Daily PUMA Column - Commentary by Alessandro Machi

Showing posts sorted by date for query MSNBC. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query MSNBC. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Should PUMA's back any presidential political candidate in 2012?

In a previous article a few months ago I gave my explanation of where PUMA's have gone after the rigged 2008 democratic nomination contest. In this article, I have to ask the question, why are we supporting any presidential political candidate in 2012?

I just don't think it is wise to back any presidential candidate in 2012 because we are presently being polarized to death by the far right and far left cable news channels known as Fox and MSNBC. I have not watched either Fox or MSNBC for more than a total of an hour or two in the past two years.

While I tend to think that Fox isn't as extreme as MSNBC, neither Fox nor MSNBC cover important issues from a centrist viewpoint. Fox analyzes MSNBC's position, and distances themselves from it, and MSNBC does the same towards Fox.

The result is what I call news regression, news entrenchment, news polarization. No matter who you may like in 2012, be it Palin, Trump, Romney or Obama, the fact remains that the news outlets that report the news will continue to ignore centrist america, what I call the moderate liberal.

A moderate liberal is a liberal that actually cares about the budget and does not want a handout in exchange for their vote. Moderate Liberals tend to be middle aged and older and are family oriented. if you are one of the 70 million americans taking care of an elderly family member, or one of 15 million americans taking care of a parent with alzheimers, you are probably a moderate liberal.

liberalism in moderation.

Yet liberalism in moderation is NOT what either Fox or MSNBC are about. The result is a massive under representation of what moderate liberal americans want, or are interested in, by both Fox and MSNBC.

If you choose to support any mainstream presidential candidate in 2012, you give your blessing to what happened in 2008 as being "one of those things", and now its time to "move on". I would suggest before you give into the temptation of moving on and supporting a presidential candidate in 2012, you fight for a third cable news channel that places itself exactly in the middle of Fox and MSNBC, and you say it whenever the issue of politics comes up.

"I'm not supporting any presidential candidate in 2012 until there is a third cable news option that is exactly in the middle of Fox and MSNBC".

If you don't agree, then you may be validating the 2008 democratic presidential race without any chance for "change" going forward in 2012.



Thursday, April 14, 2011

Ladder to the Moon by Barack Obama's half sister is a tribute to their mother, Stanley Ann Dunham.

One of my biggest pet peeves against Barack Obama was that he was writing his tribute book about his sperm donor father in the early 90's in Bali, even as his mother was being diagnosed and fighting cancer in Hawaii. Barack Obama literally had to fly over where his mother was fighting cancer in Hawaii to go Bali.

I have not been able to find an actual exact Timeline of Barack Obama's book writing in Bali and his mother's battle with cancer in Hawaii, but even if the book was barely finished when Stanley Ann Dunham was first diagnosed with cancer, isn't it odd that a book about his deadbeat and passed father was of such priority that he could not find the time to fight for the life of his still living mother?

Maybe the excuse would be, when Barack Obama was in Bali, his mother had not been diagnosed yet, when the book was finished, then he learned of his mother's conditions, and by then he could not afford the additional time off to be there for his mother.

Ok, I would be able to accept that, assuming it were true, and IF Barack Obama had not OWNED his mother's cancer treatment battle with the insurance companies as if it were his own personal struggle by referring to it during the 2008 democratic presidential campaign against Hillary Clinton, in campaign commercials, and then again in the second debate against John McCain.
It appears that Barack Obama chose to write his book about his deadbeat dad in Bali but then was not there for his mother when she was diagnosed with cancer soon after Barack's book was finished. The press has never asked him about the timing of these two relatively close events in his life.
Would you prioritize writing a tribute book about one of your passed parents and then not personally helping your still living parent in their battle against cancer? Would you then use your own mother's cancer experience, of which it appears you did not participate in, to gain sympathy and votes for your own career?

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

The Polarizing Cable News Channels are ruining the United States.

