What’s worse, someone who stabs you in the back with a smile or someone who gives you warning and says, “Don’t look now but I’m about to stab you in the back!”?

That bastion of consistency and unswerving principle, Arianna  (“I’m a Right Wing Republican-I’m a Progressive Democrat-I’m Neither!”) Huffington, wrote a column at Huffington Post last week which proudly proclaimed that since the GOP has been falling down in it’s role of attacking Obama’s character and campaign, she and HP are taking up that noble cause.

I could summarize her pretzel logic of trying to justify her upcoming campaign against Obama as good being for him but will instead allow the intellectually flexible Ms. Huffington to do so with sections of her own words from that article with some translations from me in parentheses (as I happen to speak Huffingtonese):

As the seemingly endless GOP nomination fight grinds on, it’s becoming clearer who President Obama’s most formidable opponent is likely to be: himself.

(TRANSLATION: “Trust me, this election is not about the economy, jobs, social issues, the War on Women, the Tea Party extremists in the GOP, the 99% or Kochs/Roves/Wall Streets hundreds of millions of SuperPac money that will be spent to destroy Obama’s campaign as has succeeded so well when on behalf of Romney.

Obama’s biggest threat to his re-election, purely coincidentally, is the purist resentment that I and Huffington Post are trying to get the public to focus on. Thank goodness that’s the case, otherwise we might come off as narrow-minded egotists…what a relief!”)

 So for me this election now has two tracks: 1) Obama vs. the GOP nominee; and 2) Obama vs. Obama.

(TRANSLATION: “So for me this election now has one track: 1) It’s all about me not being invited to Obama’s 2008 Inauguration.”)

Of course, many things can happen between now and November, and I want to be clear that I think it’s crucial for the country — and the world — that the president defeat any of his likely opponents.

(TRANSLATION: “Okay, before I attack Obama in the following paragraphs as being dishonest, spineless and a traitor to the people who voted for him in 2008, let me just say that I fully support him. Students, this is how you cover your ass first with a thin veneer of “Hey, I’m on your side!” so you feel free to unload your actual intent of fully attacking someone you pretend to like when you don’t want to be called a hypocrite.)

 …Obama who in a speech will dream of things that never were and ask, “Why not?” and then back at the White House, will look at things the way they are and ask, “Why ruffle too many feathers?”

As David Bromwich wrote after the 2010 midterms, “His eloquence finds its natural key not in explanations but in statements of purpose. Obama wants credit for the highest intentions even when conceding that he lacks the will to fulfill them.”

(TRANSLATION: “As I mentioned above, I support Obama but he is too much of a wimp for me to support. Not only that, I go to all the trouble of building a stable on my estate because he’s supposed to give me a pony and where the hell is it? As for the quote, I like the smell of quotes in the morning that insult Obama. It smells like…victory…for the GOP.”)

 So I guess we weren’t actually the ones we were waiting for. Indeed, the one we’re waiting for apparently won’t even be running until 2016.

(TRANSLATION: “Ain’t I snarky? See, I can have it both ways just because I want to. I can say that I support Obama and also say that he’s not the one who should be representing us as President…in the same article! I’d give myself a kiss me on the lips for that one if I could but until the cloning experiment is complete, the mirror will have to do for now. SMACK!”)

 But then there’s the Obama who gave this explanation about his failure to keep his promise to close Guantanamo: “It’s not for lack of trying. It’s because the politics of it are difficult.”

(TRANSLATION: “If Obama really respected our democracy, he would ignore the separation of powers as laid out in the Constitution and usurp Congress’ powers to make laws. I mean, if he wanted to close Guantanamo, after the Congress passed a law preventing him from doing so, he should have just done it anyway. That’s what George Bush would’ve done.”)

At HuffPost, our plan for 2012 is to vigorously cover both tracks of the election. Which is to say that while we are exhaustively covering the race between President Obama and the Republican nominee, we’re also going to be covering that second track: Obama vs. Obama. And we’ll be covering it in a variety of ways: by comparing the reality of President Obama with the rhetoric of Candidate Obama; by focusing on real underlying problems in the country that are being temporarily masked by a slight improvement in the unemployment numbers; and by using satire.

(TRANSLATION: “At HuffPost, our plan for 2012 is to convince Democratic voters that no matter how bad the GOP candidate is, Obama also sucks. Which is to say, we will cover the actual race between President Obama and the Republican nominee AND we’ll create our own manufactured race between the team of Obama and Hitler vs. Obama and Stalin. Either way, Obama loses, if you get my drift. By attacking President Obama under the excuse that by not delivering everything that he promised in a campaign…as every other President has always done throughout our history…President Obama is unworthy of support, we will address the real underlying problems in the country that are unfortunately getting better in a recovery I’d rather not admit is taking place because it spoils my whole premise.

Oh, and like Rush Limbaugh, we are calling our attacks “satire” so we can escape responsibility for them…you have to admit, it’s funny when you attack the President in a way that could damage his re-election and bring a Right Wing obedient Republican into the White House. If you don’t have a sense of humor or a portion of a $300 million buyout of your company that you don’t want to pay taxes on, that’s your problem.”)

To that effect, today we’re launching a series of videos that will try to call attention to the contradictions of that second track of the election. This first one takes on the idea, often put forth by various members of the Obama camp, that every compromise, capitulation, and seeming surrender to the “worn-out dogmas” of Washington are, in fact, just a brilliant strategy that we don’t yet understand.

(TRANSLATION: “So, in the pursuit of even handed, fair minded journalism, we will create videos that only focus on trying to portray President Obama and his camp always surrendering and never accomplishing anything worthwhile. And don’t forget, it’s just satire!  But we really do want him to be re-elected, you know it’s the truth because I said it somewhere above, don’t remember where but it’s up there somewhere.”)

