Thursday: Shoes, Gourds and Burning Flags

I was surfing through Corrente last night when I found this rather puzzling post by Mandos, Symbols, they are not your friends.  Hmmm, said I, what is this all about and what does it have to do with The Confluence and the PUMAs?  Well, as it turns out, I can see no correlation.

Let me clarify:  Too much has been made of the flag burning amendment.  I don’t have an issue with people burning the flag.  The world will not come to an end.  In fact, one of the only benefits of my Jehovah’s Witnesses upbringing is that I am not overly worshipful of flags.  When everyone else in my class was saluting it, I was commanded by my fanatical mother to stand there silently.  And in that moment of silence, I got to reflect on what everyone aroound me was doing.  They were mindlessly mouthing some little ditty created as a kind of public loyalty oath.  As a result of those hundreds of moments of silence, I decided it was much better to actually, you know, be loyal than worship some multicolored cloth.  So, the JW training definitely backfired.  It made me a stronger citizen.

Our worth is not tied up in a flag and I think Hillary knows it.  The silly parade of flag burning amendments that we’ve had over the past several decades were an attempt to divide us once again.  But they were also unconstitutional in some respects.  And sometimes there is no better way for a divisive issue to go away than to come to some compromise.  The changes Clinton made to the flag burning amendment were symbolic, not the flag burning amendment itself.  And for some reason, the only ones who have ever been incensed by them have been those of us on the left.  The people on the right just sort of let the issue drop.

So, let it go, people.  Burning the flag is rude and offensive to some people, nothing more.  It isn’t the blessed sacrament.  You will not die if you do it and you will only face a fine if the flag you burn belongs to someone else, thank you Hillary.

Now, onto the PUMA stuff.  The concept has gone viral and many people are claiming it is a shoe or a gourd.  They can claim whatever they like.  It is like any other flavor of a new religion, not that it *is* a new religion.  But that was not the original intent of PUMA.  If you need to be reminded of what we intended when we created the concept, see the tab at the top of this page.  In summary: we are 18 million voters who are being given the finger by the DNC and the Obama campaign at the same time they are expecting us to deliver our votes to them.  We are telling the DNC and the Obama campaign that they have to earn our vote or they can not count on us in November.  They need to honor Hillary’s voters, commit to our issues and allow us fair representation at the convention.  If they don’t, we must follow our consciences in the voting booth.  Obama is the weaker candidate, we didn’t choose him, he was chosen for us and we are saying, that’s not good enough for us.

That’s it.  There is no committment to either shoe or gourd, Obama or McCain.  It is up to the DNC and the Obama campaign to decide if they need our votes in November.  If they do, they need to start demonstrating it.  So far, they have not.  And that is why PUMA is getting to be such a potent symbol.  But for those of you who are reading more into it than that or are hoping for a miracle, there isn’t one.  Your vote is your own.  You give it to the person who deserves it and who has worked to gain your trust.  Or no one at all.  That is PUMA.  It is both simple and powerful.

About these ads

238 Responses

  1. Your vote is your own. You give it to the person who deserves it and who has worked to gain your trust. That is PUMA. It is both simple and powerful.

    (pre-coffee) nodding. Like a lever

  2. Now *that* is what I call good writing.

    Brava, riverdaughter.

  3. thank you, riverdaughter and good morning!

  4. And if no candidate deserves it or has earned your trust, don’t give your vote to anyone.

    I’m voting for “none of the above”

  5. Me too, myiq — my only question is whether to Punish Everyone.

  6. Well, again you return us to truth being the coin of the realm. For some reason, the discussion often gets distorted, but you have an ability to bring it back to a reality basis. I thank you for that, and for the re-establishment of personal responsibility. It’s fortuitous that we have someone like you, RD, who has that ability.

  7. I posted this on the flag-burning thread that got Mandos’ panties in a bunch, but it was stuck in moderation so I’m re-posting it here:

    I went over to Corrente to read Mandos’ post.

    Typical ideological purist argument. It equates an amendment prohibiting flag burning with burning the Constitution itself.

    Mandos oozes condescension for us “reactionary” types who don’t understand why we must defend flag burning at all costs.

    I’m sorry to say Corrente was my home blog until recently. I wouldn’t drink the kool-aid, so now I’m an orphan.

    BTW – I didn’t comment to the post over there, but if I had I would have pointed out that “freedom of speech” isn’t absolute, we already have restrictions on what people can say.

    The cliche example is shouting “fire!” in a crowded theater.

    When will these pointy-headed elites figure out that’s why they lose elections? They think the problem is with other (lesser) people, but it’s them.

    You don’t win elections by alienating the majority of the voting public. The GOP says “flag-burning” and the pointy heads rush to defend it, “winning” the argument and losing the election.

  8. Well, some women Senators are committing to our issues, but they are not giving Hillary any credit for promoting them. Check this out:

    http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/showDiary.do?diaryId=32

  9. myiq2xu,

    This is something that has really become clear to me during this election season. I’ve never been big on loyalty oaths or worshipping the symbols of democracy and country. But I also don’t need to force that view on other people. In doing this Democrats are guilty of the same kind of fundamentalism as right-wingers who demand that everyone wear their patriotism and religiosity on their sleeves.

    Democrats need to learn to live and let live. The focus should be on real issues. The spineless Democrats we have in Congress right now are into the symbols of elitist intellectualism while they roll over and allow the destruction of our personal freedoms and our voting rights.

  10. Has Corrente really swallowed the kool aid? I actually think this sort of back and forth is healthy. Again, I don’t think netroots 2.0 seeks to become the echo chamber of old netroots.

