How Media Sexism against Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Democrat Race has gone unnoticed.

A case can be made that once again Hillary Clinton is facing a mountain's worth of Media Sexism in the 2016 presidential campaign. In 2008 at least there were dueling and overlapping issues of racism and sexism that magically seemed to almost cancel each other out, the same cannot be said about 2016.

In 2008, the piping hot media sexism was laid out for all the world to see. It was the male dominated late night show talk hosts who were ALL making Hillary Clinton jokes. Then there was Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews and MSNBC going way overboard to attack Hillary Clinton. CNN joined in the fray as well. There was also a female contingent consisting of Arianna Huffington, Oprah Winfrey, Donna Brazile, even Nancy Pelosi and Maria Shriver played a significant role in making sure Barack Obama was the nominee instead of Hillary Clinton when the more prudent course of action would have been to wait on the sidelines and then support whomever won between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

But this time around all of the above have been on much much better behavior, which has mistakenly led the media into believing they are not being sexist against Hillary Clinton. But what is happening is Hillary Clinton is being double and triple vetted and condemned by insinuation while her male democrat counterpart Bernie Sander's can't make a mistake if he tried, and he has tried.

An example of media sexism is the claim that Hillary Clinton receives speakers fees from wall street and therefore she is influenced by the deep pockets of Wall Street into making anti populist decisions. Yet her opponent, Bernie Sanders, has been outspending Hillary Clinton since the middle of January 2016 while Hillary Clinton continues to win more of the popular vote and delegates than Bernie Sanders. 

My question is, How can the "populist" candidate Bernie Sanders spend more money and get less of a result than Hillary Clinton and still be called the populist candidate? Answer is he can if he is running against a woman who is perpetually being savaged by media conservatives on one side, and former conservatives turned progressive media on the other end of the political spectrum. Yes, it is media sexism to anoint the male candidate as the populist underdog when he continues to spend more money for a lesser result than Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton IS the populist candidate because she is raising less money while getting a better result than Bernie Sanders but nobody is reporting it that way, instead it is the male candidate who is the underdog populist.

In 2008 Hillary Clinton did remarkably better in Pennsylvania and Ohio than Barack Obama even though Obama spent at least double to triple on television advertising while still losing to Hillary Clinton in both states. Yet there too Barack Obama, another male, was portrayed as the populist candidate while also spending more money than Hillary Clinton and getting a lesser result.

Can a populist "for the people" candidate, Bernie Sanders, raise more money for the months of January and February 2016 than his female opponent while getting less votes than his female opponent, and still be called the populist candidate. The answer is a resounding NO, unless the opposing candidate is a female candidate, in which case the media champions on that the richer, "more cost per lesser vote received" male candidate is still the populist underdog.

Is there any chance in heck that we will see even one media outlet anoint Hillary Clinton as the underdog who is getting more votes while spending less money than her male opponent. I haven't seen it yet.

The next area of media sexism is the vetting of the candidates spouses. Bill Clinton was attacked for having a foundation that is spending millions of dollars on a yearly basis helping the impoverished all over the world because it gives him inside access to political figures from all over the world. The things the U.S. could have done better while Bill Clinton was president regarding U.S. farming competing with third world farmers he is trying to make amends for now. Yet the attacks and insinuations of insider dealings are all we hear about from the media. There has been no balance and little mention of the good that Bill Clinton's foundation has done and continues to do.

Meanwhile, Bernie Sander's wife, Jane Sanders, apparently may have a very checkered past in which while president of Burlington College from 2004 to 2011 she may have used institution funds to write checks to a resort vacation island run by Bernie Sander's best friend. What then followed was an alleged 200,000 dollar golden parachute firing of Ms. Sanders as a gentile manner of eviction from her job when she possibly could have been indicted instead. Has this story been vetted by the media? I check Snopes.com and this story has not been "Snoped", yet the media does nothing. Is it not media sexism to vet Hillary Clinton's husband while not vetting Bernie Sander's wife? Just another example of media sexism against Hillary Clinton.