I don’t know what is worse, Arianna Huffington having the hubris to so blatantly BS the members and readers at Huffington Post about her campaign to attack Obama and injure his re-election or those who actually believe in her ludicrous justifications and anti-Obama campaign?

Just to recap, Arianna Huffington prefaces and justifies Huffington Post’s launching a campaign to attack President Obama for not achieving all of his campaign promises in 2008 and/or not governing as she wanted him to, with the untrue proposition that Obama pretty much has a lock on winning. The plainly suspect facade being presented is that since there is little doubt that Obama’s going to win re-election, attacking him between now and November will have no affect on him…but will simultaneously have a meaningful impact on him.

As the saying goes, if it doesn’t make sense, it’s not true. This self-invalidating logic collapses in on itself because it isn’t genuine.

Anyone who knows anything about politics knows that this year’s election will be close with possibly razor thin majorities turning states to or from Obama. So, we have to consider, are Arianna (I use her first name not out of familiarity but to differentiate between the website and her) and HP so poorly informed about politics that they are unaware how likely it is for this to be a close election and that portraying Obama as a wimp and a failure could impact it?

Or do they know full well what the score is and are intending their attacks to have a negative impact on Obama’s chances for re-election?

The cheap painting over of their announced campaign to attack Obama has the same poisonous lead content as Fox News, which claims, “We report, you decide.” In her article, Arianna claims that the purpose of this campaign is:

…it’s also crucial that we start to focus on the possible outcomes of the second track — that is, which Obama will be reelected.

Now, aside from a number of provably false propositions in this article, can someone out there explain to me how many Americans have expressed in polls that this is a crucial issue and how such a crusade is in itself wholly unrelated to opposing Obama’s re-election? What if we buy into her BS and decide, “I don’t want THAT Obama as President!” What conclusion does she expect to inspire?

And Arianna’s presenting as a given that Obama is duplicitous and that Americans need to be concerned that we may elect Dr. Jekyll but when he takes office again, he could become Mr. Hide-In-Fear, that’s advancing her alleged position that she’s fully supporting his re-election?

I don’t think Arianna Huffington is a fool or an idiot. She conceived of this campaign of attacks on Obama because she knows full well that it could be detrimental to the enthusiasm and support for President Obama’s re-election. She knows that the election is considered to end up being very close and that Obama could win or lose states and electoral votes by very narrow margins. She is far too smart not to know that in the end, this year’s election will not have “Obama vs. Obama” on the ballot, it will likely be “Obama vs. Romney” and a Republican could indeed take over the White House if Democratic votership is depressed from lack of enthusiasm.

People do things for reasons. When they lie and deceive as to the motivation and purpose of their actions, they are often undertaking such actions for self-serving reasons that would reflect poorly on them if the truth was known.

Arianna Huffington throws stones at President Obama from the spectacular glass house she lives in. Perhaps the question should be turned around, which Arianna Huffington is using HP to advance her agenda? Is it:

a. A plagiarist who was sued and paid a six figure settlement to avoid trial?

b. An avowed hard right conservative hired by Newt Gingrich to work for his affiliated think tank, The Center for Effective Compassion and who championed the Gingrich take over of the House of Representatives.

c. The unrelenting, campaigning wife of a Republican House member who sought to defeat Democrat Dianne Feinstein in a CA Senate race.

d. An avowed liberal Democrat who endorsed John Kerry’s campaign for President.

e. A collaborator with Andrew Breitbart to start up a political website.

f. A supporter of candidate Barack Obama for the Presidency in 2008.

g. A constant and continuous critic of Barack Obama and his cabinet since 2009.

h. A business owner who created and protects a system to use unpaid labor to profit off of.

i. A multimillionaire and internet media mogul and one of the top 1% who received a share of a $315 buyout of HP.

j. An avowed independent who is neither a Republican or Democrat and claims she never was.

Isn’t it crucial that we know which Arianna is behind this anti-Obama campaign? Actually, for my money, it’s all of the above which is fully encapsulated in the term, “mercenary opportunist”.

Perhaps it’s her newer multimillionaire status, perhaps it’s the profits HP reaps from stirring Obama resentment at HP, perhaps it’s her gadfly aspect and she needs to turn on whoever she supported once they are the ones in power but in any case, her history has never veered off the path of opportunism. If she has seen a path for greater attention, celebrity, power and money, she has been willing to turn a full 180 politically to follow that path.

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If Arianna Huffington and Huffington Post intend to attack President Obama and his Administration for not being consistent in their campaign and presidency, then the one self-righteously claiming a higher cause for making such attacks should be held to the same standard of consistency.

And I see no case to be made by Ms. Huffington that would support any claim of consistency. In fact, she has exhibited far more extreme reversals on issues and policies than any claim she has made against Obama, even switching to diametrically opposed parties and positions over a brief period of time.

The emoprogs/purists/opportunists who received a lot of attention in the past two years are being left behind and good riddance to them. Progressives and Democrats know what are really the issues in the elections this year and the stakes are very high. It is no longer of interest to debate the small minded, “Why hasn’t Obama been everything we wanted?”. The real and pressing issue at hand is, “Do we reverse all of the progress we’ve made since the dark days of deceit and destruction under George W. Bush and cement the nation’s path on one of plutocracy or do we keep moving forward with a focus on returning jobs, economic fairness and security and hope for the future?”.