  11. Vichy Collaborator Democrats:

    Barbara Mikulski
    Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
    Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)
    Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
    Mary Landrieu (D-La.)
    Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.)
    Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
    Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.)
    Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)
    Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)

    Read Melanie’s (writing as masslib) post. I heard about these “Women for Change” yesterday. Disgusting sellouts – they should all be punished. (katiebird, make note.)

    Taking Hillary’s agenda and and giving it the Obama Brand (“Change”)

    I am a PUMA. I am not dumb. Your pandering will not work on me. But it disgraces you.

    NO DEAL

  12. If the Democratic party wants my vote then they will have to find a nominee I can support.

    Not Obama – no way Jose.

    I would prefer Hillary. There are only a couple of Democrats even close to her in qualifications, and one is already termed out by law.

    But if it can’t be Hillary, there are other Democrats I would support as the nominee.

    Gore, Edwards, Dodd, or Biden, for starters.

  13. Another great post Melanie. You really nailed it. It’s a disgrace that those women are trying to shut Hillary out of their “change checklist.” Some of them did endorse Hillary, and they should be the most ashamed for not giving her credit now.

  14. We are 18 million individuals that voted for Senator Hillary Clinton.

    We each have our own issues and our own values and our own ideas. We will resolve them in our own way. We will agree on some issues and we will disagree on others. That’s what free individuals do.

    What so many of our “elite” brothers and sisters never understand is that just because something, in this case flag burning, doesn’t bother them it doesn’t mean that everyone agrees. And it doesn’t mean that other people’s thoughts, values and opinions are more or less valid. Just different. Respecting those values and opinions, when it doesn’t infringe on someone else’s rights and freedoms should be standard policy. If it brings them into the tent why not? Feeling superior to the hicks and being condescending may be personally satisfying but it’s a rather stupid way to get people to vote for the candidate of your choice.

    I am far more offended by some pinheaded pundit spouting nonsense than I am by someone burning a flag. Both are knotheads IMHO. But neither should be a matter for the law.

    Except Olbermann, he should be arrested for impersonating a newsperson. And Obamatrolls who should be arrested for impersonating a Progressive.

  15. Arabella,

    Isn’t that Melanie’s post? I believe she is “masslib.” Melanie can let us know for sure.

  16. bostonboomer, on June 19th, 2008 at 8:40 am Said:
    Some of them did endorse Hillary, and they should be the most ashamed for not giving her credit now.

    Exactly, Boston. I am most disappointed with those that endorsed her. How dare them! This is Hill’s agenda. They should at least be giving her credit for it.

  17. Yep, tis I, masslib.

  18. bb – Oops! So sorry. Can you fix my post?

    Melanie – thank you for that excellent post!

    PUMA 4 EVAH

  19. Melanie,

    I keep forgetting you are the same masslib that I remember from the Orange Cheeto. But since you started posting at Allegre’s place, I think I’ve permanently made the connection.

  20. I have to disagree with RD on this.

    Unfortunately, I don’t think its about addressing “our issues” or ‘our concerns’. I don’t see how “our concerns” can be addressed as long as Obama is the nominee, because “our issues” can and will be betrayed, and “promises to do better” will be broken.

    And I think that saying things like ” It is up to the DNC and the Obama campaign to decide if they need our votes in November” is a serious mistake. Its up to the DNC to make someone besides Obama the nominee — the Obama campaign has nothing to do with it.

    For instance, a lot of people are saying that Obama has to speak out against misogyny. Sorry, its too late for that — especially since ‘speaking out against misogyny’ now dovetails quite nicely with the Michelle Makeover.

    I don’t want to be ‘shown respect’ — because i know that its just a ‘show’. and that the respect is not genuine, but merely a ploy to get my support.

  21. Oh, thanks guys. My blood is boiling. How can these women take Hill’s agenda as their own? WTH?

  22. Boston, thank goodness for this blog and alegre’s place. I will never go back to cheetopia again.

  23. My favorite line is “Obama could not be persuaded to study history during his university days.”

    No sh?t ! I would have never thunk it! But, I bet he watched some really good movies.

    http://www.nypost.com/seven/06192008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_vs__osama_116128.htm?page=0

  24. As sickened as it makes me I am not surprised they did it . Look at Obama since Hillary was forced out of the race (or should I say pushed out) I have heard him take several of Hillarys plans and tout them as his own.

  25. “And I think that saying things like ” It is up to the DNC and the Obama campaign to decide if they need our votes in November” is a serious mistake. Its up to the DNC to make someone besides Obama the nominee — the Obama campaign has nothing to do with it.”

    (nodding)

    My God, I need a decent cup of coffee. I’ve had two cups but could fall asleep where I’m sitting!

    Confluencians? What do you suggest?

  26. Melanie – I want to shave their heads and parade them in public the way the French did to the female collaborators after WWII. Here are their names again:

    Vichy Collaborator Democrats:

    Barbara Mikulski
    Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
    Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)
    Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
    Mary Landrieu (D-La.)
    Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.)
    Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
    Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.)
    Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)
    Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)

    Women Selling out Women.

    PUMA

  27. melanie, I would agree with you except for the fact that it is the third time they have posted elitist and/or self indulgent crap, just like all the other OFB blogs. It hasn’t been about debate but about one-upmanship. Perhaps the toddlers at corrente are upset that a low brow site like this one is garnering more attention than their “mighty” postings. Mandos’ pathetic attempt at deconstruction reminds me of a first year grad student trying to impress his professor, but failing miserably, because not only can he/she not write anything original, he/she can’t even properly deconstruct somebody elses argument. I think the worst was CD complaining about the quality of writing, when personally I find her writing just plain awful and with no thought for her reading audience. its like coming across a teenagers diary. Totally unreadable And the attempt to tie PUMA to the GOP? well that was pure propaganda worthy of the wingnuttiest of blogs from the far right nutoshpere. Oh how the mighty have fallen……

  28. Why would these women not take up Hillary’s agenda and pretend it was their own?

    Isn’t that the Democratic way, aka, Barack Hussein Obama!

