Huffington Post: Dead To Me

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

Their anti-Obama slant is present in every article, and it's really pissing me off.

For example. Here's the headline from their Politics frontpage:

Dawn Johnson Nomination sent back to White House for "Reconsideration"

The implication from this headline? SWEET JESUS!!! THE SENATE IS REJECTING OBAMA'S NOMINEES! SKY FALLING - FILM AT 11:00!!

And now, the headline from the actual article it was linked to:

Senate Confirms Several Obama Nominees

If passing health-care reform was the Senate's Christmas present to President Obama, then the confirmation of more than 30 of his nominees might as well serve as stocking stuffers or a year-end treat.

The Senate confirmed the nominees after voting on health-care reform and a raise in the debt ceiling.

The reason for the six being returned to the White House (which may decide to renominate them) is that they ran into opposition. In the case of Dawn Johnson, she's the former Legal Director for NARAL, so you can probably imagine who's objecting to her.

My larger point is that ever since the Inauguration, it seems that Huffington Post has been praying for the Obama Administration to go off the rails, and they'll take any chance they can get to slap a negative headline on what is, upon further review, a neutral article. They seem to be going out of their way to cast this administration in the worst possible light on every issue.

Inquiring Minds want to know what Arianna's agenda is...

[Armstead]

1. Her agenda is pretrty clear -- She spells it out in columns, books and on TV

No hidden agenda....Just one you don't happen to agree with.

[NJmaverick]

36. I would agree her agenda is not really hidden

it shreds her credibility as a journalist, but it certainly isn't hidden.

[BeFree]

2. In the old days...

...they called it yellow journalism.

Anything to sell ad space nowadays.

[WeDidIt]

5. For some on the left, they will ALWAYS "fight the man"

They don't give a fuck who "the man" is.

Hell, if Kucinich was president, they'd still bitch and moan and call Kucinich a sell-out.

[grytpype]

7. Yep.

There's a faction on the left that likes to cry and scream and can't hack actually governing.

And they are sounding off loud and clear right now.

[BeFree]

12. Let freedom ring!!

What, you think they should STFU?

[rudy23]

15. Of course they do, they're DLC!

They have nothing in common with the Democratic Platform, nothing.

[grytpype]

16. Right on!

Groovy!

Acid, Amnesty, and Abortion!

[Armstead]

11. Unfortunately "the man" hasn't gone away --It just keeps getting more powerful

"The man" being the systemic undermining of the principles of democracy by powerful corporate special interests and the perversion of truly competitive free enterprise capitalism into Monopolistic Crony Capitalism over the last 30 years.

Anytome Obama chooses to take on that version of "the man," most progressives will be cheering him on.

But so far he hasn't warranted much cheering.

[WeDidIt]

14. Thank youy Armstead

You have adequately proven my point.

[Armstead]

19. And how do you disagree?

[boppers]

75. Heh. Heard of the East India Company?

"30 years" is giggle-worthy, as it's merely the latest meta-incarnation of complaining about some vague, external, inhuman (or less human) force, without which life would be much better.... and it's a very consistent thread in history.

Corporations, Welfare Queens, Jews, Blacks, Spice Traders, Irish, Polish, Italian, Mason, Mormon, Mafia, Africans, Colonialists, Communists, Capitalists, Savages, Natives, Catholics, Protestants...

"If only we could free ourselves from the shackles of (insert fashionable group here), things would be so much better!"

30 years indeed, it's the exact same vapid argument that we've had for pretty much all of recorded history...

Almost as if we were a bunch of stupid primates, hard wired for some tribal instinct to try and wrest "control" away from whoever was perceived as currently leading the group of stupid primates. Even if that control didn't actually exist.

[tridim]

3. And if that doesn't bother you, the site is also dog-slow.

That's the main reason I never visit the site.

Doesn't matter how fast my connection is, the pages still take 30 seconds to load. Nasty stuff.

[RebelOne]

48. And I thought it was my computer that was slow.

That is why I rarely visit Huffington Post because it takes forever to load.

[WeDidIt]

4. I've even given up on Act Blue

Used to donate regularly, but since Hamsher used Act Blue to try and get donations to kill HCR, I'll never donate to any Act Blue fund raiser again.

[rudy23]

20. Why would a person with a Rahm avatar have ever donated to Act Blue?

Aren't they on opposite sides of the fence?

[WeDidIt]

27. You really have no clue, do you?

Just not a fucking clue at all.

[grytpype]

6. Huffington is an opportunist. She was a con, then she switched to be anti-Bush now she's anti-Obama

[rebel with a cause]

29. exactly.......