There is absolutely nothing anti-Progressive or anti-Democrat about criticizing President Obama, I’ve done so on many occasions over his approach to health care reform, his support of the Patriot Act and a number of other issues. Dissent can be very constructive as can lobbying your President or representatives to do the things you want them to do…especially during election years.

If Arianna was pure in her pursuits, instead of just trying to tear President Obama down, she would be rallying people to lobby President Obama for the things they want accomplished that they feel haven’t been. Instead, my conclusion is that Arianna and HP are in the wrecking ball business, both on Repubs and Dems including Obama…and business is booming. They seek conflict and destruction because the more upset people are, the more time they spend at HP blogging…and the more money HP can charge for advertising exposure.

IMO, this is all about money, one way or another.

There is no cause to suspect any concrete political convictions residing in Arianna Huffington when she has constantly swapped one set of “principles” for another as easily as other people change their socks. What has been the one consistent thread in this inconsistent string of events in Arianna Huffington’s life is personal gain and this latest of contradictions would seem likely have the same motivation behind it.

And Arianna, if you’re reading this, don’t be upset, it’s just satire.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
116 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Kalima
Admin
8 years ago

In June of 2006, a group of researchers discovered a venous species of snake that can change its skin colour, in the jungles of Borneo. It’s known as the poisonous chameleon snake, and suits AH down to the core. She was never a progressive, and she pulled the wool over the eyes of many Progressives, Liberals and Dems, until she began to unravel during the 08′ primaries, praising Sen. Obama because she hated Hillary, and then letting the faux headlines about “Guns and Bibles”, the Rev. Wright fiasco, and the RW hate groupies do their best to install racial tensions on the site. I believe her motto is, “I’ll be whatever you want me to be, as long as I can see the colour of your money.” These people who live without core principles, decency or a shred of integrity while telling the masses how to think or vote, are the worst offenders. At least with some of the others who hurl insults and venom, you know that they are certifiably nuts or actual hard core racists. With AH, you know it’s all about money, power and more money, and her 15 minutes of fame fizzled out long ago, too bad that she doesn’t know it yet.

reubenoff
reubenoff
6 years ago
Reply to  Kalima

bingo.
couldn’t agree with you more…’chameleon’ is the key word.

Dbos
Dbos
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

I think many of us knew her thru and thru and this not a surprise;the question is what does one do to fight it; if one walks away from all the unsuspecting progressive, liberal and just plain good people on HP.

BourneID
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

Good morning aL

i read the entire thread, the majority of comments between you and Murph. Trying to define AH (interesting initials, right – appropriate I would say), is not as difficult as you might think. She is exactly where she intended to be from the moment she stepped into this country. Opportunist, as you describe her, is exactly what I see.

Her marriage to husband Huffington, a congressman, placed her almost immediately in the chambers of power. She’s clever and, I believe, immediately recognized the flaws and weaknesses within the holders of power themselves. When a woman recognizes a man’s weakness, he might as well surrender. She’s good at the game. The one word I haven’t seen to describe her is “ruthless.”

I am going to go out on a limb here, probably generate some hostile responses, but I speak with some deeper “interior” knowledge of her. My heritage is Greek; Greeks are not very nice to each other, vis a vis the mess you see in the country now. AH could not care less about that. There is an emotional dead zone that somehow moves through the culture. This is my observation, based on experience. The Greeks cannot move past their golden age. I would think that in 25 years, they could claim some contribution more important thatn Greek yogurt. What have they done? Nothing.

Back to Arianna. Her marriage was one of conveninence and ambtion. She met and knows the big guns. It was also a conveninence for Mr. H who came out just before the divorce. I would ot be at all surprised if there isn’t some sort of prenup that has nothing to do with who gets what at the end of the union.

Somethng evident that I view is body language. Women, because we all share a certain “bitch gene” so we cnn spot sighs right away. AH is as comfortable talking to Joe Scarborough about the launch of HuffPost Women as she is talking to anyone on Fox. I agree with you AL, she talks out of both sides of her mouth. She’s ambitious, ruthless, cunning, and unfortunately influential.

I’ve been on this site for just about a week, thatnks to the good advice and insight of Murph, whose judgement i trust.I’ve seen more constructive analytical and critical thinking on these pages than i’ve seen in all broadcast journalism for the past 4 years. Don’t kid yourselves. Part of her problem could very well be a tiny little smidge of racism. Greeks have alwa;ys seen themselves as the blond-haired, blue=eyed, fabulous bodies seen only in statues. I haven’t known one in my life who look that way. They cannot stand that their now dark hair and darker skin is the result of a few well-placed gneetic contributions from the Moors.

Loved participating in VP last night; it moved so rapidly but I think I’ll learn. BTW, as you were reporting sign-ins, a very narrow band wss scrolling that someone was apparently searching or surfing the POV sight via Google. How can you tell that?

Have a great weekend, AL. And you too Murph. Check email sometime this evening or tomorrow. There’s a message/discussion there. And, yes, I know you use it only rarely, but I don’t do anything only rarely.

Bourne

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  BourneID

Bourne….outstanding contribution. Just the kind of thinking and discourse this site values.

I have to say that you, Ad Lib and a bunch of other folks here really level a lot of criticism at Arianna H. I truly do not know if she deserves it. I think you and others here have made a good case in support of your critique. I can’t really argue it. Still I value HP as an important place for conversation and some limited debate for a whole lot of people. The critiques you and others have leveled at the HP limitations are very real and I have made the same observations.

Your comments on the Greek ethos, the modern Greek ethos, is EXTREMELY important. It is cutting edge and certainly provocative. I know it is not PC to characterize people by ethnic groups, but my knowledge of history as common experience that shapes people tends to support your thinking that there is a Greek way of thinking.