    We can now use his middle name after he threw all Muslims under the bus – this solidifies that he is not “one of them”.

  29. No, I agree. Mandos’ post was silly. But Lambert and Vast Left are still not bad. I love this site, though.

  30. Confluencians? What do you suggest?

    Chocolate covered coffee beans. One of our analysts went to the shareholders meeting for Hershey and brought back a box of goodies. I OD’d on the chocolate flavored coffee beans.

    PUMA

  31. Arabella, it sounds good. But, would it wake me up?

    (snoring)

  32. kenoshaMarge said,

    Both are knotheads.

    LOL — haven’t heard that term in years. Thanks, brings back some good memories.

  33. I noticed that the Obama campaign apologized for moving the Muslim women off the stage.

    I am still waiting for his apology for the insults to Hillary.

  34. plural, that’s like waiting to win the lottery.

  35. katiebird – Yes, you would be bouncing off the walls. I’m still wired from yesterday! I have to get more chocolate covered coffee beans , but I don’t know where to get them.

    I’m hooked!

    PUMA

  36. Melanie, I know. It’s not going to happen, and that’s one big reason I would never vote for him.

  37. plukasiak,

    I think when RD says that the DNC/Obama need to show us why we should vote for them, she doesn’t expect them to do it. I think it’s a rhetorical means of demonstrating their cluelessness about how to win elections. She can obviously explain it better and correct me if I’m wrong.

    I agree that it’s too late for Obama to speak about misogyny. It would be insulting if he did it now. The time to do it would have been when MSNBC first began to really push it.

    Do you really think we would advance our case by demanding right now that Obama be removed as the nominee and replaced with Hillary or someone else qualified? I see that as something that could happen between now and the convention, but if Hillary isn’t pushing her candidacy, how can we do it?

    I repect your opinions greatly and would like to hear more about how we could do this. I think the only way is by indirect means, but if there is a direct way to do it, I’m open to learning about it.

  38. Carol,

    We have decided not to use Obama’s middle name here. He seems to find it insulting, and RD has made that a rule.

  39. Garych:

    I agree with you, and that’s why I don’t hang out at corrente anymore. The last straw for me was having a post about Obama trolls “depaged” without any explanation.

    Some animals are more equal than others.

  40. katiebird,

    I suggest calling in sick and taking a mental health day, but I’m not a good example for anyone.

  41. katiebird:

    Crystal meth will wake you up, but I wouldn’t recommend it.

    Tweakers are the only people who can stay up all night and still be late for work.

  42. We are telling the DNC and the Obama campaign that they have to earn our vote or they can not count on us in November. They need to honor Hillary’s voters, commit to our issues and allow us fair representation at the convention.

    It is pretty much impossible to get more reasonable or level headed than this. As far as issues, are we talking altering BO’s healthcare policy, SS policy, energy advisors, or??

    As far as honoring her voters I am less clear about what you mean; is it via incorporating HRC’s issues into BO’s platform? Many people are also furious about FL/MI delegates. I have a lot of difficulty imagining any way forward for many people on that issue.

  43. BZero has announced he is opting out of public financing — another broken promise.

  44. BB, I’m just about out of sick leave I’ll use the last of it tomorrow for my “procedure” and well since I’ll be on what my cousin calls permanent vacation after the 27th, taking a mental health day seems desperate.

    I’ll just have to grab a nap at the occasional light as I drive to work.

  45. What promise could Obama make that we could trust?

    The only thing he can do before the election is pick his VP nominee. Hillary doesn’t want the job, and it wouldn’t be a good idea anyway.

    Other than that, he can promise the sun, moon and stars and then give us the other middle finger if he wins and we can’t do anything about it.

  46. Jerlyn has a post about Obama’s new staff appointments and a critique of his speech. (War in Afghanistan is an option.) She’s dissapointed.

    The commenters are all “Well, he has to say this stuff now.”

    PUMA

  47. Prolix, just say the ‘news alert ” about opting out.. it’s fun to watch him it’s like a fish out of water.. flip flop flip flop..

  48. I meant said not say…(interupted the show to announce)

  49. Katiebird,

    As I said, my advice is not worth following. I knew you would go anyway. Another thing that sometimes works for me is some exercise. You can fine opportunities to get up and walk around once you get to work.

  50. BB, I swear I always listen to your advise. You’re brilliant.

  51. Liberals often have trouble seeing the forest for the trees.

    It’s about working class people stupid!

    When we veer off into flag-burning, we have taken a detour from what really matters. It reminds me of when bugs bunny would put up a detour sign, and whoever was chasing him would blindly follow it into a hole.

    Republicans detour us into the flag-burning hole. They WANT you to defend it vociferously, because they know the average American will think Democrats are nutty. Clinton’s response to this was a deft politcal move. She neutalized the bill, and at the same time didn’t fall for the trap.

    And who is it who is truly reactionary when Corrente feels they have to defend flag burning as soon as Confluence rights about it.

    I’d love to write a book chronicling the many times Democrats have stepped into the traps Republicans have set for them. Hillary knows how to avoid them, some Democrats continue to want to put out a thousand flag-burning fires.

  52. Moving around is the best thing. Don’t get glued to the desk.

  53. BB:

    She said “listen to” not “follow”
    ;-)

  54. Mawm:

    Admit it, you’re a reactionary.

    You’re probably a bitter racist clinging to your guns and religion too.

  55. The Democrats are Wile E. Coyetes and the Republicans are Road Runners.

    Democrats run right under that 10 ton Acme weight every time.

    Beep beep!