Barack Obama admires Jamie Dimon. Dimon, Winfrey and Obama all have their business roots in Chicago.

It is silly to criticize Jamie Dimon's tactics while liking Barack Obama. Obama's campaign engineered the biggest pre-paid credit card donation swindle ever perpetrated during a presidential campaign.

Wall street wanted Barack Obama in 2008, not Hillary Clinton, because Hillary Clinton has way less wall street puppet strings attached to her than Barack Obama.

Hillary Clinton can't win in 2012 because cable news reporting is intentionally decisive, pushing people into either supporting MSNBC and Barack Obama, or Fox News and the republican candidate.

Ironically, there is a huge swath in the middle, called main street, who are Hillary Clinton supporters and who have been disregarded and marginalized.

Until we have a cable news network that is not as polarizing as either Fox or MSNBC, nothing will "change".

Isn't it ironic that polarizing cable news channels were the ones that tried to stick Hillary Clinton with the polarizing label in 2008?

Look no further than the Wisconsin collective bargaining ongoing news story. MSNBC didn't focus on numbers, nor intelligent compromise solutions, (such as collapsing the numerous collective bargaining unions into ONE COLLECTIVE). Fox didn't focus on solutions other than simply eliminating collective bargaining.

In the cadence of Charlie Sheen various sloganeering, the new catch word is, POLARIZING!

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Nice Remembrance of Basement Angel from SICKOFITRADLZ.

Before I started Daily PUMA after the November 2008 presidential election, I was originally a member of the Hillary Clinton Forum after having just stumbled into the whole 2008 democratic nomination scam by accident, literally.

A foot injury caused me to be couch bound for about 7 -10 straight days in early February of 2008. During that week to 10 days I watched a whole lot of MSNBC and their bizarre coverage of the 2008 democratic nomination race.
After what can only be described as waterboard torture administered by Keith Olbermann over the airwaves as I recuperated from my foot injury on my couch, I went from being a completely ambivalent democrat over whether or not Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama won, to an angry, angry democrat completely freaked out over the media's completely biased coverage of the 2008 democratic race, coverage that favored Barack Obama.
As time marched forward I began researching the extent of the 2008 democratic caucus fraud, media misdeeds and the profound level of relationship betrayals that it took to finally get Barack Obama over the top. At some point in May of 2008 I came up with the idea to make protest postcards that could be mailed to ALL of the 2008 democratic delegates BEFORE they arrived at the democratic convention.

Each Protest Postcard had a message that related to the 2008 democratic fraud nomination process. My belief was that one protest postcard message in the hands of a delegate might have more impact that a hundred angry emails.

To my surprise, my protest postcard idea was rebuffed by many of the most well known Hillary Clinton supporters and bloggers. I've always believed that it takes a coalition of believers with ideas that makes sense, to make a difference, but I've never been very good at the "politics" of being accepted.

I have contemplated for the past few years what would cause a true Hillary Clinton supporter to not be excited by the protest postcard idea and will address that issue in a further article.

There is a fine line between trying to profit from an idea, and using that idea to help create normalcy and fairness regarding how the media and our own politicians wage their election battles. My fine line was that the only way I could make money from the protest postcard idea was if the postcards actually helped get Hillary Clinton the nomination.

In other words, if 15,000 to 30,000 of these postcards actually got printed and mailed to the few thousand delegates, enough delegates could have been turned to give Hillary Clinton the nomination. Postcard runs of that size would have to make a miniscule amount of profit from each postcard, otherwise I would run the risk of significantly going into the red. If however, only a couple thousand were sent out, I would lose money. So if Hillary wins, I win, if Hillary loses, I lose. Works for me.

I compromised on my original run of protest postcards. I did a thousand each for each postcard, plus a second run of one of the postcards.

lol, I lost money on the protest postcard venture but I felt I handled the procedure the correct way. I would much rather pay to create the postcards with my own money up front, than announce I was making the cards ahead of time to see if I could get enough pre-orders to not risk my own money at all. While getting pre-orders may be good business sense, it flies in the face of supporting a candidate because you believe they will do the best job of anybody running.