I also find your discussion of the “feminine” as it relates to the Greek identity completely intriguing. I do not know if I accept it, but it raise my curiosity and I will consider it carefully.

I now understand the point you were reaching for at HP. And it is a very good one.

That discussion by you is exactly the kind of writing which HP does not permit and the length of that discussion is certainly outside the standards.

I hope to read a LOT more of this kind of thinking from you. The structure here seems to me to be right up your alley.

When will you be penning your first article? I think you have something significant to say.

KillgoreTrout
8 years ago
Reply to  MurphTheSurf3

Murph, I just can’t abide all the censorship and manipulation of debate that goes on at HP.
I got so fed up with taking the time to write a well thought out comment, only to see it disappear into the ether, and have no idea why it got scrubbed. This happened to me time and time again. I eventually realized that I was grossly wasting my time and energy.
Thank goodness someone turned me on to the Planet.

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  KillgoreTrout

I have the same experience but I find the interaction with so many…some of whom I think I influence to make my time use valuable. At the same time I have made some headway on some of the issues which have been discussed here.

BourneID
8 years ago
Reply to  KillgoreTrout

Hi KT

Just saw your reply to Murph re HP. I share your frustration but I also have made some interesting worth-keeping friends that I learn a lot from. One is an amazing man that has also written to me with the same complaint you just talked about. I actually met him while reading a long exchange between and Murph. His screen name is Outlandish. Do you know him? We talked now and then and in October he sent me a post asking about my last name. He was on Cyprus and sid he had some friends whose last name is the same as mine. I gave him some info about my dad and he wrote back saying we apparently weren’t related but one of the men told him a cousin from Cyprus was a billionaire living in London who had been one of the people killed in the hotel massacre in India. We started talking occasionally; he told me he was studying languages becuse he needed them in his work. I asked what he did and he sent a really interesting reply: He is an ophthalmologist, retired at age 40 because he designed and patented some small unit that changed laser surgery, so his name is on every surgical unit used. He opened eye clinics all over the US, Australia, Europe; he owns a farm in Australia, another in some other country (can’t remember); Cyprus where he spends 4 months in winter, and lives in Denmark where he bought a 400 year old home. He was leaving Cyprus in April for Kenya whre his Doctors Without Borders team will work. He works 3 to 5 months a year with DWB. I got a post from him 10 or 12 days ago; his team was called to the Sudan (southern) to replace another team that contracted some kind virus, that they haven’t been able to diagnose yet. He might have contracted the same virus and was confined to his bed and was posting a few things. What an incredible man.

He told me that he had sent HP a “beautiful description of the horrible conditions in the Sudan” written by another doctor. He said the post was reviewed and all the information scrubbed so that it simply said that he met George Clooney. He asked how a post that describes the fear and horrific lives of these people could be reduced to nothing more than blather. He told earlier that some of his things were removed; I sent a link of that to Murph and he got in touch with Outlandish.

This is long, KT, but his story is worth telling. Murph suggested we invite him to join the planet. I think that’s a great idea.

Bourne (Pat)

BourneID
8 years ago
Reply to  MurphTheSurf3

Your last comment had no reply point so I used another to tell you I’d read the ink you sent re AH charities.

Ihave completed reading AH post re charitable contributions and noted that it was posted in July 2009, months after President Obama was inaugurated and perhaps a year or two prior to AOL/HP union. Things change.

Within the article she refers to a person named Traubman” – who appparently gave several separate gifts to several charities with only one requirement: each had to bare his name. AH pointed out that it might have been more charitable had he given 1000 families %10K each than to want to see his name on so many things. Again, times change.

You said AH paid for buses to send 10,000 to Jon Stewart’s rally in DC. Jon is a pretty power influence in his own right; the rally was well-intended a somewhat entertaining. You stated that the only requirement for the bus ride was that each person wear a Huffington Post bracelet. And that is the rub. Charity, as she defined it in 2009 and as I was taught and still do define it, is not broadcast and comes with no attachments. if one is unimpressed with AH, as I am, one sees that as an opportunity for 10,000 potential new HP members and/or advertisers and/or exhibitions of the Huffington name. Maybe this wasn’t the case at all, but she called out a multimillionaire 2.8 years ago for what it seems she herself did.

MTS, I do not think you should change your views or stop supporting what you believe about her. You’re a careful thinker and on a conversational level you are much less persistent in presenitng your views as you are when you write one of the articles specific to a political issue of the tiem. There is no conflict here, we simply don’t agree on her.

Do you know Michael Wood (British historian who periodically produces excellent presentations on various ancient locations). One of my favorites is his program on Greece. They are wonderful to watch because he is wonderful to watch. He’s excite to show things, such as the agora, and to comment that it’s still open after 2000 years. He loves taking the viewer with him to the Acroolis to sugggest where Socrates might have been sitting when he taught his students. He climbed over a short fence on one journey and showed a rock with an inscription in Classical Greek; translation: “Never lend a Greek money; tomorrow, he will remember it as a gift.” Now that is something that has not changed.

I prefer that any communication we might have in the future be done here, not on HP. I’m selective with whom I share my thoughts and you have 4300 people I haven’t met yet.

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  BourneID

Bourne PS..you replied as we do here when the thread runs out…

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  BourneID

Yeah…we need to agree to disagree regarding what I regard as the open question of AH motivation and behavior. I am not convinced in either direction now. As to HP, the interaction with so many others, some of whom I influence and some of whom influence me is a value. HP and Planet are two very different experiences. Room for both in my world.

BourneID
8 years ago
Reply to  MurphTheSurf3

Responding to your latest comment. Changing minds is not easy, so I understand the conflict. Any discussion deserves time to study all vantage points. I’m on my way out so won’t get back to this until early evening.