    PUMA

  56. “Republicans detour us into the flag-burning hole. They WANT you to defend it vociferously, because they know the average American will think Democrats are nutty. Clinton’s response to this was a deft politcal move. She neutalized the bill, and at the same time didn’t fall for the trap.”

    Exactly. She’s so good at this.

  57. WTF? I’m being moderated?

    I don’t want to be a moderate – that’s like being neutered.

  58. I noticed that Heidi Li and Marc Rubin have started a new organization, The Denver Group. It looks promising to me, more so than the Just say No Deal group. But both could be worth supporting. Like RonK, I still have a problem with people who appropriate other people’s ideas without giving credit.

    From their website:

    The Denver Group has been formed to insure that the Democratic National Committee respect and carry out the democratic process at the convention in Denver this August by meeting certain specific goals. We will be advocating, and if neccessary pressuring, through purchased mass media as well other accepted avenues, the Democratic National Committee to see to it that these goals and the interests of tens of millions of Democratic voters are met.

    Our goals are:

    An open convention.

    Senator Clinton’s name on the ballot

    Speeches allowed by supporters of Senator Clinton on
    behalf of her candidacy.

    A roll call vote.

    No coronation.

  59. “The spineless Democrats we have in Congress right now are into the symbols of elitist intellectualism while they roll over and allow the destruction of our personal freedoms and our voting rights.”

    So true. Nancy–impeachment is too much trouble–Pelosi, John–health care is a non-starter–Kerry, and the rest.

    I have no respect for any of them. After watching the RBC completely stampede the most fundamental principle of democracy, it’s all b.s. now. Where is the outrage about that? All of these Senators and “Dem leaders” lining up to push the Party, for what? The Party sold it’s soul.

    That is why there is absolutely nothing Obama can do to “earn my vote.” He is illegitimate, just like Bush was, and will never be my president, whether he pulls it out or not.

  60. If a narrow exception is carved out of the First Amendment to prohibit flag-burning, it wouldn’t be the end of the world.

    That would be insignificant compared to the repeal of habeas corpus, the Fourth Amendment, the legalization of torture, etc.

  61. Thank you Katiebird. I am far from brilliant. I guess I’m feeling lazy today. I can’t stay home either–I have to babysit this afternoon, and will be at the mercy of two very energetic little boys who will not let me nap!

  62. myiq2xu,

    I freed your comment. Maybe it was the “bitter racist” that triggered the moderation software.

  63. It is getting awfully crowded under that bus, he has thrown a very large group that has supported him.

    http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_080616.htm

  64. Well it let mine through. Who knows what will trigger the moderation beast? Not I.

  65. Arabella Trefoil, on June 19th, 2008 at 8:48 am Said:
    Melanie – I want to shave their heads and parade them in public the way the French did to the female collaborators after WWII. Here are their names again:

    Vichy Collaborator Democrats:

    Barbara Mikulski
    Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
    Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)
    Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
    Mary Landrieu (D-La.)
    Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.)
    Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
    Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.)
    Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)
    Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)

    Women Selling out Women.

    PUMA

    You tell um Arabella. These frauds are disgusting!

  66. Kim,

    The Black Agenda Report has a post on Barack throwing half of AA’s under the bus. As far as they are concerned, he has already thrown all AA’s under the bus in order to get white liberal votes.

  67. Hi guys.. I tend to lurk…but I always come and read the posts..they are wonderful.

    my father, who was a huge fraud fan,decided last week he can no longer support him…. I was very surprised b/c he was a HUGE fan… and so I asked him why.. 2 words: arrogance and incompetence

    He and I listened to mccain last week when he was with hill supporters.. and he liked mccain’s honesty and true humbleness…

    anyways.. I agree “its my vote, and whoever wants it has to earn my trust”…

    the truth is I DO NOT TRUST THAT FRAUD.. and LOYALTY IS NOT TRANSFERRABLE..

    I will only vote for hillary or then mccain.

    and nothing that fraud will say, most likely copied off of hillary, will change my mind…

  68. I read that one too, but wasn’t sure if it was a site that is totally trustworthy.

  69. DiFi is a DINO.

    She and Boxer are my Senators. I really hope she doesn’t run for reelection.

    Boxer is usually pretty good though.

  70. I see the idea of revering symbols as some of people’s learned way of evoking a feeling of the grand, divine, pure, etc., etc., etc. Some religions actually worship their symbols (example: icons), some use them as a way to let go of the mundane and focus on the divine, and some forbid physical and artistic symbols because they take focus away from the purity of the divine.

    Some of those religious icons are so saturated with people’s highest faith and divine energies that they actually might create miraculous events for them. Other people are able to experience miraculous events snd divinity by carrying their own mental symbols (example: peace, jope, faith) with them in their thoughts and emotions.

    It’s all on what each person has personally decided or environmentally been conditioned to believe. And it is very powerful psychologically, subconsciously, and, consequently, socially.

    Of course, politics and working out how to live in the “real” world is all different than working out one’s belief and relationship with eternity. There’s the time factor, for one. And the “beside me, other people with their own belief systems” factor.

    I personally think that rspect for all people is the only way to go. I would not want to ever damage something that is psychologically necessary or important to another person or other people. However, I can understand how when people who revere symbols are in power over your own and your loved ones’ well being, it becomes an important symbol to you be able to damage their symbol as a symbol of war. And it’s much less time-consuming, violent, and dangerous.

    Going back to my own religious belief system, I feel that any kind of war, even symbolic war, is not the way to go, and not really effective, unless someone is attacking you. I think that negotiation in the style of Gahndi is what makes real changes.

    Hillary Clinton’s stance on flag burning indicates to me that she has some kind of similar belief system, including the fact that she said that if someone were to attack the US she would srtike back. At a moment like that, negotiation and Gahndi-style protest is way to time-consuming.

