative Ralph Nader.

When I would watch the NBC / Donald Trump show The Apprentice (I stopped watching once I discovered how good The Good Wife was and it was on at the same time on CBS), I was pretty impressed with how Mr. Trump came across and wondered how much of that was manipulated by editing after the fact. 

Since witnessing Mr. Trump's rise in the Republican president polls I must say Mr. Trump has shown an ability to think on his feet when ambushed by the media, such as being accused of being a misogynist. Mr. Trump retorted that it's only Rosie O'Donnell and her big fat head that bugs him (or something like that). Mr. Trump's response was a pretty good comeback considering he was blindsided by the question. I found Mr. Trump's instant retort a peculiarly hilarious response because he admits to doing something, but to only one person, and not only does Mr. Trump believe that Rosie O'Donnell deserves the comments Mr. Trump has made about Rosie in the past, Mr. Trump knows Rosie is a tough enough person to take it and dish it back, basically implying that Rosie is his equal as a sparring partner who also punches back and that's not misogyny, that's a combative form of respect between two people who don't like each other. Whereas a true misogynist would more likely operate more under the cloak of darkness and secrecy such as the KKK when attacking those they don't like.

I also found Mr. Trump's curt and discourteous response about John McCain being a "captured" war hero remarkable as well. And for those who are annoyed by it, lets not forget it was the Barack Obama supporters who probably gave Mr. McCain the biggest insult of all 8 years ago when they said it would not be wise to vote for Mr. McCain for president because he was a cancer risk and at his advanced age it would not be safe to have him for president. That was 8 years ago and Mr. McCain and his now 102 year old mother would beg to differ, and when do the Obama concern trolls about John McCain and his date with cancer as a reason to not vote for Mr. McCain, apologize to Mr. McCain?

Mr. Trump appears to have become the conservative version of Ralph Nader. Republicans have spent decades witnessing Democrats whining and loathing about the U.S. as a way to gain votes, yet for the first time in quite a while the Republican Party has been revitalized by Mr. Trump's Ralph Nader conservatism firebrand. However, what Mr. Trump appears to lack are some examples of having actually achieved Ralph Nader type of victories from a conservative point of view in his past in which he fought for the common man and woman, and won. 

If Mr. Trump is now able to spot good ideas and make them part of his presidential platform going forward, that could be good enough to make him the republican nominee and a realistic challenger to "presumptive democrat nominee", Hillary Clinton.

And all of this brings us to the point of this article. While the media has been whipped up into a frenzy over Mr. Trump's political rambunctiousness, one takeaway not yet taken away is if Hillary Clinton ever behaved in the manner that Donald Trump has behaved, the non complementary names she would be called would stretch a mile long and a mile deep, and that is something I hope the Republican Party AND Progressives as well will accept some "mea culpa" for and tone down their "Attack Hillary Rhetoric" going forward. 

Or are only men presidential candidates allowed to whine and complain about things?

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

Neo Con Dingalings, Benghazi, and the Current Attack on the Internet that is being Reported as not Happening.

One of the "outrages" that neocons had over Benghazi was the blaming of the attack on a documentary video that had come out prior to the attack. NeoCons outrage centered on the documentary lie. You see, Neo Cons were DEMANDING that the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton bow at the feet of the terrorists and claim defeat and by instead incorrectly crediting a documentary the terrorists were denied credit for their attack. lol, I'm serious, this is how deranged neocons can be when it comes to Obama and Clinton. 

According to Neocons, Obama and Clinton were supposed to elevate, empower and credit terrorists groups for Benghazi rather than minimize their act of terrorism. And lets not forget that EVERYDAY in the U.S. 22 veterans commit suicide. Rather than help lower that number, Benghazi nuts want to forever go on and on about Benghazi even at the expense of diverting attention away from reducing DAILY VETERAN SUICIDES in the U.S.

Over the past few days, there have been several server outages. From Airlines to Wall Street, there have been significant outages that have been DOWNPLAYED by the media, even the California Bureau of Automotive repair was down a day. If the reports in the media about these outages had been more dire, panic would have ensued and there would be even more internet traffic, possibly compromising the internet's capacity even more.

As you can see both examples above point to a KNOWN type of defense against terrorist attacks, it's called MINIMIZING the attack in the media in an effort to DEMORALIZE the attackers. So as the Neocons continue to blather on about Benghazi and condemning Obama and Clinton for blaming the Benghazi attack on a documentary, just remember that the worst thing one can do for a terrorist in this day and age of social media is to admit a terrorist attack was 100% successful.