Plus, where was the risk if one offers pre-sales? If the protest postcard pre-sale idea is golden, the person with the idea comes off like a true Hillary Clinton supporter without ever having risked their own money. I'm glad I risked my own money, because my conscience is pure, I had a great idea, but not enough places to go to get enough people to back it.

Of all the protest postcard rejections that I received, the most hurtful one was from Lambert Strether at Correntewire (I assume not his real name as that is the name of a literary character). I had just been approved for "membership" at correntewire but because I mentioned my protest postcards more than once, Lambert immediately banned me without any type of additional questioning.

I could not comprehend how people allegedly backing Hillary Clinton would not bend over backwards to help any idea that might help get Hillary Clinton elected in 2008. So from that point on, I just presumed that Correntewire was a faux pro Hillary Clinton site. After I started Daily PUMA later that year, any alleged Hillary Clinton pro site that would post a link to Correntewire, but not Daily PUMA, had some explaining to do, and that's putting it politely. See for yourself, if you see an alleged pro Hillary Clinton site with a link to correntwire, but no link to Daily PUMA, be aware.

All of this is background to what follows next.

Today I came across this remembrance of Basement Angel by SICKOFITRADLZ. Please read this remembrance as it is a nice tribute to Basement Angel.

SICKOFITRADLZ'S tribute helped tie up some loose ends for me as well. Apparently Basement Angel was the one poster at Correntwire who could be counted on to rebuff the anti Hillary nonsense that was posted there as part of the Barack Obama trollingbrigade that went around either CONCERN TROLLING, (AND STILL DOING IT!) or attacking Hillary Clinton without identifying themselves as a Barack Obama supporter.

ONE POSTER?
That's it? Only one poster (Basement Angel) at correntwire could be counted on to attack any and all stupid Barack Obama shills that were against Hillary Clinton?

If anyone reading this was a friend of Basement Angel, why not go to correntwire and find her best Hillary Clinton comments, and do a tribute article about her and include those comments.

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Where PUMA's went after the 2008 democratic fraud nomination process.

(quick update note, July 25, 2012), DailyPUMA is a bit surprised that in 2012 very few former PUMA bloggers have gone to the trouble to actually post their desire for a Hillary Clinton presidency in 2012 on their own blog! Are you Pumas aware that progressive democrats will be backing Elizabeth Warren in 2016?)


Where did all the PUMA's go after the 2008 democratic fraud nomination process? The answer is, everywhere.

And "everywhere" speaks to something that seems to have gone unanalyzed by the alleged pundits.
There were so many different types of Hillary Clinton supporters in 2008, including women, poor, working class, Bill Clinton fans, Chelsea Clinton fans, Hillary Clinton fans, Diverse ethnics, working class men, Republicans who wanted fiscal responsibility, and finally, loyal, loyal democrats.
When all of these Hillary Clinton factions were overruled by a corrupt central democratic alligiance that still remains in power, these multiple Hillary Clinton groups all went their own separate ways. Hillary Clinton supporters truly fractured to all over the political spectrum.

And therein lies the paradox.

There were so many different coalitions that were ready to rally around Hillary Clinton for president in 2008 that when Wall Street realized that Barack Obama would make a much better lap dog president than Hillary Clinton, Clinton supporters went in all different directions as they witnessed the lengths to which the democratic party went to rationalize the kinds of illegal political campaigning that went on in 2008.

While many of the disenfranchised Hillary Clinton supporters didn't see themselves as PUMA's, they are actually all PUMA's who believed being pragmatic was the only choice they really had, (the same type of pragmatism that Hillary Clinton championed within her own political career).