    By burning flags, the people doing the burning are attacking, be it symbolically.

  71. So, he has thrown his granny, his minister, his church, older women, Appalachia, Ohio, Florida, Michigan, half the black population, muslims. Who’s left, besides elitists?

  72. Kim,

    They are radical leftists. I enjoy reading them. I’m glad there are at least some in the AA community who are trying to hold Obama accountable. He certainly won’t do anything for AA’s if he’s elected. He’s a corporate candidate who is just using them for their votes.

  73. BB: They should have left him when he finally denounced the church and minister he said he would not denounce. This man is the biggest flip-flopping panderer, I have ever seen in politics.

  74. One thing missing from all the “party loyalty” arguments is the implied covenant that nominees will be qualified for the job.

    Nominate a qualified candidate and I will vote for him or her, even if they are less than ideal.

    Obama is not qualified.

  75. Do you really think we would advance our case by demanding right now that Obama be removed as the nominee and replaced with Hillary or someone else qualified? I see that as something that could happen between now and the convention, but if Hillary isn’t pushing her candidacy, how can we do it?

    I absolutely think that the one non-negotiable demand is “Nobama”. The DNC needs to understand that there are loyal democrats who are, and will continue, to work against Obama and the thorough corruption of the Democratic Party.

    I’m going to be working to convince people to not vote for Obama. I’m not going to tell them to vote for McCain (even though I may cast a ballot for McCain, it will be a vote for maintaining control of Congress in 2010, and getting a competent Democrat in the White House in 2012…and NOT a vote for McCain) I’m just going to keep making the point that Obama is unqualifed and unsuited to be president, and (among democrats) will keep pointing out that a vote for Obama is an endorsement of the corruption of the DNC.

    It is, IMHO, important to say “Hillary or someone else qualified”….while there is no doubt in my mind that Clinton is the single most qualified person in the nation to be president right now, there are others who are also qualified — and as long as they represent a repudiation of the corruption of the DNC, I’m willing to support any qualified Democrat.

  76. Buenos días a todos.

    With respect to appropriation of others’ ideas–there is a quotation on ¿this? blog or perhaps another pro-Hillary site (It might be someone’s tagline.) that goes something like this: “It’s amazing what you can accomplish if you don’t care who gets the credit.” I do not remember to whom this it attributed. Perhaps that is the wise road to choose with respect to the Women for Change. Some of the women were staunch HRC supporters until Hillary herself endorsed Obama and have a favorable legislative legacy. Also recall that different and unconnected people can have the same ideas at the same time independently. Credit for originating the idea generally goes to whoever publishes first or gets the patent. The point being, PUMA very much advocates an acknowledgement of sexism and misogyny, in addition to their repudiation and termination. Who said that the first step in solving a problem is acknowledging there is one?

    That being typed, I do agree with the sentiment “too little too late” with respect to how it would affect my vote.

  77. Women Selling out Women.

    I prefer to think of them as Ladies Against Women..
    http://www.ladiesagainstwomen.com/

  78. ea: Shouldn’t she have been included in the “Women for Change” thing? Has she been totally shut out?

  79. ea, I respectfully disagree. Hillary may bot care if she gets credit, but I sure as hell do. I also don’t think these women presenting these issues as women when many didn’t support the woman running on this very agenda is consistant. Eff that.

    myiq2xu, DiFi was a staunch Hill supporter and the only one to speak out on the sexism so I sort of disagree.

  80. Shouldn’t she have been included in the “Women for Change” thing? Has she been totally shut out?

    yeah… that is an interesting question.

    My guess is that Clinton’s exclusion is due to Team Obama. Clinton is the defacto leader of any group of female senators at this point, and Axelrod knows that a picture of all those women standing behind Hillary would swamp the message that he wants the Ladies against Women to be sending.

    Her absense from that group should speak volumes…. and it should be a major controversy.

  81. Exactly, Kim. Since she designed this very agenda, ran on it, won the popular vote on it, at the very least, she should have been included.

  82. Wow three fundraising letters yesterday: DNC, Edwards and Obama – its was with great pleasure that I wrote PUMA across the text with my favorite red lipstick, put all their crap back in the SASE and returned to them… maybe they’ll get the hint.
    Given that they pester me by phone – I just set it on the counter and let them talk to the philodendron on their dime.
    NM PUMA

  83. Kim – The NY Times article about Obama talking about fathers on Fathers’ Day in a Church was a total set up for a puff job. The NYTimes bought it hook line and sinker.

    It was a make-whitey-feel moment. Obama hardly ever criticizes the black community. When he does, it’s done in controlled setting and it’s aimed at white people. And the black congration knew it.

    PUMA

  84. Paul:

    I wouldn’t believe it if I hadn’t seen it, but this campaign has showed that there is a large part of the Democratic party, particularly the leadership, that is infected with CDS.

    That is a large part of Obama’s support. Even if he were forced to resign due to some scandal, the Clinton haters would never agree to let Hillary be the nominee. They will do everything they can to prevent it.

    So unless the rank and file can force the leadership to make Hillary the nominee, the best we can hope for is a compromise candidate. And that will only happen if Obama implodes before the convention.

    I’m guessing the implosion won’t happen until September or October.

  85. To stand there and pose as women for change and not include the very woman that prompted their issue is not just wrong, it is despicable.

  86. Kim, it’s disgusting. I am suprised to see Hillary’s own supporters go along with this charade.

  87. Paul – I like that : Ladies against Women

    Vichy Democrat Collaborators:

    Barbara Mikulski
    Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
    Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)
    Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
    Mary Landrieu (D-La.)
    Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.)
    Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
    Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.)
    Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)
    Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)

    They sold us out. They sold Hillary out. Remember their names.