I will read the links you offer.

Bourne

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  BourneID

Just some of the info going into my confused perspective.

BourneID
8 years ago
Reply to  MurphTheSurf3

Thank you; your generous approval is appreciated. I haven’t read much about your views on AH. I’m sure you give it the same careful consideration you apply to all of your views. From what I have read, I note that you place high value on the opportunity HuffPost offers thousands of us to communicate with one another every day. It is an imp0rtant value for those of us who use it, but I give it secondary importance in view of what I still perceive as one whose power and money give her voice that may not serve the interests of this country. I compare her unfavorably with Murdock. Who owns the press in America owns America – naive? Perhaps. She has joined the ranks of the purchasers.

You and I have had a number of conversations about Citizens United. As a consequence, we have also associated CU with the Koch brothers, whose unlimited resources we’ve seen as the power to purchase America. Yet, there is the counter argument that, while we hate one component of the brothers’ power, we cannot dismiss their generous contributions to art, science, and education. They are generous sponsors of PBS and others. We remain in a constant state of weighing good against evil, aren’t we?

I have read nothing abour charities she supports or if she contributes to the humanities. I would have expected by now, in view of the pathetic state the country of her birth finds itself in, she might offer something, some sympathy, some regret for the people. It speaks to that same cold detachment I refer to in my piece. HP is a high end publication for high end people with high end Sections. Maybe I’d change my mind if she’d add one on Appalachia

Give me something to balance my view against.

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  BourneID

My opinion of AH is all up in the air in no small part thanks to the very critical perspective people who I very much respect- you among them.

On the other hand I look at HP and at Arianna’s shift from a public association with the GOP to a public association with liberal/progressive issues/causes as the counter-argument.

For example Huffington offered to provide as many buses as necessary to transport those who want to go to Jon Stewart’s Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear on October 30, 2010, from the Huffington Post Headquarters in New York City. Ultimately, she paid for 150 buses to ferry almost 10,000 people from Citi Field in Queens to RFK Stadium in DC. The only self-promotion on her part was ‘Huffington Post’ written on the bracelets needed to get on the bus.

She is very active in Movement of Spiritual Inner Awareness which has attracted a number of those from the left.

Here is something she wrote re. charities and giving to them: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/charity-may-begin-at-home_b_115082.html

I have seen her name associated with a number of causes and fundraising efforts.

But, your insights re. the Koch brothers is worthy of notice. Motives can be very mixed.

So, my personal jury is still out.

SallyT
8 years ago

AdLib, I don’t go on there anymore, but, I’ll be damn if I don’t click on something and it takes me there! I guess I need to read the fine print better. I rely on you to tell me what I should be missing over there. Adrienne lost me when she made her millions on other people’s writings.

foodchain
foodchain
8 years ago

Ariana/AOL only has to plan on where the clicks will be and then develop a headline. I’d bet that there’s a clicks/inch of headline and that this is designed to promote clicks that serve important advertisers. It’s all business. News is $$ and is desperately looking for it’s future. The way of good journalism boar it’s cost by producing news that informed. Now it’s “news” to provoke and create ratings/clicks.

bito
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

AdLib, if you remember in one of our many posts on HP and/or Ariana, there was a Brietbart “leaked memo” on making a story “your story” when those two were together in the beginning. They even gave that “style” of “reporting a name. From the very beginning HP was looking for the ‘New Squirrel’ attepting to make it their story to generate more clicks. Did it get worse over time and make it more noticeable? Yep, they have perfected it but they have been always doing it IMHO.

KillgoreTrout
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

And the sheer volume of advertising has increased to an absurd level. I signed up with HP back in 2007 and the advertising was far less. Got to pitch those products and services, that’s where the gold is!

KillgoreTrout
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

They were using google ad sense, I don’t know if they still do, but it was pretty ridiculous at times. On an article about the Virginia Tech shootings, they displayed a prominent ad for guns. I nearly spit my coffee all over my screen and keyboard!

Caru
8 years ago

Huffington is a fair-weather fiend. If the US once again gets swept up in Obama fever and the President is re-elected, expect her tone to change to match. Then, watch her slowly revert to her usual diet of bile.

Nirek
8 years ago

All I know is that HP has steered hard right sense AOL bought her out.
I see more trolls every day on HP.

foodchain
foodchain
8 years ago

Ad, Merciless mercenary. She does everything a far right conservative would do: manipulation of (her) base through any means in order to gain recognized power, control and financial reward. I think her support of Obama was due to his inevitability but the Obama camp probably snubbed her. She would have loved to float along historic legislation with an historic president. (I do believe she is a long time conservative looking for glory but will follow glory anywhere)

Since that didn’t happen, this trumped up “helpful hints” concept is her special brand of GOP obfuscation. This dual track is designed, IMHO, to rile up the far left again so that they lose their incentive to vote for Obama. This is a strategic win win for her. Excite the GOP base, disenchant the left, get more clicks, act the innocent facilitator.

She is clever and has leveraged herself very well. I have, however, a ten foot pole that I keep handy.

Khirad
8 years ago

I only wonder if they have “aggregated” this yet.

Obama’s Gay Past Being Hidden By Killing Ex-Lovers
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1635/646/Obamas_Gay_Past_Being_Hidden_By_Killing_Ex-Lovers.html

escribacat
8 years ago
Reply to  Khirad

😆 Some Klown out there will believe it.

bito
8 years ago
Reply to  escribacat

My problem is that when completely bogus stories like this one one the new CBO report are reported on “serious” tv and Santorum declares it in a speech the same day that the cost of ACA has been doubled–it’s the same fiction as ““Obama is the Father of My Extraterrestrial Baby!”, yet it will be believed by millions of GOPers even though it’s a complete lie and Fox/Santouium aren’t challenged on such a complete lie.