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

How the Neo Con and Progressive Media plan on destroying Hillary Clinton's Moderate Based 2016 Presidential Campaign..

I don't recall seeing the newsprint reporting technique being used to derail the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign before, maybe its been done, I just don't recall seeing it done before. The technique involves showing an interaction between the Clintons and ANYONE who is famous, then intercutting that interaction with an everyday person who has a gripe with the famous person that has been attached to the  Clintons and how they can't believe the Clintons would even breathe the same air as that famous person, let alone interact with them.

A reporter does a detailed interview with someone who has what is either a ridiculous complaint, or even a legitimate complaint about the Clintons and through the magic of editing makes it look like the Clintons are hobnobbing with the rich and famous while PURPOSELY avoiding talking to the person that the reporter has questioned.

This "cross cutting" technique is very clever because it gives the illusion that the Clintons have blown off an every day man or woman in favor of a famous or wealthy person. But the reality is there are over 300 million people in the United States, are the Clintons supposed to be able to allow any one of the 300 million people to have instant access to them?

I have a plan on how Hillary Clinton can win the 2016 presidential election and avoid most of the inevitable progressive and neo con media created controversy that is sure to follow her, yet I hold no belief that anyone will contact me, let alone pay me a consulting fee for handing Hillary Clinton the keys to the White House in 2016.

If the Clintons access and consider their own long time supporter's ideas and suggestions they simply increase their own agility to handle  the new world of social media. 

Here is a quick example of the Cross Cutting technique and how grossly effective it is when applied to television. When dead US soldiers were being flown home during our first George Bush presidency, one of the news stations did a split screen showing the war dead's caskets being taken off a military airplane while on the other screen hundreds if not thousands of miles away George Bush was shown laughing at a different event he was at. The initial false impression given is that George Bush was actually looking at the caskets and laughing. This over the top stunt somewhat backfired as the news division responsible had to issue an apology. Although it does make one wonder why then President Bush was not at the airfield where the war dead were.

When this type of implied connectedness, or cross cutting, is done in print, it can be less obvious that the two events really don't relate in the manner that the article conveys.

What is the solution? Those who really feel the Clintons have favored the rich elite over the everyday man or woman should take the time to contact the Clinton Foundation and allow them time to respond to their complaints if they genuinely want to know the truth.

In the meantime, here's hoping the Clintons realize there are people on their side who have good ideas and suggestions and that the Clintons should embrace their supporters rather than keep fending for themselves against an aggressive progressive and neo con media that does not want to see Hillary Clinton as president in 2016.

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

Message from both Neo Con and Progessive Media to the Clinton Foundation, You can't have your donations and eat them too.

So now George Stephanopoulos is apologizing for donating to the Clinton Foundation? So basically anyone who donates to the Clinton Foundation is bribing the Clintons. lol. Remember, this is what the rotting remnants of both neo conservative media and progressive media do to try and make the Clintons look fallible.

If Robin Hood's last name had been Clinton he would have been remembered as someone who robbed from the rich and gave to those he had first made poor.

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

Washington Post Raves about the Clinton Foundation...

A quote from the Washington Post regarding the Clinton Foundation...

"The foundation has won accolades from philanthropy experts and has drawn bipartisan support, with members of the George W. Bush administration often participating in its programs. Major donations have come from figures such as Christopher Ruddy, the chief executive of the conservative Web site Newsmax.com and a onetime critic of Bill Clinton".

The media is comprised of either neo con or progressive liberal media, as moderates, the Clinton's will continue to be under attack by somebody.

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

Republicans & Media Decide Classified Information does not exist anymore as they attack Hillary Clinton's presidential bid before it starts.

What is getting lost amidst the attempts to get email gate running at full speed is the concept of classified information. Is nothing classified anymore? I'm not against the concept of transparency but who passed the law that made all political documents declassified whenever congress snaps its fingers?

And if everything has suddenly become declassified, how come George Bush JR repeatedly ignored congressional requests and supoenas?  

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE BUSH IGNORED SUPOENAS

When it comes to negotiating with other countries, if a political figure or cabinet member knows that everything they say or do is declassified even as they state a plan of action in a classified setting, their position of authority is stripped even before they say or do anything.