  88. myiq2xu: I was on the phone last night with a friend from DC, who has worked on some subcommittees as a special consultant. He says the reason, many have said they don’t want to serve as VP with him it that they think he will implode. He said many have stated that even if he makes it into office, they fear he may have to step down at some point.

  89. No don’t remember their names, email them now. I will get the addresses if you want and we should tell them now, that their charade is not fooling any one.

  90. Plukasiak: I agree with you in most everything. But we must be open to the or else we will look like sore losers. My standards are pretty high and it is unlikely that they will be able to meet them if past behavior is any indication of future performance. Hiedi Li’s new Denver Group demands are what I had in mind. I will never be convinced that Obama is the legitimate nominee if there is not a fair convention.

  91. Party Unity… got Kool-Aid?,

    I can’t believe I am not getting any fundraising emails or letters now. I must be on a black list.
    I have donated a lot of money to them, so It is very curious.

    I imagine my file with them has “subversive” written beside my name in red ink.

  92. Kim and Melanie,

    I agree with you and with Paul “ladies against women.” What these women Senators are doing is knuckling under to the Obama campaign when they should be holding out for him to demonstrate a committment to women’s issues. I don’t know how he would do that at this point, since nothing he says can be believed or trusted. He would have to do something real like introducing and passing some sort of legislation in the day job that he is paid for but never goes to–the Senate.

  93. Mawm: They seem to see us as pests, reminiscent of Obama sloughing Hillary off his collar. They believe they do not need us. I don’t think they quite get our convictions or our numbers.

  94. I just can not believe they stole Hill’s agenda. If these were their priorities, they should have been out there pounding the pavement for her(though some did, some vocally, and ardently opposed her). Oh, I could see Obama saying yes, I will help these women pass their agenda. Maybe that’s the plan. Bypass Hill and take her agenda.

  95. I really like the Denver Group idea and I will probably donate when they get their legal certification. I’m not sure who Marc Rubin is, but he is a hell of a writer.

  96. Mawm:

    If Obama wins you’ll be on the first plane to Gitmo. Your outspoken advocacy at the RBC meeting will be your first-class ticket to the Richard B. “Dick” Cheney Waterboard Park in Cuba.

    Never let them know your true identity

  97. Seeing all of these Democratic leaders and /or icons “bend a knee” to Obama is part of his power consolidation. He does not care if they are loyal to him or not, he simply wants the public obsequiousness which will make it harder for them to turn on him down the line. I am starting to see a pattern with Sen Obama which indicates that defeating someone is not enough, but that they must make a public gesture of allegiance and obedience. Only public humiliation will suffice. He sees himself as an overlord. Divine right and all that.

  98. I want to urge caution here on these Senators. They, and Hillary, support and have supported the same policy goals that are part of a prgressive Democratic agenda.

    We can too easily (in our fury at what has been done to us), extend our rage to other Senators who really have not “sold out” Hillary’s legislative goals. We have real flatearth Republican agendas to fight against. And these women have done great work in fighting this Republican agenda, along with Hillary.

    Barbara Mikulski
    Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has been a staunch vocal supporter of Hillary
    Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) this brave woman deserves a medal for putting up with coworker Sen. Inohofe every damn day! Could YOU work with this moron every day?
    Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
    Mary Landrieu (D-La.) um….bad oil votes…primary her
    Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) really pushed for neighbouring states to help in Katrina aftermath
    Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
    Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) is one of the best in suggesting good environmental policy ideas
    Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) pushed for stem cell reasearch
    Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) supports progressive Wind legislation

  99. myiq2xu,

    Fortunately for us, the SCOTUS has reinstated Habeas Corpus. I just wish the Dems weren’t so anxious to allow the spying to go forward, because if, Heaven forbid, Obama should be elected President, I’m convinced he would be every bit as authoritarian as Bush/Cheney.

  100. Beautiful! EARNING my vote – what a concept!
    Yup. Stull waiting for that R.E.S.P.E.C.T

  101. This “first year grad student trying to impress his professor” has a few short things to note.

    1. Burning a flag is not analogous to shouting “fire” in a crowded theater.

    2. Not all opinions are equal.

    3. I am definitely not trying to win an election. Almost never vote for a winner.

    Lastly, do you understand how bizarre this statement is? If you don’t, that’s where we are…miscommunicating.

    This is something that has really become clear to me during this election season. I’ve never been big on loyalty oaths or worshipping the symbols of democracy and country. But I also don’t need to force that view on other people. In doing this Democrats are guilty of the same kind of fundamentalism as right-wingers who demand that everyone wear their patriotism and religiosity on their sleeves.

    This is one of those things in which either you “force” that view on other people (by preventing them from passing flag burning laws, amendments, etc) OR they (really) force it on you (by passing said laws). It’s not fundamentalism, it’s life-and-death democracy and it is indeed connected to habeas corpus, and so on, and so forth.

    Does “wedge strategy” ring a bell?

  102. myiq2xu,
    No. I’m thinking it will be re-education camp, so I can come back and tell everyone how I have seen the light, and will now bow down to the precious.

  103. Escoffier:

    The DC Dems will be happy to bend a knee. Bush has most of them trained to lick his boots.

    Obama is just taking advantage of their sycophantic tendencies.

  104. Again, dot, diagree. This checklist is Hillary’s total agenda. It’s what she ran on. For them to present it as women without even crediting her or including her, particularly those who ardently opposed her, I find disingenous. I’m not saying vote against them or something, but this is wrong.

  105. Riverdaughter, I do agree burning the flag is a total non issue.

    For one thing, who has EVER seen anyone burning it ANYWAY since the 1960′s?…talk about political gamesmanship.