Without even one cable news station that simply reports the news from a moderate middle position, there is no room for Hillary Clinton style of moderate politics in the United States. Instead, we are left with a polarizing cable news junta of Fox and MSNBC, and millions of americans being taken advantage of because there is no real honest news out there, just agenda driven news that goes either far right, or far left.

Without any cable news channels reporting moderate middle news, a Hillary Clinton style of presidency was not possible, especially when a fledgling group of millions of Hillary Clinton supporters had nowhere to go on the cable news channel dial to get truly fair and powerful news reporting with a slant towards finding solutions to existing problems.

We can all see by what happened in Wisconsin and the collective bargaining impasse that neither the ultra conservative republican branch, nor their equally demented ultra progressive whack a noodle liberal democrat counterparts care about anything other than their own voter base, and that will always separate them from Hillary Clinton supporters.

There are blogs on Daily PUMA that cover women's rights and women's continued fight against media bias, there are blogs on Daily PUMA that celebrate younger women's quest to attempt physically demanding adventures on par with their male counterparts, bloggers fighting cancer, environmentally based blogs that bring the latest news on green energy technology breakthroughs, there are also some ultra liberal blogs and ultra conservative blogs, and there are PUMA blogs,
and that is what makes DailyPUMA a special place for those who "get it".

I commend those who have discovered that Daily PUMA blog is a huge time saver when it comes to quickly analyzing news story clips of the day because there is such an interesting cross section of blogs.
Rather than simply surround ourselves with people who all think alike, PUMA's get that Hillary Clinton would have truly been an all encompassing president who would have "worked hard" to make a difference without being as polarizing as either the ultra conservative republicans or progressive liberal whack a noodle democrats have proven to be.

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Is NBC changing from their despicable 2008 political news fraud that they perpetrated on democratic voters? Meet Harriet's Law, um, Harry's Law.


Hmmm, should we go with Harry's Law...

Or should we go with Harriet's Law?

Hey Guys, pretend we have holsters and are about to draw our guns, would you watch then?
Ok, we'll compromise, no guns, but we'll call the show Harry's Law instead of Harriet's Law.

The good news is MSNBC recently parted ways with Keith Olbermann. The additional good news is at the same time, NBC released a new show by David E. Kelley called "Harriet's Law", um, make that "Harry's Law", starring Kathy Bates. Yes, a female in the lead of a legal drama. Ok, it's been done before, but Harriet is more "matronly", and that is what makes Harry's Law a win for humanity.
You mean a matronly female lead actress can carry a show??? Yep. But wait, we'll fool everybody into thinking it's a guy, so that they at least tune in, by calling the show Harry's Law. Then we'll play whack a mole with Harriet in the first few minutes so the guys we fooled into tuning into the show, will like the whack a mole aspect and stick around.
You'll have to see the series premiere to get the meaning of whack a mole.

So the good news is, NBC has approved a show about a matronly lead actress, and the slight down side is they were afraid to call the show Harriet's Law, and instead went with Harry's law. But that is more of a knock on my male idiot brethern who would never even give a show called Harriet's Law a chance, but would tune in to see a show called Harry's Law. (already branded by the "Dirty Harry" Clint Eastwood movies of the past 30 years).

If you watch Oprah, and don't watch Harry's Law, you are a dope. Cut the Oprah watching time down and make time for Harry's Law. The show even has a Hillary Clinton / Barack Obama angle to it. Harriet has to save a young Barack Obama type from being a three time convicted felon, and takes him under her wing for guidance. Ah, if only...

Now if some start up news show other than Fox or MSNBC could see the wisdom in advertising on Harry's Law and catering to the nice people of the world, the people who voted for Hillary Clinton, we could start a real movement, and real change.

Friday, September 24, 2010

Why is Lady Gaga's Meat Dress considered hip, but Sarah Palin standing in front of a Turkey Farm/Slaughterhouse draws a lot of flank?

Click here to see original photo source and article.