Here's a final thought, the Osama Bin Laden assassination, is Congress entitled to view ALL documents related to that event? Because it seems to me that would expose people to death threats. So which is it, a bi-partisian Congress can ask for anything and all things whenever they want, or, somehow a bi-partisian congress magically knows when to ask and when not to ask for documents and content they have not seen and therefore all of their requests should always be followed to the letter of their demand? 

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

If you want a taste of how bad it will be if the republican party make gains in 2016 elections, look at their recent behavior.

First there is Benghazi. What Daily PUMA finds so strange is if Benghazi is supposed to lead to shame and dishonor for democrats, then what the heck was 911? Bush and his cabinet were warned about threats against the United State, yet FOUR, FOUR planes were taken over and did undeniable damage HERE IN THE U.S.! 

How can a sane or rational person in any way, shape or form even begin to imply that Benghazi is anything more than a speck in the dust when compared to Bush's botching of 911. Democrats probably did the right thing by rallying around George Bush (although there will always be suspicions that dark forces possibly from within the U.S. assisted the terrorists by placing GPS tracking devices inside of the intended targets) rather than verbally assaulting his administration for lapses in vision.

And lets not forget the NUMEROUS blunders during the Reagan / Bush era in which the country rallied around the president versus having the democrats assault the republican administration in power for lack of judgement.

Then there are the 22 veterans who are committing suicide everyday in the U.S. while the Benghazi Bombastards continue to divert attention and resources away from the 22 daily veteran suicides and onto more and more Benghazi investigations.

Then there was EbolaGate. Whenever Obama brought up Ebola, Republican politicians complained Obama was politicizing the issue. Yet several Republican governors grandstanded just before the 2014 November elections complaining the federal government was dragging its feet on an ebola policy and therefore they were imposing their own rules and regulations immediately. The timing of the move just before the 2014 fall elections was beyond suspicious, the lack of a dual press conference in which the president and the governors spoke in unison on the ebola issue was appalling.

Not to be outdone, Republican politicians then outdid themselves again by allowing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak in front of Congress just before the recent Israeli elections. In essence, a republican majority congress interfered in foreign policy by helping re-elect a specific political ally they wanted via the PR boost the prime minister received by speaking in front of congress. The president leads on foreign policy, not congress.

As if that was not enough, 47 congressional republicans also sent a letter to Iran saying they would not honor any peace agreement reached between Barack Obama and Iran! If the Republicans do have a war mongering, pro bank, middle class obtuseness reputation, these are the types of actions that just reinforce that viewpoint to a majority of americans. 

What odds would you place on the Republican majority congress sending a letter to Iran asking them to go solar energy instead of nuclear energy. Pretty much next to impossible, no?

Once again the democrats will let the "over the top", possibly treasonous actions taken by some Republican politicians go unsanctioned when clearly some republican politicians have stepped over the line of treason with their recent foreign policy interference.

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

Why Isn't the US building a fresh water pipeline from the midwest to drought plagued areas in the U.S.?

Why Isn't the US building a fresh water pipeline from the midwest to drought plagued areas in the U.S.?

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

Super Bowl Consulting

Move On dot org Polarizing the 2016 Presidential Democrat Race.

In 2008 the mega polarizers of the democrat party including Huffington Post, Move on dot org, Nancy Pelosi, Donna Brazille, Keith Olbermann, Tim Russert and Chris Matthews, MSNBC, and others claimed that Hillary Clinton was "polarizing".

It is now 2016 and one of those polarizing elements of the 2008 race who accused Hillary Clinton of being a polarizing influence are turning out to be the BIGGEST polarizers of them all, that group is Move On dot org.

Excerpt below from a Move-on dot org email. And, just clicking on the link makes one an Elizabeth Warren petition supporter even without seeing what one is clicking on first! FIVE BLIND CALL TO ACTION LINKS that automatically mean support for Elizabeth Warren running for the democrat presidential nomination, all in just this one email.  wow. I've defused the links so they are not active in this article on Daily PUMA's page.

Just because Warren might do well in the first two democrat presidential caucus and primary contests simply means Warren could weaken Hillary Clinton in the long run, and that is the very definition of polarizing, no?