  106. Why now? Where were these women when Hillary ran on these very same issues? They may have had more clout in getting this onto any agenda or platform at the time of the primaries when these issues had more resonance. This attempt only looks like another Obama ratification somewhat like the Kids for Obama crapola that came soon after his “presumed nomination”.

  107. dotcommodity,

    I haven’t seen anyone suggesting bringing these women Senators down. I think the strategy being suggested is that they be pushed to actually stand up for women rather than allow themselves to be fully absorbed into the Obama agenda. Why isn’t it appropriate for them to make some demands of the presumptuous nominee? Those demands could include getting him to be more supportive of environmental issues too. But if they allow themselves to be co-opted, what use will they be to us voters?

  108. Riverdaughter
    “looking like sore losers” should never be a consideration, seeing as we won
    http://blog.hill4pres.com/2008/06/12/another-stolen-election.aspx?results=1
    Beyond that, I agree with everything you wrote.
    Indeed, our vote must be sought after, respectfully.

  109. Exactly, Pat. Let’s say they still wanted to support Obama, at the very least, they could have supported Hillary when she was fighting for these issues. They could have said, I really like Hillary’s stance on a and Obama should adopt that position.

  110. Mawm:

    As Orwell pointed out, your return tour will be short-lived.

    I just hope they never find out my real identity. My mom would be really embarrassed when the come and haul me away.

  111. Again, dot, diagree. This checklist is Hillary’s total agenda. It’s what she ran on. For them to present it as women without even crediting her or including her, particularly those who ardently opposed her, I find disingenous.

    I agree with Melanie. To add insult to injury, they rebrand Hillary’s agenda with Obama’s “Change” brand. Also, I ask these women “It took you so long to come up with list? How long have you been in office? Women’s issues are new to you?”

    Barbara Mikulski
    Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
    Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)
    Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
    Mary Landrieu (D-La.)
    Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.)
    Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
    Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.)
    Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)
    Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)

    PUMA

  112. Kim and Melanie

    Thank you for responding. I did not see the interview, so I do not know how this platform was presented. I can only get the gist of what they (Women for Change) want from the comments I read. If not a single one of them said, “Hillary is absolutely right about…” or “It’s true about the widespread anger and disgust…” then I certainly would be less generous. Another thing we do not know is if someone did actually say something like this, whether it was edited to make it appear that HRC is or was irrelevent. What remains, however, is that these women would not even be together, talking about the issue of misogyny and societal acceptance of it, if it were NOT for HRC and the treatment she received. That, as the expression goes, is the elephant in the room.

    p.s.: I care very much.

  113. Mandos,

    That is a quote from my comment although it is not attributed. I don’t see “live and let live” as bizarre at all, since it is the philosphy I try to live by. I think it is the American way. I don’t believe in forcing other people to march in lockstep to my views. If you think that is bizarre, then my attitude toward you will be “live and let live.”

    On the other hand, I frankly don’t care what you think of me. I read your post at Corrente, and I saw you dismiss several attempts to explain to you why Hillary supported flag burning legislation. It is clear to me that your ability to reason unfortunately somewhat limited.

  114. Mandos,

    You are all over the place. If you agree that it is a wedge startegy, why would you fall for the trap?

    Also, what were your feelings about SC Democrats spending so much time trying to remove the confed flag from the government grounds?
    Isn’t that sort of an analagous freedom of speech issue. AAs are offended by the flag. They don’t want to see it, so they try to ban it.

    You can’t defend flag burning and try to take away the right to fly a confed flag. Sorry.

    They want you to spend all your time with your back against the wall defending flag burning. Clinton’s solution was right. She neutralized it, and didn’t fall for the “Democrats Hate America” trap.

  115. Well, we will see. It was emailed to me with no mention of Hillary. We’ll see if she comes up when they present it today.

  116. Melanie I think we are jumping to a conclusion here that she was deliberately excluded. Lets find out.

    Although the media has been unfair to us, I do not see antagonism from her colleagues. I feel we should check. Lets call the congress switchboard (202) 224 3121 and speak to their staff and find out, ask about it, registering our anger is fine.

    But I would not advocate for voting against any of these (good progressive) Senators.

    They eat with Hillary once a week (I read a book -sorry I forget the name: about the women Senators) . Many initially endorsed her, and could well change back to her in August ;-).

  117. “Obama is the weaker candidate, we didn’t choose him, he was chosen for us and we are saying, that’s not good enough for us.”

    The only way they can make it right by me is to undo the bogus conclusions reached by the RBC mockery and make it right (fair / reflective); reinstate the FL / MI votes or apply their “rooolz” to the oter states that violated the primary date rules; punitive actions against Obama for advertising in FL, etc. (It’s too early in the day for me to make a complete list.)

    Talk is cheap. I’m watching what they do, not what they say. Promises mean nothing to me when they come from people lacking integrity. Pandering and parading “women’s issues” mean nothing, and is insulting considering that they ignored the hostile sexist assaults hurled at Senator Clinton before, during, and after the primaries.

    Much too little too late.

    Good morning.
    PUMA Democrat

  118. Exactly, Mawn. This is political framing at its best. Hillary is a master of it.

  119. steveeboy, don’t get your jock twisted. We are only playing.

  120. Barbara Mikulski is about as loyal a Hillary person as you can find.

  121. Mawm: About a year ago, I was feeling very much the activist, and had responded to maybe a dozen or so petitions. The last was from Camp Casey, Cindy Sheehan’s site. I signed that petition and was immediately locked out of my email account. I was able to log on to my old email account, and everyone else at my office could log on to theirs. My account was the only one “experiencing difficulties”. I received a message that my account was under repair. After about three hours, I was able to get into my account. Now I am not one of those conspiracy theorists, but it was pretty weird.

    BTW, I have been kicked into moderation.