Very vocal against anything liberal and made fun of the left, then a big liberal. Anti bush pro Obama, now anti Obama and pro ultra left. Huffington is for what ever is in power at the time because that gets her more attention and on more talk shows. $$$$$$$

[fedupinBushcountry]

63. Bingo!!!

[impik]

8. Ohhh, i was done with that place a long time ago. It's worse

than any RedState site. And this woman as an *******.

[Cary]

9. Agreed on the slant but not ready to throw Ariana under the bus

Maybe she will come around?

[MadMaddie]

10. Can someone explain why Ariana hates President Obama?

I agree with you, It's almost like reading a right wing rag now. I rarely go there anymore.

[WeDidIt]

13. Ever know a reformed smoker, or drinker?

And how they are radically opposed to all smokers, or drinkers? Even somebody who only has a glass of wine each night is an abomination to many recently reformed alcoholics.

Arriana Huffington is a reformed right of center activist. She cnanot abide anything other than full left-tilt liberalism now.

[Armstead]

18. And we need more full-tilt liberalism

And before you leap, let me say that full-tilt liberalism does not mean some far-out utopian progressive dream world.

But the kind of full-tile liberalism that championed the real economic interests of working people and the poor, and small and medium sized businesses who play by the rules and are not greed-junkies, and the promotion of equal rights for all.

[rudy23]

17. Maybe she's just disappointed that they're openly taking Democrats for granted.

Maybe it's more of a consequence of Obama and Rahm's strategy than some sudden shift in Arianna Huffington's ideology, or some psychological problem on her part. Taken a look around the blogosphere lately? She's not alone.

[nckjm]

52. Well, duh....

The bloggers and posters on Huffington Post are only telling it like it is:

Below are some of the ways Obama has failed to live up to Progressive's expectations:
didn't change or eliminate the Patriot Act when he could have; refused to go after Bush/Cheney for crimes against humanity; secret meetings and agreements with big Pharma and insurance companies to prevent import of cheaper drugs and bulk price negotiations; the appointment of Bernanke, Geithner, and Summers; the disparate ways he handled the bank bailouts compared to how he handled the auto bailout;the escalation of the war in Afghanistan; his failure to push for a strong public option/expansion of medicare in the health care bill; his hands-off leadership style; his aversion to conflict.

Exactly where is the "Change we can believe in?" So far, I haven't seen it. And frankly, I'm feeling like I've been duped! You don't?

You can bet that Progressives will continue to call him out on it. The disparity between candidate Obama and President Obama is an American tragedy.

[benld74]

21. HAS turned into an ONLINE ENQUIRER!

[firedupdem]

22. Read this on another blog:

The rich liberal class has revealed its true hide in recent months. For them, the entire election cycle last year and candidate Obama's electrifying campaign was all about cashing in on ad revenue on their blogs. The true capitalists that they really are, Markos Moulitsas Arianna Huffington et al. have quickly figured out that discontent is the current hot commodity. They have acquired a whole new slew of astroturf bloggers to amp up their ad revenue from President Obama bashing. Nothing in their stance tells me that they truly care about the middle class or the poor (which includes many minorities) This is class warfare and they have revealed themselves for what they truly are, opportunists.

[Roland99]

23. oh puh-leeze

And the fact that Obama is acting like Bush, Jr has *nothing* to do with it!

:eyes:

[JuniperLea]

31. Bush Jr.?

Oh puh-leeze your own damn self!

[jgraz]

35. Good point. He's a lot more like Bush Sr.

[JVS]

39. Not so sure there. Bush Sr. knew to be very careful in the application of US troops abroad

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powell_Doctrine

[jgraz]

42. He was careful about it, but he didn't hesitate to do it

The rationale for Senior's Gulf War was about as trumped-up as Junior's.

[JVS]

43. Yes but remember that Bush I was not willing to go into Iraq.

It was all about limited quick and decisive engagements. Not unlike Clinton's bombing campaigns in Yugoslavia.

[jgraz]

45. Huh? We INVADED Iraq on his orders.

We just never toppled Baghdad. And we abandoned the Kurds and the rebels in the south to be slaughtered by Saddam.

[JVS]

46. Bush I never wanted to have to occupy Iraq. He knew it would suck. That's what the whole...

idea of having and exit strategy was.

[jgraz]

49. Yep. Got it.

[Roland99]

40. Bank bailout, Patriot Act, Guantanamo, escalating in Afghanistan, caving on health care reform

Yeah, what a great progressive/liberal President we have.