Obamacare Haters Angered by Facts
By Jonathan Chait

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/03/obamacare-haters-angered-by-facts.html

funksands
8 years ago

As a level 3 moderator and close confidant of her majesty, you couldn’t be more wrong about her!

The glistening drops of poison that drip from her delicate fangs nourish and sustain us all in these dark times!

“If it bleeds, it leads” has been a respected keystone of fine journalism for at least 1000 years!

Shame on you!!

choicelady
8 years ago

Snark – why to GOP men get to be tubby and GOP women look like scarecrows? Cannot figure that out.

escribacat
8 years ago
Reply to  choicelady

Because they often have that most cynical of relationships — the woman wants the man for his money and power and the man wants the woman for arm candy. When arm candy ages, it turns into scarecrow woman!

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago

And here is what I just left at HP in response to an article on Obama and Liberalism…..http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/19/how-obama-tried-to-sell-o_n_1365750.html#comments
===================================================

Let’s get this straight….

The Idealistic Obama Won Election

The Realistic Obama is Governing

Had Ideal Obama insisted on governing…insisted on getting the terms the way he wanted them, the language the way he wanted them, the sign on the way he wanted it…….we would be facing Progressive Armageddon.

There would have be NO Auto Manufacturing Loans, Recovery Act, Wall Street Oversight of any Kind. Repeal of DADT, Equal Pay for Women Act, Affordable Care Act, Expanded Mileage Requirements, Extended Unemployment Benefits.

THE PARTY OF NO, NOT, NEVER, NUH-UH…..would have won every battle…..

The overarching point here is that Obama’s idealism, presented so eloquently by him as a candidate in speeches before huge crowds where his soaring rhetoric actually made his centrism loftier has not been matched by Obama the realist who decided that he would rather be a governing president than a martyred president.

Who is Barack Obama….?

He is more Bill Clinton than Jimmy Carter.

Clinton got reelected and survived an effort to impeach him.

Carter did not get reelected and he left virtually nothing in his wake as President.

Obama will get reelected.He will go into his 2nd term with the kind of strength that will enable him to survive the storms of that term and to leave behind a solid legacy…..like Clinton.

I believe that his second term, will be more progressive, if he also gets a Dem House and a more Dem Senate. If he doesn’t…. the second term will be about holding onto ground already taken and whittling away at the GOP fortress of selfishness. He will adapt to either condition.

You see, it’s not that Obama was engaging in the kind of fraudulent fakeout that typifies the Romney candidacy. He is the centrist liberal progressive he said he was. Many, l read more into his books and his speeches than he said. Many projected their own political philosophy onto him.A quick review of the Blueprint for America tells you this.

But, from the moment he took office he has faced a wall of pollicy, operational and personal opposition the likes of which no one has experienced since FDR. He was forced to adapt. And he did. And as a result he has a solid record of accomplishment.

I may be foolish but I will take that over brokenhearted idealism.

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

Ad Lib…if you have a moment pop over to my thread at HP and see how the trolls came calling and how I responded. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/murphthesurf3/how-obama-tried-to-sell-o_n_1365750_142284662.html

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

Do you put on a full body hazmat outfit when you surf huffingland?

I have not looked at the post since I submitted it. Going there now.

foodchain
foodchain
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

I hear you AdLIb. It’s tempting to upset the HP troll population, get them all in an uproar, but outside of throwing a punch, there is no satisfaction as there is no one there to inform or influence. It’s somewhere between childish taunting and mud wrestling. HP does have some good people who have built a support base for themselves.

But HP has made a new haven for the righties that makes it clear to me: it’s all about commenters being the fodder to keep their machine running. But don’t get me started on how we are fodder for our major industries.

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

Make sure your shots are up to date.

choicelady
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

Child abuse!

choicelady
8 years ago
Reply to  choicelady

LOL!!! Well, then, OK – so long as she thinks mud is just mud and doesn’t know the deep secret of politics as mud. She deserves to keep her happy outlook on life a few more years! And if turning the hose on you makes her laugh, then good for you. Goooood Dad!

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago

HERE IS WHAT I WROTE AT HP THE FIRST DAY THE ARTICLE APPEARED (AND REPRINTED TWICE SINCE THE ORIGINAL POST) IN REGARD TO THE POST IN QUESTION. IT HAS POSTED EACH TIME
____________________________________________

I posted the following on March 15….

I am posting it again (for the third time) to be sure that it gets read by enough people to spread the word.

Idealistic Obama Won Election

Realistic Obama Governs

Had Ideal Obama insisted on governing….we would be facing Progressive Armageddon. No Auto Bailout. No Recovery Act. No Wall Street Oversight of any Kind. No Repeal of DADT. No Equal Pay for Women Act. No Affordable Care Act. No Expanded Mileage Requirements. No……

Arianna’s overarching point here is that Obama’s idealism, presented so eloquently by him as a candidate has not been matched by Obama the realist a governing president.

I agree.

But, thankfully, Obama does not have Ms. Huffington for a principal adviser.

He is more Bill Clinton than Jimmy Carter.

Clinton got reelected.

Carter did not.

Obama will get reelected.

I believe that his second term, will be more progressive, if he also gets a Dem House and a more Dem Senate. If he doesn’t the second term will be about holding onto ground already taken and whittling away at the GOP fortress of selfishness.