And finally, Bernie Sanders has been making over 150,000 dollars a year as a politician for the past 20 years. His wife was probably making at least 100,000 dollars a year at Burlington College. So would it not be safe to say for at least a 7 year window of time, and presumably longer because people don't go from unemployment to 100,000 dollar a year jobs, that the Sanders were making the Equivalent of 1,000 dollars A DAY (not counting Saturday and Sunday) for a very long stretch of time. If you agree that yes, the Sanders were making a thousand dollars a day for the past 7 to 10 to maybe 15 years, why does Bernie Sanders have between 20,000 to 50,000 dollars worth of credit card debt? 

The Bernie Sanders credit card debt is a Carny trick. Bernie Sander's credit card debt creates the illusion that he is broke like the common man or woman. If Bernie Sanders and his wife were making 1,000 dollars a day for a decade or longer, why does Bernie Sanders have any credit card debt? Again, no vetting by the media.

And why is Bernie Sanders credit card debt such a big deal? Mr. Sanders is paying between 5,000 to 10,000 dollars a year in "interest payments only" on that revolving credit card debt. For a politician who wants to spend MORE of other people's money to help the needy, Mr. Sanders is voluntarily paying 5,000 to 10,000 dollars a year to the banks in interest rate charges on his credit card debt!  

If Mr. Sanders had no credit card debt he could take the yearly 5,000 to 10,000 dollars in interest rate charges he is currently paying and start donating that interest payment money to charitable causes that ask for 19 dollars every month to help a war veteran, a child with cancer, abused animals, and so on. 

Mr. Sanders has instead chosen to "Carny" his credit card debt for maximum political advantage and in the process has basically blown off helping 25 to 50 charitable organizations on a monthly basis with all that interest rate money he has been paying to the banks year after year. 

Mr. Sanders has willfully chosen to pay the banks interest rate charges rather than pay off his credit card debt and use the interest rate charge savings to help war veterans, kids with cancer, and abused animals. There is no stretch here, it's either keep credit card debt for political advantage and therefore keep paying thousands of dollars in interest rate charges every year, or use that very same money to help several dozen in need people and animals through various non profit groups on an ongoing basis. 

Mr. Sanders, why have you chosen paying the banks interest rate charges rather than paying off your credit card debt and then donating the savings to dozens of non-profits that help the truly needy?

If Mr. Sanders can't get the little things right, how can he be trusted to get the big things right? If Mr. Sanders wife has behaved in the very same manner that Mr. Sanders abhors on wall street, is he not the ultimate con artist for concealing it from the public? If Mr. Sander's is not vetted on these issues, and vetted soon, than Media Sexism will have once again roared to life in the 2016 democrat race. 

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

Hillary Clinton has been outspent by Bernie Sanders since the beginning of January 2016 yet Hillary Clinton continues to get more votes and delegates.

Bernie Sanders shouldn't get to have it both ways. On the one hand he claims to be a populist candidate with average donations of around 40 dollars. But on the other hand Bernie Sander's has out raised Hillary Clinton by 10 million or more dollars since the beginning of January 2016. 

Can someone explain to me how one can be the populist, "for the people" candidate who collects more money than his alleged wall street opponent Hillary Clinton, while consistently losing the popular vote to Hillary Clinton who he is outspending?

This same phenomenon occurred in 2008. Hillary Clinton was being wildly outspent by populist candidate Barack Obama by a 2-1 to 4-1 margin in the swing states of Ohio and Pennsylvania, yet Hillary Clinton kept winning those swing states in 2008.

Dollar for dollar, it looks like the alleged wall street candidate Hillary Clinton is spending LESS MONEY once the  campaigns enter their stretch run, yet Hillary Clinton is delivering a BETTER return on the money she spends. 

Maybe its time for the male dominated media to stop harassing Hillary Clinton by claiming she is the presumptive,  paid and bought for wall street candidate when she is winning against an opponent who is ultimately spending MORE MONEY than Hillary Clinton while getting less votes than Hillary Clinton!