NOT.

[JuniperLea]

62. Who did you vote for? I voted for Obama...

He told us during the campaign what he meant to do with Afghanistan... and he did as he said he would.

He didn't start the bailouts, which are now becoming a moot point since most of the banks are paying back the TARP funds.

Do you know what his plans are for the Patriot Act?

How did he "cave" on healthcare? Do you understand that he isn't in Congress?

Weak... very, very weak.

I don't like the escalation either, but I was paying attention, and I expected it to happen, and I voted for him anyway... what was the alternative?

Who did you vote for, and why?

[Roland99]

64. Obama, of course. What other option did I have? I wanted Kucinich, then Edwards. Settled for "O"

I was never all that thrilled with his stance re: Israel, the war, health care.

My vote was sucked up anyway as my home state of KY is quite red.

Obama's been tossing out a lot of platitudes to use plebes but then stacked his economic team with a bunch of BoA asshats and Geithner is part of the original problem, too.

He was against mandates for healthcare reform and now he's pushing for them (gee, thanks, Barack. Nothing I wanted more for Christmas than to be told I had to give money to a greedy insurance company or else the IRS would be on my ass. Fuck you very much.)

He already did escalate in Afghanistan earlier this year and then did it again. Is he going to do the neocons' bidding and start in on Yemen now?

[JuniperLea]

66. You voted for him... he never lied...

He's done what he said he was going to do.

Seems you changed, not him.

[Roland99]

67. Oh? He was for mandates on healthcare before? I missed that part.

I also missed the memo that Guatanamo was closed.

I also missed the memo where he was cracking down on Wall St.

I also missed the memo where he was going to add "real oversight" to the enforcement of the PATRIOT Act.


And a few others.

[JuniperLea]

70. And you wanted all that months ago...

That's where your theories fall apart. With all the obstruction, will all the people working against him on both sides of the aisle, you expect it should all be done yesterday.

Guantanamo is BEING closed... clearly you have no grasp of the scope of the issue.

There are things in the works to reinstate regulations for Wall Street and for banks... but you wanted it all now, right?

With everything else he's doing, you expect to see all his notes on the Patriot oversight... unfuckingbelievable.

What else did you expect the Magic Negro to have done so far?

[O is 44]

71. HE DID NOT BAIL OUT THE BANKS

Why do liberals keep saying this? Tarp was signed before he came into office, he however did continue with AIG but that was a very small portion compared to the heist that took place in 2008. He did not give the banks billions with no strings attached. In case you did not notice he is trying very hard to close gitmo. I guess you have missed all the obstruction. If he caved on healthcare then why did we get bill out of the senate and a bill out of the house now waiting to be combined in conference? I would hate to go into a tough negotiating session with some of the people around here. You would go in and put all your demands on the table and if they were not met you would take your ball and go home. Just how do you think you would get anything done by doing this? crickets

[Roland99]

74. Simple

1) Fuck the Republicans.


There. Problem solved.


Force them to filibuster. The Dems in the White House and in the Congress are a bunch of spineless fucking cowards (save a few rare exceptions) and bow down to corporate/military interests over American citizens at every turn.

A long slow process will NOT fix this nation. We need progress and fast.

And if you think Obama is all that, then why did he fill every economic post with a bunch of fucking crooks that had their hand in the till the entire time the economy was being run into the ground? And, he did get the $350 billion leftover from the original TARP funding. That's not chicken scratch.


Sorry, Obama has made a turn to the right moreso than did Clinton.


This country is fucked and will remain fucked until we have public financing of EVERY election at EVERY level and corporate personhood is revoked.


Good luck to us getting that to happen.

[rudy23]

24. Okay, THAT class of rich liberals are the bad guys, and not the Union busting DLC

I think I'm figuring out where the Huffington backlash is coming from.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

32. Union Busting DLC? Hello?

Care to explain that?

[rudy23]

37. Rahm Emanuel was bragging about NAFTA just this week. Compared the health bill to NAFTA

and meant it as a positive thing. Let's see how they treat the teachers' union in the months ahead.

[JVS]

38. Are you familiar with the DLC?

If you are, explanation is not needed.

[NorthCarolina]

68. Does that really require and explanation? Seems obvious to me. (nt)

[POAS]

25. +1

[Armstead]

26. Now , that's funny.

They could also make a boatload of money by being an Obama/DLC House Organ.

There are, after all, other elections to come, and biting the hand that fed you last year is not the way to cultivate their future business.