You see, Arianna, it’s not that Obama was engaging in the kind of fraudulent fakeout that typifies the Romney candidacy. He is the centrist liberal progressive he said he was. Many, like you read more into his books and his speeches than he said. A quick review of the Blueprint for America tells you this.

But, from the moment he took office he has faced a wall of opposition the likes of which no one has experienced since FDR. He was forced to adapt. And he did. And as a result he has a solid record of accomplishment. I will take that over brokenhearted idealism.

kalie
kalie
8 years ago
Reply to  MurphTheSurf3

I first saw Obama when local organizations were trying to get him elected to the Senate. We gave away free hot dogs to folks at an outdoor venue, to get people to come hear him speak. He was very impressive, and I have been a fan ever since. Even seeing him speak at a Chamber of Commerce meeting, everyone was impressed with him, but many would never vote for him. Not from that group.

I read his first book and knew that when he got in office, he would be a progressive but he was not a far left liberal, which appealed to me, because I am not either.

I agree that Obama didn’t know the opposition and racism and hate he would face when he got in office. Who would have?

Regardless, now that we know who wants to play and who doesn’t, I think Obama is ripe for a second term. He has the training years behind him and i think the best is yet to come.

foodchain
foodchain
8 years ago
Reply to  kalie

Kalie, sorry to have missed this conversation. You sound like a Chicago person? I’ve been in the area for years (and years). Welcome!! What a great experience to have been involved at the early stages of Obama’s political rise.

The 2008 campaign revealed just how alive racism is: McCain’s loss in SC due to “illegitimate black daughter”; the huge black vote turnout in the primaries; Hillary’s dark man creeping into a little blond girl’s bedroom in the middle of the night; the endurance they showed standing hours in line to vote for Obama.

I understood the division that racism has created when I saw how very deeply and profoundly affected the black community was by his election. They truly had a well of experience/pain that the rest of us couldn’t touch in all. We had exhilaration; what they felt was that and much more.

kalie
kalie
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

Ad Lib:

You know, i had no idea how racist we are, as a country, until Obama became POTUS. I am still disappointed. We live in our own little communities, and day in and day out, we don’t have to encounter what black people do. It makes me sick when people say they want “anyone but Obama” to be president. He is not the devil. He wants more for the people of the US than any of the other candidates. But yes, he is not the color of their choice. But what have the other candidates promised? Umm hell if you ask me. Taking away rights, regulations, austerity that doesnt work in Europe…. Yes wont that be grand? Anyone but Obama. Right?

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  kalie

Hey kalie…..have we met before? I think not. Been on the Planet for long? I am still relatively new here.

Well….we are on the same page. I came to Obama’s cause slowly…I was told by friends that he was the real deal. I watched, read and discussed. I then went to two events; one with him and one with Michelle.

I moved into his camp and have not looked back.

Thanks for sharing your experience.

kalie
kalie
8 years ago
Reply to  MurphTheSurf3

Murph:
Dont know if we have met, but I have been on Huffpo for about 4 years and at Planet Pov occasionally since it started. Yes I think we have spoken before. Probably the last time i logged in was during a debate. I was looking for some intellectual conversation/comments and wasn’t disappointed!! It was fun.

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  kalie

Kalie…please come by more often…..

kalie
kalie
8 years ago
Reply to  MurphTheSurf3

You betcha!

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

I do not read Arianna the way you do. I do not know if she is the person you believe her to be, but I have learned to value your point of view. What I do know is that I believe she is often wrong about Obama and that her website reflects this skew too often for my liking. So I critique every time. So far nothing has been censored.

To respond to your points:

Who has been held to a high standard- the expectation that their promises would be embodied in their presidencies? I can name a few: Hoover (failed), FDR (succeeded), Ike (succeeded), JFK-LBJ (failed), Reagain (succeeded for his followers, failed for the rest of us), Clinton (succeeded), Bush (failed), and Obama. NOW, WHO HAS BEEN HELD TO SOOOOOO HIGH A STANDARD….Obama and he gets it from both sides.

Your second point is one I wholeheartedly agree with.

Your third point is a powerful one and I admit that your and Kalima’s exposition on this subject has left me wondering. Is she a born again progressive who turned her back on conservative principles but who has become a progressive zealot in the process and sees herself holding him accountable or is she a trojan horse? I do not know. Depending on the day, I could offer evidence either way. There is a sort of fugue personality at work in all of this.

Your fourth point is at the heart of my objection to posts like the one she wrote and the one to which I just responded at HP written by New York Magazine (which seems to whine a lot about Obama just not being good enough).

Of course, she would likely saying she is no longer taking sides, being neither left or right, but I don’t buy that for a second.

choicelady
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

I have to disagree. Millard Fillmore fulfilled them all. He just didn’t have many, and they were totally without substance. THAT is how you fulfill your campaign promises – make ’em out of cotton candy and voila – you can get them done just fine.

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

AdLib…in response to your last comment. I think you are pretty much on target in all of this. As I said before my perspective on Arianna has been informed by you, Kalima, KilgoreTrout, SueinCa et. al. and I am much less certain in my thinking regarding her.

Again, is she a trojan GOPer? much of the content on the Post certainly does not built that case

is she a new born Progressive Zealot demanding unremitting fervor from one and all?

is she really trying to walk the balance beam?

is she all about generating hits on the site which generate dollars?

is she an unrequited “fan” who sees herself as being slighted by the man she supported and he has not responded in kind?

I really do not know, but I found her blog damned irritating and I went after it. I will continue to do this every time.

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

I was not clear. I was referring to a general expectation that the president would work to honor their promises and for which there was an expectation that this was a reasonable expectation. More complex than your question. Should have spelled it out more.