Dear MoveOn member,

We commissioned a poll about Senator Elizabeth Warren's standing in critical presidential primary states, and the results are stunning: When Democratic Iowa Caucus goers and New Hampshire primary voters get to know Elizabeth Warren, they overwhelmingly want her to run for president.¹ Our poll shows that if Warren ran, she'd have a real shot. Now it's up to us, together, to convince her to run.  Click here to automatically sign our petition, which says, "Dear Elizabeth Warren: Please Run for President." We turned to industry leaders at YouGov to conduct this poll, and this is what they found: Voters love Senator Warren's personal story, her status (asTime put it) as a "new sheriff of Wall Street,"² and, importantly, her major legislative proposals—lowering student-loan interest rates, expanding Social Security, breaking up the big banks, and holding Wall Street criminals accountable.This poll shows unequivocally that a majority of voters in the two critical states of Iowa and New Hampshire are what we'd call "moveable"—they're open to supporting Sen. Warren if we can tell them what she stands for. Realistically, the results don't say that Sen. Warren would win today—but they show that Sen. Warren has a real opportunity to build the levels of support she would need to win in both states if she decided to run. Now, it's up to us to keep urging her to get in the race. Will you join us? Click here to automatically join our petition, which says, "Dear Elizabeth Warren: Please Run for President." We can make these poll results send shock waves through the political press. And through some very strategic targeting—we can get them in front of real influencers in Washington and people close to Sen. Warren. But first, we need to show that our movement continues to grow. That's why we're asking you to sign our petition today, help us get hit our latest goal of 300,000 signatures, and show that the momentum from our campaign keeps growing. Click here to automatically join our petition. It says "Dear Elizabeth Warren: Please Run for President." Let's dig into the polling numbers a little bit.Our results show that after these likely caucus goers and primary voters learn about Elizabeth Warren's biography and issue positions, not only do a stunning 79% say they want her to run, but, in both states, Sen. Warren ends up leading all other potential Democratic candidates in a head-to-head ballot question.Here's more:

• 97% of survey respondents across both Iowa and New Hampshire agree with Warren's call to lower student-loan interest rates. 

• 92% agree with Sen. Warren's call to expand Social Security benefits.

• 91% agree with her statement about breaking up the big banks.

Those numbers prove that Elizabeth Warren's vision is powerfully resonant with the voters she would need to win the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary—especially the young voters who'll be critical to any victory in 2016. Sen. Warren holds more than a 20-point lead in a head-to-head match-up with other potential candidates among respondents ages 18-29, once they learn about her. Thanks to these results, we know that support for a contested primary is nearly unanimous among all age groups, and that a core segment of the winning Obama coalition—young people—are particularly excited about Sen. Warren.Our job now is to capitalize on these results—and we can do just that by showing that this news is encouraging more and more people to join the Run Warren Run movement.  Will you join more than 283,000 other Elizabeth Warren supporters by automatically signing our petition? Just click here. This polling shows that Elizabeth Warren has a clear chance to obtain the support she needs to win—and that her story and message resonate deeply with voters.By continuing to stand up to Wall Street on behalf of America's working families and working to create a more level economic playing field, Sen. Warren herself could have more than a fighting chance of earning the Democratic nomination for president—and we're intent on proving that to her.  Click here to automatically sign the petition, and join the growing movement.  Thanks for all you do.–Mark, Ilya, Erica, Ben O., and the rest of the teamP.S. Want to see the detailed poll results? Click here to read our memo and results.Sources:1. "MUST SEE: Poll Shows Big Opening for Elizabeth Warren in IA, NH," MoveOn, February 11, 2015 http://www.moveon.org/r/?r=302997&id=108356-27787899-1XnYU_x&t=72. "The New Sheriffs of Wall Street," Time, May 13, 2010 http://www.moveon.org/r/?r=302998&id=108356-27787899-1XnYU_x&t=8 Want to support our work? We're entirely funded by our 8 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Start a monthly donation here or chip in a one time donaton here. PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. This email was sent to #####  ########### on February 11, 2015. To change your email address or update your contact info, click here. To remove yourself from this list, click here. 

Move On Dot Org Re-Stabs Hillary Clinton in the back with their ongoing drive to get Elizabeth Warren into the 2016 presidential race.

Daily Puma warned several years ago that the progressive wing of the democrat party would find a candidate other than Hillary Clinton to fall in love with for the 2016 presidential campaign. All you Move-on dot org supporters and supporters of their Causes petition platform help feed the anti-Hillary Clinton Move-on Dot org beast.

Here is an example where Move-on Dot Org uses a Hillary Clinton youtube video while on the side of the page they are endorsing Elizabeth Warren for 2016!

Fire Dog Lake excoriating Hillary Clinton for "attacking" Move on Dot org back in 2008.

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