Maybe the media should not have it both ways either. Calling Hillary Clinton the candidate of the rich and owned by wall street as Bernie Sanders outspends her while getting less votes and delegates per buck than Hillary Clinton, seems to be a oxymoronic cliche whose time has passed.

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

Hillary Clinton with 125,000 more votes and 18 more delegates than Bernie Sanders from 2016 Mississippi and Michigan Primaries.

It must be easy for Bernie Sanders to just give up on states he can't win, like Mississippi, and not even visit Mississippi, and instead outspend Hillary Clinton by massive amounts in Michigan for a very narrow victory, losing the night by over 125,000 total voters and 18 delegates while declaring victory.

But if Hillary Clinton had done the same thing, completely ignoring Mississippi and focusing entirely on Michigan, she might have made up a very minor 2% differential. Instead, Hillary Clinton put in the work in multiple states and came up with 125,000 more votes than Bernie Sanders and 18 more delegates. Hillary Clinton put in the hard work and won the night.

While Bernie Sander's younger, supposedly more environmentally aware supporters vigorously support Sander's slash and burn approach, (how ironic is that!) Hillary Clinton put in the hard work and respected both states came away with 18 more delegates and 125,000 more popular votes.

Now lets hear Bernie Sander's supporters whoop it up for winning the night, when they didn't.

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

Cenk Uygur's Apoplectic yet Nonsensical Rant about Bernie Sanders being a stronger candidate than Hillary Clinton.

I'm not even going to bother linking to Cenk's Uygur's latest fit of Rage against Common Sense thinking. To sum it all up, Cenk cites polls that show Bernie Sander's polling higher than Hillary Clinton against Republican candidates and how could all the democrat oldsters be so stupid as to not see it.

Cenk's eyes bulge out as he gestures wildly and one wonders if he isn't the long lost brother of Dad Murray Goldberg from the TV series The Goldbergs. Fittingly, Cenk is the moron for piling more and more crap onto his previous crap of misdirection regarding Hillary Clinton's electability.

But what can we expect from a former republican pundit who seems bent on uplifting millions of younger democrats so they can be demoralized by the truth that Cenk does not speak.

In his latest diatribe, Cenk fails to mention that the reason Bernie Sanders may be polling higher than Hillary Clinton against Republican candidates is because Bernie Sander's supporters are so fanatical they are skewing these national polls by saying they would vote for a Republican before they would vote for Hillary Clinton.

Now picture Cenk Uygur as Murray Goldberg's brother, wildly  gesturing about anything anti Hillary Clinton. Then picture Jeff Garlin as dad Murray Goldberg telling his brother Cenk Uygur that Cenk is a moron. 

Maybe Cenk was destined to be an estranged brother on the TV show The Goldbergs and through some episodic accident landed in politics instead. I'd gladly rather watch Cenk on the Goldbergs being called a moron than watch one of his political editorials where he gets it wrong about Hillary Clinton over and over and over again.

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

Hillary Clinton leads Bernie Sanders 9 to 3 in Primary Contests, 8 more Primaries coming up!

Bernie Sanders fanatics keep pointing to his Caucus wins as having super significance. Sure, up through March 5, 2016 democrat caucuses, Bernie Sanders has won 4 of 7 caucuses, but Hillary Clinton has won 9 of 12 primaries. 

Maybe Bernie wins the Maine caucus today, at which point Sanders fanatics will scream he's on a roll because he has won 3 of the last 4 contests, even though once again, those three wins will be in, caucus contests.

Sanders 4-3 in caucuses, add Maine and it's 5-3, Hillary Clinton 9-3 in primaries, and most importantly,  8 of the next 9 contests after Maine are Primaries. So look for the progressive media to try one more time to deflate Hillary Clinton supporters with Bernie's 3 out of 4 victories this weekend in a desperate hope to quell the tide of 8 primaries out of the next 9 contests, you know, where Hillary Clinton is 9-3 so far.

Caucus contests just do not fairly represent middle aged and older americans and that is why Hillary Clinton struggles in those contests. Lets not forget that caucus contests are usually held at night in the cold of February and March winters, minimal heating, minimal seating, parking at a premium, farther from home for many then when they vote in the actual presidental elections, and the process takes several hours. Do you think middle aged people with families, and their parents, have the time and stamina to put so much effort in to a caucus night as compared to simply going into a voting booth and voting at a time and location that is both close and convenient?