Let me reframe this. Nixon was widely regarded as a snake, Carter as a flake, Ford as a fool, Bush as a duplicitous cynic….thus low expectations in regard to credibility. The ones I list were those whose campaigns had the feel of crusades and whose platforms were raised up by a nobility that comes with that. People expected greatness from Ike, from JFK-LBJ, from Reagan etc. and depending on their political philosophy, their study of the period and their personal experience with the government they made their judgements.

I will go looking. But a fast check gets me more of the same kind of endorsements we see in her post….Many “yes, buts” nothing full throated.

escribacat
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

Adlib, Has she actually said she is supporting Obama’s re-election? I’m very surprised about that.

escribacat
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

Amazing. It’s a Sarah Palin-like lack of concern for making sense. But she’s not stupid like Palin, so I really don’t get why she would say that when it’s so obviously not true.

KillgoreTrout
8 years ago
Reply to  MurphTheSurf3

Well said Murph. If the emo-progs had actually paid attention to what Obama the candidate was saying, they would have no reason to feel “disappointed or betrayed.” Instead, they took all the hope rhetoric way beyond the meaning Obama gave it.

I thought then, that hope is a hollow emotion, and still do to some extent, but the thing about hope is that it gives a lovely light. Something sorely needed beyond the dark days of bush/cheney.

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  KillgoreTrout

I believe they projected their political philosophies on to him….common when a figure like Obama is hailed as a messianic figure who can do it all. This captures my thoughts on hope:

“More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not disappoint us, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.”
― Saint Paul

Paul’s words are powerful political philosophy and theology.

KillgoreTrout
8 years ago
Reply to  MurphTheSurf3

Big time projection going on then. I guess that’s easier for some, than to admit a mistake.

Saint Paul’s words are eloquent and do contain some truth in them, but I must disagree. I am inclined toward the Buddhist tenets regarding “suffering,” and how we should work to end it, at least in our own lives. The Buddhists also say and I paraphrase here, that “one should take joyful participation in the suffering of the world.” So I guess in a way, St. Paul is not too far away from the Buddhists.

MurphTheSurf3
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  KillgoreTrout

In Buddhist philosophy/theology…suffering arises from want….want arises from desire…therefore to end suffering end desire….thus the Buddhist value self-emptying….a very Eastern approach….Paul arises out of Greco-Roman thinking and is, as a result, Western.

Still, I agree, when it comes down to it, Paul and Buddha are not so far apart as is often the case with the wise.

KillgoreTrout
8 years ago
Reply to  MurphTheSurf3

Good point about the difference between Western thought and Eastern thought. It really is the subject/object split in thought. Eastern thought is more subjective, where Western thought is more objective. Our science is nearly all objective. Westerners, for the most part see a difference between the object and the observer. Eastern thought basically sees the object and observer as being one and the same.

KillgoreTrout
8 years ago

Isn’t that Barbra Walters standing next to Callista? Trying to look all incognito?

Kalima
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  KillgoreTrout

KT you are correct. I’ve just enlarged the photo on my iPad, then compared her ears and the way she stands with another photo, it’s BW alright. Nice catch.

KillgoreTrout
8 years ago
Reply to  Kalima

Yeah, that’s her. I’m usually pretty good when it comes to face recognition.

choicelady
8 years ago
Reply to  KillgoreTrout

I don’t think so – the mouth is too wide. And what’s up with the large white paw on her left hand? Is that a cast? Anyway, these are pretty emaciated and hard lookin’ women. I once sat next to Jane Fonda and did not recognize her because she had on a long wig and was scrawny as hell. I figured her for a Beverly Hills divorcee looking to score and pretending at 60 to look 20. Pitiful. My dining companion recognized her voice, and then I realized how AWFUL Jane looked even if she’d NOT had on the wig.

It has never been my goal in life to look as if all the juice dried up.

KillgoreTrout
8 years ago
Reply to  choicelady

Well, Jane is one of the 60s crowd that lived in the fast lane for a number of years, so I’m sure that’s had an adverse affect. I like Jamie Lee Curtiss’ philosophy on aging. She does it naturally, with no cosmetic surgery and very little make up and no hair dye and I think she looks great. Healthy.

GirlOutWest
GirlOutWest
8 years ago

I rarely read her articles because I don’t trust her even a teeny tiny bit. There has been the rare occasion when the title will interest me but they are few and far between.

I can not imagine why ANY woman would want to dissuade voters from voting for the only one that has OUR interests at heart, President Obama. Arriana Huffington is in it for the money and the glory. I don’t think the nation’s well being is of much concern for her or AOL.

escribacat
8 years ago
Reply to  GirlOutWest

Agreed. They’ve learned that outrage-generating articles result in the most clicks and that’s the bottom line.

GirlOutWest
GirlOutWest
8 years ago
Reply to  escribacat

I hate being used but I do like HP and a lot of the good guys that post there. I’ve been shocked by the animosity some of the posters there feel for the President and all of us “commies”.

Huffington Post got big time by pushing the buttons on both sides but I really hate it when they do a hit piece on the President. I feel as though he’s done a pretty good job considering the situation.

When I first saw that photo of AH with the vacationing Gingrichs’ it was my first clue to her. Her loyalty lies in a bank vault.

GirlOutWest
GirlOutWest
8 years ago
Reply to  AdLib

Yep, AH wants to have it both ways and as much as I wish I didn’t I’m like a Carp biting at her tidbits on the water.

Sometimes I find it fun to be snarky and argumentative with the righties that comment. I know it’s bad but I’m nice to everyone in my real life so I find it theraputic occasionally. Kind of addictive.

kalie
kalie
8 years ago