When I wrote about Sarah Palin standing in front of a Turkey Farm/Slaughterhouse in November of 2008, I pointed out that raising awareness of how Turkeys are slaughtered for our Thanksgiving enjoyment is not something Sarah Palin should get flack over.

"But, but, she didn't know what was going on in the background" clamored the liberal and progressive community. The truth is, Sarah Palin did not care what was in the background. In my opinion the reason Palin did not care about what was in the background was because we eat Turkeys, and this is how they are prepped. And yet, people like Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann of MSNBC just ridiculed her to no end over the Turkey interview video.

Amazing the flack that Sarah Palin also took over the budget for her wardrobe during the 2008 presidential race. Maybe Lady Gaga's meat dress was "affordable".

So, what about Lady Gaga? Can someone explain why Lady Gaga gets a free pass from the MTV awards and the liberal media for wearing raw meat all over her body and then accepting an award dressed that way while Sarah Palin is vilified for doing an interview in front of a Turkey farm / slaughterhouse?

The two acts are inseparable, and yet, does the liberal media treat them in an equal light?

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Chicago Dentist runs ad supporting Hillary Clinton for President in 2012.


As I stated in a previous article, Hillary Clinton will need a political news channel that won't go in the tank for the biggest democratic progressive spending candidate, (and well before the democratic presidential race was actually decided), which is what happened in 2008.

However, since most new prime time television programming is aimed at the under 35-40 years of age crowd, it becomes difficult to then run news programming aimed at the over 35-40 crowd. Even the late night stand up comedians cater their comedy to the younger people, and of course, part of their "comedy" includes making fun of Hillary Clinton.

There is a built in television production cycle that is funded by Wall Street and the bankster industry and their desire is to financially indenture younger people because revolving credit card debt from a 20 something is the most profitable type of debt there is.

Fox Television is the perfect model of what is needed for the Hillary Clinton voter base, but Fox is primarily a republican channel and even if Fox ran stories exposing the lying and deceit of the democratic party, it would not be reaching the right demographic base.

Another channel is needed. TV Land is catering to the over 35 crowd, but they are somewhat rudderless and clueless and would need to be "guided" into a nightly news programming show that would simply reveal what MSNBC refuses to reveal.

Click here for CNN Story. The comments section was closed very quickly as many Hillary Clinton supporters began commenting.

Saturday, July 31, 2010

What is really stopping Hillary Clinton from becoming President in 2012 and beyond.

There is an underlying reason why Hillary Clinton cannot become president in our lifetime, and it has to do with television.

One of the things I do to take care of mom is find television programs for her to watch so that she isn't on her feet all day long because she is a compulsive worker.

I gotta tell ya, 98% of the stuff on television is not just crap, it is crap directed towards those under the age of 35. I can't tell you the time I have wasted sifting through over a 100 channels trying to find something for mom to watch.

Thank God for TBS and TV Land.

The criteria used when I channel search is, no skanks (there goes ALL OF REALITY TV) and no guns or violence.

My Chase Bank and Bankster research over the past year has revealed to me that both the banksters and the television media have a very similar agenda. THE BANKSTERS AND NETWORK TELEVISION DON'T CARE MUCH ABOUT ANYBODY OVER THE AGE OF 40 when it comes to television programming because the commercials that sponsor those television programs have a specific agenda when it comes to whom they want buying their products and services.

Chase Bank went as far as to screw over A MILLION of their over 35 years of age customers by changing terms on a low interest, life of the loan credit card agreement already in place, and Chase Bank would not allow the older consumer to opt out of the tyrannical change in terms that raised the monthly payment by an additional 150%, either, which was actually against consumer guidelines.

While some of you may already know the banksters and television don't cater to anybody over the age of 40, do you know why that is?

The reason banksters and television programming don't care much about anybody over the age of 40 is because A, those over 40 generally have enough wealth and wisdom to only buy what they need, and B, those over 40 are less likely to have long term debt than the youth of this country.