So lets see who the republican shills posing as progressives are over the next day or two, they will be the ones trying to imply that Bernie Sanders is on a huge winning streak with his 3 of 4 victories over the weekend, never mind that all three wins were in caucus contests.

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

Bursting the Bernie Sanders Bubble, Hillary Clinton with more than a 10% Popular Vote lead from all the Primary Contests so far.

Hillary Clinton holds a plus 10% popular vote lead over Bernie Sanders among all the 2016 democrat primaries. 

Meanwhile several former republican operatives, Cenk Uygur and Arianna Huffington, and Move On Dot Org (with a failed attempt to form a Republican Move on group), and MSNBC and their Pro Wall Street Programming, continue to mislead the nation and democrat voters over Hillary Clinton's viability and credibility.

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

Cenk Uygur's Super Tuesday Downward Spiral into Clinton Derangement Syndrome.

Cenk Uygur's "Bernie Sanders won Super Tuesday" Rant is devoid of statistical truthfulness.

What Cenk doesn't tell you about Super Tuesday is that two of Bernie's four victories were in democrat caucus contests. What Cenk Uygur won't tell you is that Hillary Clinton is KNOWN to do between 10 to 30 points worse in democrat caucus contests than her actual popularity if that same state had had a primary contest instead. It is very likely that if Colorado and Minnesota had actually run primaries instead of caucuses Hillary Clinton would have won both Colorado and Minnesota. 

In 2008 Barack Obama doubled Hillary Clinton's delegates among all the democrat caucus contests even though Hillary Clinton was either tied or leading in polling done just prior to the caucus contests.

When a former republican operative  (Cenk Uygur) now preening as a democrat progressive posts in a major publication (Huffington Post) named after a former republican now posing as a democrat progressive (Arianna Huffington), little things like the truth just don't seem to  matter. The truth is that Minnesota and Colorado democrat caucus contests DID NOT represent what the majority of the voters in those two states wanted. 

Cenk's selective handling of the truth is his way of trying to get what he wants even if it isn't the truth. Coming from a former republican turned democrat progressive, why trust that windbag's brontifications?

What matters most is that Hillary Clinton went into Bernie's territory and won a Massachusetts PRIMARY, primarily because Massachusetts is a primary state rather than a Caucus contest. While the Uygur's of the world try and sell caucus wins as being as legitimate as primary wins (they are not), what Cenk won't tell you is that Hillary Clinton is leading Bernie Sanders by at least 10 percent in all of the democrat primary contests that have been held so far. (Apparently it's a much higher percentage than that).

So who are you going to trust, MORE primary voters who go into a voting booth and vote for Hillary Clinton, or LESS caucus voters who fill out pieces of paper in out of the way places in the cold of the night with no comfortable seating while conducting a process that takes several hours to finish?

I'm trusting Hillary Clinton and her superior winning margin in the primary state contests, and I'm most assuredly not trusting a former republican operative (Uygur) now reformed as a democrat progressive posting in a publication (Huffington Post) owned by a former republican operative turned progressive journalist (Arianna Huffington) whose missions appear to be taking down Hillary Clinton.

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

Bernie Sanders Supporters complaining about Caucus Fraud, but refuse to believe that Hillary Clinton was victimized in the 2008 Caucuses by Fraud.

Any Hillary Clinton Supporters who witnessed or remember 2008 Democrat Caucus Fraud, you may need to start posting new articles or links to old stories about caucus fraud. Oh wait, that would probably offend Barack Obama supporters and the somewhat warm relationship that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have right now.  

lol, never mind. I guess we have to watch Bernie Supporters "feel the bern" as they complain about caucus fraud while denying that Hillary Clinton ever was victimized by Caucus Fraud.

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

Cenk Uygur's Delusional, Deranged, and Amazingly Obtuse rant Against Hillary Clinton.