[JuniperLea]

30. Controversy sells... and causes site hits...

It's all about the money and the celebrity. I'll throw Firedoglake onto the slag heap too.

[nckjm]

58. I love your Peace symbol but...

I can't figure out why you would be upset with Huffington Post and Firedoglake...the writers on these sites are simply voicing dissatisfaction with how Obama and the Democrats are failing to act on behalf of those who elected them. Was Howard Dean just trying to get attention? Was Senator Feingold just trying to get a headline? The middle class is going to hell in a hand basket, and we have time/energy to grip about Progressive websites?

[JuniperLea]

60. And it's my right to say what I feel about them too...

I can't get upset? Why?

I feel they are all about their own personal celebrity, and that they are being very hypocritical in their current verbal assassinations of Obama. Everything I read on those two sites, up to the point I deleted them from my favorites, was either misleading, or grilling him over a hypothetical they themselves made up, or getting nasty with him over things he was very clear about during his campaign. There is nothing progressive about their actions, imho, and it's my right to voice my opinions.

I can't figure out why it's not ok for me to complain, but it's ok for them to mislead. Interesting.

[MH1]

28. They're just more Big Media now.

Controversy helps them make money.

[felinetta]

33. You know, Arianna has been a turn-off to me for awhile now. She is supercritical

and negative. I don't appreciate it at all.

[zulchzulu]

34. Remember that Stassinopoulos supported Bob Dole and Newt Gingrich in the 90s

Stassinopoulos uses her husband's name, who she divorced after he came out and said he was gay... he is also a religious conservative who is worth millions in oil money.

Stassinopoulos is an embarrassment to the so-called "progressive" blogosphere.

[burning rain]

41. No, Michael Huffington's not a religious conservative.

He's fiscally conservative, socially liberal-to-moderate. Even in his single term as a Republican US congressman (1993-95), he was a pro-choice moderate on social issues. He was also never a US senator, as you have elsewhere claimed he was. He narrowly lost a US Senate race to the incumbent Diane Feinstein in 1994.

[zulchzulu]

57. Huffington certainly catered to the religious conservatives.

I lived in California at the time and remember him as one that played right along with the vicious religious conservatives when he ran against Dannemayer for the GOP attempt to beat DiFi. I stand corrected that he was a senator however. He was a congressman in California's 22nd District (Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties).

[burning rain]

76. You may be recalling Huffington's demagogy during his Senate campaign.

That, I don't remember--just that he was full of vitriol, desperate to take down Feinstein any which way. But his record 1993-95 was as a fiscal conservative/social moderate, and more recently he was active with Christine Todd Whitman trying to promote socially moderate Republicanism, and has been doing gay rights activism.

[Bluenorthwest]

56. Wow, hitting all the cylinders!

Xenophobic, homophobic, sexist and simply incorrect.

[zulchzulu]

69. WTF?

You obviously don't even know what you accuse me of... you should get a gig at the Bluffington Hoax. You're a perfect fit.

:crazy:

[AVID]

44. huffpo is becoming TMZ - shock and awe with boobs, ass, jon, kate & tiger

[Lord Helmet]

47. Yesterday the headline was that Obama had killed her nomination.

Which of course some breathlessly posted here in yet another negative thread. It wasn't until today that that headline was walked back to the real story, that the nomination was sent back to the WH for reconsideration.

This kind of careless journalism not only exposes the blogs but also those that utilize their tripe to attack the president.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

54. My Suspicion: They're not being "Careless"

It think this is intentional. Nobody is THAT careless!

[Lord Helmet]

59. I suspect you may very well be right.

I guess some people are willing to distort facts to support their already entrenched opposition to this president. We see that here every day.

[jefferson_dem]

50. HuffPOS.

n/t

[Phx_Dem]

51. K&R!!!!

[freddie mertz]

53. Then stop reading it, maybe? nt.

[Armstead]

55. Nah -- That is too easy. Much more fun to bash it.

[butterfly77]

61. After all ..

she is a republiCON..

[depakid]

65. Crikey! This Obama über alles business is getting kind of creepy

Sounding more and more like a cult of personality, completely divorced from any substantive positions of the issues or approaches to getting policies enacted or nominees through.

In some cases- it's almost the mirror image of what we saw with Bush (except of course, Bush and the Republicans tended to get just about everything that they wanted).

[jenmito]

72. K&R. I feel the same way. n/t

[gulliver]

73. Definitely getting tired of it.

She needs to lob bombs at Republicans. I'm about ready to ditch HuffPo too.