Television programming and commercials are designed to promote and glamorize behavior that will create long term, indentured debt for the younger crowd. What Banksters and advertisers desire above all else is someone who will be in debt for a very long time. The younger the debtor is, the more profitable of a target they are because they can be indentured for a much longer period of time.

Until television programming is created on a more truly demographic scale, Hillary Clinton cannot win a presidential election because she is a candidate without a television channel to back her up. MSNBC backed up Barack Obama, even when Hillary Clinton was actually still running and Fox News backed up whomever the Republican candidate was going to be.

If there is any rich person out there who likes Hillary Clinton and believes she would be good for this country as President, get control of the TVLAND channel and create a nightly 1/2 hour news show that would cater to the Hillary Clinton crowd; you know, the nice people who care about others and are responsible to their family, and desire to pay their bills.

Not only could TVLAND channel level the playing field in terms of dismissing the idiotic antics of Keith Olbermann and his friends at MSNBC, it would also give Hillary Clinton supporters a channel as a home base and advertisers to support by SPENDING THEIR MONEY on the companies that advertise on TVLAND.


Tuesday, June 29, 2010

How TV Land could affect the 2012 presidential campaign.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



Wednesday, April 7, 2010

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

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

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

Monday, March 29, 2010

The Hypocrisy, Stupidity, and Inconsistency of Michael Moore during the 2008 democratic presidential nominee race.

Something happened in 2008 that is still being covered up, and covered up big time. I believe it involves Hollywood and the promise of distribution deals to anyone who publicly backed Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton.

As exhibit A, I would like to point out the utterly bizarre behavior of Michael Moore during the 2008 presidential election. You would think a man who built his early career success by portraying his own state as dying and destitute because the unions had been crushed by Roger Smith of General Motors, would fight for his state's right to move their democratic primary date up.

You would further think that since Illinois DID MOVE UP their 2008 primary date by SEVEN WEEKS to help Barack Obama, Moore would be complaining about Illinois getting preferential treatment while his own beloved state of Michigan was being disqualified from the voting process!

When one factors in that Michigan moved their primary date up out of economic desperation, how could Michael Moore not fight for his own state? 


Sequestering the vote tallies from Florida and Michigan until the beginning of February as a form of "punishment" was the logical solution. However, that would have made Barack Obama look foolish for taking his name off of the ballot in Michigan, and we couldn't have that now, could we?  


Instead, Obama and two other democratic presidential candidates purposely waited until the last day to legally withdraw their names from Michigan so they could then criticize Hillary Clinton for staying on the Michigan ballot. While some can claim that a brilliant political ploy, if Hillary Clinton had taken her name off of the Michigan ballot first, Obama would have stayed on and cajoled and ridiculed Hillary Clinton for thinking it was all about her, and that she was so confident of victory that she didn't care about Michigan or its people.


In 2008, it was ok to portray Hillary Clinton as making a foolish political gambit, but never Barack Obama.

When Michael Moore put that one short video clip of Hillary Clinton interacting with Republicans in his documentary as a way of blaming her for Health care not being passed in 1992, I began to wonder what Moore's real agenda was. Healthcare not passing during Bill Clinton's first term had NOTHING TO DO WITH HILLARY CLINTON, and everything to do with how upset republicans were over losing to Bill Clinton after George Bush had had a 91% approval rating in early 1991. For Moore to skip over that reality is very disconcerting.

A documentary film maker who first profits over his own states demise, but then won't fight for his own state regarding the 2008 democratic primary makes me wonder just what other evil lurks in Michael Moore's pysche. Was the Hillary Clinton clip purposely put into Moore's documentary to help set her up as being "polarizing"? Did Moore get any distribution deals for going against his own state and Hillary Clinton?