It's so hard to know where even to start regarding the Young Turk's Cenk Uygur and his recent Delusional, Deranged, and Amazingly Obtuse rant against Hillary Clinton accepting donations from big business & wall street. Let's start at the beginning.

Cenk Uygur's career was dramatically boosted by his affiliation with MSNBC. I can't seem to find when the affiliation started but I recall seeing Cenk on MSNBC in late 2007 and for sure in 2008 to help stop Hillary Clinton's 2008 democrat nomination bid. Why was MSNBC so against Hillary Clinton in 2008? It might have something to do with Hillary Clinton standing with Homeowners during the foreclosure crisis of 2007 and beyond. Hillary Clinton wanted a 90 day foreclosure moratorium so something could be worked out. You know, so homeowners could actually remain in their homes and avoid the financially devastating scar a foreclosure imbed's onto one's credit history for seven years or even much much longer if garnished payments are made towards a foreclosure debt that never dies. 

It turns out that Wall Street was completely against saving homeowners from foreclosure. Wall Street wanted their fraudulently rated mortgage backed securities investments, returned. Wall Street helping homeowners stay in their homes would not free up wall street's investments that had suddenly been exposed as falsely rated MBS investment schemes. MSNBC liked Barack Obama better than Hillary Clinton because he was keeping an open mind towards the foreclosure crisis. When the 2007 bailout vote was happening, MSNBC's commentators were practically having coronary's because the first congressional vote was no and the second vote was so close. Why would Cenk even dream of hooking up with MSNBC to further his career knowing how in the tank they were for Wall Street? 

Could it be that Cenk Uygur believed he could thrive within MSNBC's wall street connected confines while maintaining an entirely different perspective from that of his new found alliances? Apparently Cenk Uygur can benefit mixing with entities he disagree's with without becoming corrupted by them, but only Cenk can do that, It's not possible for Hillary Clinton to accept donations and input without actually remaining impartial, only Cenk is capable of that.

Cenk's career trajectory was amped up by working for a channel that had a vested interest in maintaining wall street's interests, even at the expense of MILLIONS of homeowners that were being exposed to foreclosure through a constitution busting scheme called parallel foreclosure.

So what is it Cenk, have you somehow managed to keep your integrity even while you promoted yourself on a channel that was a decidedly pro wall street teet sucking channel. If you answer yes, then what you are stating is that YOU can stay neutral and true to your beliefs even as you accept publicity benefits from a wall street friendly channel, but that Hillary Clinton can't accept monetary benefits and keep true to her own political instincts. And yet it was  Hillary Clinton who actually lost her 2008 democrat nomination chances because she stood with homeowners and against wall street regarding the home foreclosure issue. 

Meanwhile Cenk Uyger GAINED notoriety at the same time  Hillary Clinton was trying to protect homeowners by bashing Hillary Clinton and her save the homeowner's homes public stance. Gosh Cenk Uyger, you are such the man, and you were even the first one to want Bernie Sanders for president, as you keep reminding everyone every day of the week.

But there is even more derangement, how come it was ok for Barack Obama to have all kinds of wall street contributors and wall street influencers both contributing to his campaign AND then working for Barack Obama for the past 7 years, but if Hillary Clinton knows the same people, it's somehow really really bad?

Cenk originally was a conservative with somewhat disturbing views of women. Now year's later, Cenk has decided that he can go among those with whom he disagrees with on a myriad of issues and not change his own values while brontificating that a woman cannot do the same thing.

And Cenk, you're not that young anymore.

Cenk Uygur Delusional, Deranged, Amazingly Obtuse Rant Against Hillary Clinton.

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

DailyPUMA, your 2016 one stop Internet spot for all things Hillary Clinton, has recently been supercharged with more RSS feeds.

If you think there is a solid Hillary Clinton blog or news source that is missing from Daily PUMA, please post the name of the blog in the comments section of this article. Otherwise, enjoy all the of up to the minute stories about the best candidate in the 2016 race, Hillary Clinton.

There is no faster way to check out the newest Hillary Clinton stories than by visiting Daily PUMA.

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

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.