I’m very pissed, so this post isn’t for the family to gather around and read. :) I’m calling for a massive boycott of The Huffington Post. As massive as I can muster, anyway. Spread the word. They have crossed over to the dark side and are “playing” progressives, returning to Arianna’s Newt Gingrich roots. If you think you know who she is, I bet you would be surprised to learn more. Coming soon to this blog.
The folks over at The Huffington Post did it again, it’s a daily thing for them…sometimes multiple times per day. They had a screaming, misleading headline slamming President Obama, which set off a tidal wave of others who believed their bullshit headline and perpetuated it. A Bloomberg story was the catalyst, they paraphrased and pulled words out of context from an interview Obama did for the magazine which implied that he’s fine with the big bonuses on Wall Street. This is the exact opposite of what he said as you will see in the full quote from the interview. I wonder if Bloomberg’s people intentionally mislead in their first story just to set off these “anti-corporatists”, which is so fucking ironic when you look at the massive operation The Huffington Post has with all their side “non-profits” and PAC’s and Arianna’s extravagant lifestyle….spit. Anti corporatist, my ass. The Huffington Post is great at making their screaming headlines disappear once someone calls them out on it, which apparently the White House sent them several messages about. There was probably a different screaming headline earlier that I missed, but look at this one that was there when I clicked over to see what was going on. It’s gone now, of course. And the story is buried now, they did their smear and got out.
Look at the photo, WTF. Do you suppose they have a supply of unflattering photos of him laying around just for these occasions. And the headline, President Obama said the exact same thing he’s been saying for the last 6 months, Bloomberg just spun it to their liking, probably to set off these assholes like Arianna and her editors. More than likely it’s Roy Sekoff who’s writing that shit. If you can see the smaller headlines below, “White House Moves Swiftly to Stem Fallout From Interview”….uh, fallout from your bullshit misleading interpretation of the interview. They start the bullshit and then write a story about how the White House corrects their bullshit and the bullshit parade continues at the piece of shit rag that The Huffington Post has become. Here is the full exchange, I for one, think President Obama nailed it.
QUESTION: Let’s talk bonuses for a minute: Lloyd Blankfein, $9 million; Jamie Dimon, $17 million. Now, granted, those were in stock and less than what some had expected. But are those numbers okay?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, look, first of all, I know both those guys. They’re very savvy businessmen. And I, like most of the American people, don’t begrudge people success or wealth. That’s part of the free market system. I do think that the compensation packages that we’ve seen over the last decade at least have not matched up always to performance. I think that shareholders oftentimes have not had any significant say in the pay structures for CEOs.
QUESTION: Seventeen million dollars is a lot for Main Street to stomach.
THE PRESIDENT: Listen, $17 million is an extraordinary amount of money. Of course, there are some baseball players who are making more than that who don’t get to the World Series either. So I’m shocked by that as well. I guess the main principle we want to promote is a simple principle of “say on pay,” that shareholders have a chance to actually scrutinize what CEOs are getting paid. And I think that serves as a restraint and helps align performance with pay.
The other thing we do think is the more that pay comes in the form of stock that requires proven performance over a certain period of time as opposed to quarterly earnings is a fairer way of measuring CEOs’ success and ultimately will make the performance of American businesses better.
The Huffington Post is on to their next smear job, please, stop clicking over to them. They are the real corporate whores who want your clicks so Arianna can fly around on private jets and be the west coast Sally Quinn.
Watching Morning Joe this morning helped to clarify my understanding of the “problems” that the media is saying President Obama has with his supporters, or more accurately, those who voted for him. Tim Dickinson from Rolling Stone was on talking about his article called “No We Can’t” about how the field operations for the Obama campaign, the grassroots folks haven’t been included in his administration. As if we were all going to follow him to Washington and we’d have his Blackberry number to give him our opinion on things. Most of the impatience with the president and the stories the media has been pushing are based, in my opinion, on complaints from a few who are novices at how things work in Washington. Many are people who never paid attention to politics before Obama came along, so they are naive to the way things work in Washington. Of course the media, who does know, plays along with them to get a story. They rarely point out the practical reality of how things work in Washington and the limited power that the executive branch really has in the process.
To Tim Dickinson’s point about this army of supporters who were going to march on Washington and change things. Well, once Obama was elected, most, if not all of them moved on with their lives, work, play, all those mundane things we all do when there isn’t a presidential election to obsess over. Maybe some thought they would get cabinet positions or have that direct line to the president, but found out that an election does have an end date, it’s called election day. When someone wins a race, they don’t keep running back and crossing the finish line over and over again. The race is over at that point with the next one in 4 years. Seasoned political observers know this and retreat to their easy chairs for a few years until the troops need to be mobilized again. So why have a few of the idealogues who projected all their hopes and dreams on President Obama, unrealistically I might add, gained so much prominence in the media? The answer is that the media loves that kind of story, it sells papers and increases viewers, it’s like Hollywood gossip or a jilted lover story. The health care battle is a prime example of the naiveté of people like Jane Hamsher and Arianna Huffington who seem to relish the contrarian position, motivated by clicks on their websites and donations to their many “non-profits” that they have attached to their money making ventures. Do they really think that if the president had just been more forceful in pushing single payer, universal health care for all, squash the insurance industry-type policies that Ben Nelson, Joe Lieberman, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln etc. would have just fallen in line?
The republicans have been fanning these flames too, they love what’s happening on the left, the infighting, the trashing of Obama for not being more liberal, the unrealistic ideas about how Washington works, they feed the fire with kindling. Joe Scarborough has made a living out of it on his morning show. He loves to bring on Arianna Huffington, Mark Halperin, John Heileman, and anyone else who likes to talk about process and spin things to the right. I also notice how when he does have Eugene Robinson or someone else who might actually deal in reality, he often asks them stupid questions about Tiger Woods or Sarah Palin, or he changes the subject to sports or whatever. He deflects any comments that might actually go against the narrative he is working so hard to promote for the Republican Party. Morning Joe is a well oiled propoganda machine for the Republicans.