Speaking of deals, did you know that the VERY FIRST COMMERCIAL that MSNBC ran after Hillary Clinton's suspension speech WAS A COMMERCIAL FOR THE STATE OF MICHIGAN. If Hollywood wants to support one political side versus another, that is their right, but when Hollywood actually sabotages one democratic candidates chances to win the party nomination without full disclosure, in my opinion they have a crossed a line of ethics I cannot accept.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Pardon the Interruption, Sports Announcer Tony Kornheiser suspended for outrageous on air remarks about Hannah Storm.

Current DailyPUMA article, click here.

If I were offered a job producing a radio show, I'd probably only take the job if there was a ten second delay AND a stun gun hooked up to that very special place where my fellow man's leg tingles. I think it's called the "T spot". Chris Matthews of Misery TV (MSNBC) revealed the T spot's existence.

As Tony Kornheiser was makiing his incredibly hostile remarks about fellow radio sports anchor person Hannah Storm, I would have used the stun gun on Kornheiser's legs until both of his legs stopped tingling, at which point I would have handed the stun gun remote control to Hannah Storm for her own one on one interview with Tony Kornheiser. Click here if you want to read the article.

Hannah Storm had to put up with the same kind of BS back during the 1995 World Series from Cleveland Indians star Albert Belle. 15 years later and nothing has changed, Hannah Storm has to hear the same kind of crap, 15 years later! At least Tony Kornheiser got suspended for two weeks. Maybe he should be suspendered when he gets back as well.

John McCain wanted to suspend his 2008 campaign to focus on the bank bailout bill, Barack Obama and MSNBC accused McCain of being afraid to Debate!


I still find this one of the daffiest moments from the 2008 presidential election. There is a huge bankster bailout bill proposal and John McCain is like, time out, we have to focus on this. This is more important than the presidential debate.

Barack Obama and MSNBC's response is to ridicule John McCain incessantly as they accuse McCain of not being able to both prepare for a debate and be involved in the bankster bailout bill at the same time.

I guess Barack Obama had already prepared new speeches to deliver during that debate and something as trivial as a bankster bailout bill was not going to get in the way. Keith Olbermann really layed into McCain over this issue as well.

What was it Hillary Clinton said about Barack Obama having a speech from 2004....?

Barack Obama was in favor of not maximizing the focus on the bankster bailout bill because he had a debate to attend. Does anybody see the irony in that?


Friday, February 5, 2010

Its time for OBOT Friday. Meet the Hillary Clinton Polka Geek Dude syndicated columnist.


If you choose to watch this video, notice how the "audience" never moves, applauds, or does anything affirmative. Even the girl whom he grabs and then dances with never has her face visible to the camera. Could this guy actually be holding these people hostage and using them in his youtube videos? I thought I detected a sigh of relief from the girl when the "dancing perp" lets her sit back down.

Remember the Twilight Zone episode where the kid had all the power and the adults were catering to his every whim and faking being interested? Except in this instance the kid is the adult and the audience his caged prey.

Ironically, this Hillary Polka video points out a very sinister aspect that Hillary Clinton had to deal with from the media before she declared her candidacy. I believe that Hillary Clinton did not want to enter the race first and as the leader for fear of being overexposed too early in the presidential race. (I think this video came out in 2007 and the guy is already not wanting to see anymore of Hillary). It was the media, led by Keith Olbermann and MSNBC, that constantly harped on her to announce her candidacy as early as possible.

How many times in past elections has the initial "leading" democratic candidate actually become the nominee? I seem to recall that democrats who are trailing and then gain momentum as the race develops have more success than those that are just presented as the initial, inevitable nominee. So the media knew what it was doing by trying to overexpose Hillary Clinton early on, and this "gentleman" with the faceless guests seems to confirm the media conspiracy of early overexposure being used against Hillary Clinton, quite effectively.


Best Quality VHS to Digital Transfers

Best Quality VHS to Digital Transfers
Serious Customers Welcome.

Share Gadget

10,000 Dollar Grant! Another Great Find from FABULOUSLY40.com

10,000 Dollar Grant! Another Great Find from FABULOUSLY40.com
Would this be a good way to win funds for Louisa's Law ?