  122. Again, dot, I’m not advocating against them either. But, i found it hypocritical that Klubachor and McCaskill would list these items as their priorities when they didn’t support the woman who ran on them.

  123. Steveboy
    Good point! Not only didn’t Howard Dean ever pledge to endorse kerry
    he had a phone conference with his supporters asking them
    to support Edwards (IWR co-sponsor), in a last ditch effort
    to derail Kerry’s nomination. And they did.
    But voters back in 2004 listened to what media told them and went for the designated loser without a second thought.

  124. Claire McCaskill was on CNN often during the primaries, always with a smirk and a gleam in her eye, always bringing down Hilary and glorifying Obama. I have a vendetta against her because of her annoyance factor.

  125. Solitude is good for the soul Steveboy:-)

  126. ea: These women using the Obama brand name “Change” did not acknowledge Hillary. They are in Obama’s pocket along with many other Democrats.

    Barbara Mikulski
    Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
    Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)
    Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
    Mary Landrieu (D-La.)
    Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.)
    Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
    Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.)
    Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)
    Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)

    They are sell-outs. And, as Pat said, they should have been working on these issues for years. It is sickening to see women become Obama’s puppets.

    NOBAMA

  127. Mandos:

    I didn’t say that burning a flag was analogous to shouting fire in a theater, although it would be if you burned the flag in there.

    My point was that not all speech is protected by the First Amendment.

    Adding flag-burning to the list of speech that is not protected would not be the end of democracy.

    If you want to pick a fight on this issue, I suggest Redstate or Free Republic. They’ll enjoy ridiculing your ideological purity.

  128. I am getting a preview of an Obama Administration. Apologies followed by backtracking followed by more apologies. Yep, going to be a great 4 years.

  129. Ok, dot, I just called McCaskill’s office and no, Hillary won’t be getting any credit. She’s “not a part of the Checklist for Change”.

  130. riverdaughter, apologies for leaving this here, didn’t know how else to reach you. left message #11 comment at LBNYC — http://tinyurl.com/5gzrse yesterday, requesting if i can bump your dfa comments into a follow up article on dean’s dfa. please reply at LBNYC. thanks!

  131. FYI-
    I so admire this Colorado Clinton Delegate who is not falling in line- Sacha Millstone. Can we give her a riverdaughter award or something?
    PS: Riverdaughter- I love your blog. I read it daily. You bring perspective and analysis to the issues and to the PUMA movement.

    Here is the link to this great story:
    http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_9508204%22%3Ehttp://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_9508204

  132. myiq2xu,
    Excellent suggestion. I would suggest that Obama supporters also take their arguments about everyone being a racist over to Redstate, and see how that goes down.

    Is Mandos supporting Obama?

  133. COMMUNITY ADVISORY: STEVEEBOY IS A TROLL.

    I’ve saved his comments so RonK can trace him. Please ignore him for now.

  134. myiq2xu, on June 19th, 2008 at 10:16 am Said:
    Mandos:

    I didn’t say that burning a flag was analogous to shouting fire in a theater, although it would be if you burned the flag in there.

    Nicely done — LOL.

  135. Pat, I haven’t seen any apologies from Obama, because he never takes responsibility. It is always someone who wasn’t who he thought they were, or a staffer who got it wrong and who ends up “under the bus”.

    I would expect exactly what we got from Bush, absolutely NO accountability.

  136. It seems I remember Hillary explaining her ban on flag burning by stressing the soldiers she was visiting in hospitals who feel that that flag represents them. She was building up her support with veterans and the military. Pandering, maybe, but so is that flag Obama now wears, only her concern for our soldiers seems more real to me.

    It seems to me the country missed a great opportunity with McCain/Clinton. I think Clinton would have done the town halls McCain wants; I think she might have even agreed with him to opt for fed money to finance their campaigns. It could have been a totally different kind of election.

    Now we have the same old same old with the guy who falsely tooted for change and a new kind of politics. The Democrats are no longer the good guys to me.

  137. Fantastic post, RD. I love your no-bullshit tell-it-like-it-is style.

  138. I think Hillary is all over the women sponsoring her agenda – she is promoting it.

    Hillary Clinton promoting checklist

    There are many ways to get things done, again, if you don’t care who gets the credit (as ea says above )

    Now, it absolutely SUCKS that Hillary’s ideas are what dem women can get behind – when they ran to hide while she was getting beat up. That would be the focus of my outrage, not the ideas but the lack of support when it mattered. These women should have gotten together to speak out about the sexism months ago!

  139. Where is Mandos to follow up?

  140. Checklist for Change

    Well, women just love to make lists. Here is our little check list for change. It’s on right on the fridge door – you can’t miss it.

    So, guys, if you ever get around taking care of anything on our Check List, just put a check mark next to it. The pens are on the counter. Can you see them?

    We’re not trying to nag you or anything.

    PUMA

  141. myiq2xu,
    Many of them are suck ups and cowards, but the SD’s and few congress persons who are not lining up instantly are freaking them out. Most candidates would not care if a small number of these folks held out, but Obama sees it as some kind of betrayal and must be dealt with harshly. This is what the Bushs’ do also. “He’s the one”, the Christ symbolism in photos, thinking he can win after basically expelling half of the party. going after evangelicals who are authoritarian in belief and behavior are all indicators of a Louis XIV complex, Or something. I find him fascinating and horrible at the same time.

    As an aside, I have a reproduction “Don’t tread on me” flag from the bicentennial. Would you believe it was on the Democratic party float in the parade? I am looking for a small tasteful flagpole to display my defiance.

  142. Sorry – messed up the link…

    The right link to Hillary’s promotion of the checklist

  143. That is exactly what I meant; it is always someone else’s fault. He hardly knew them. His staff overreached. It was a mistake in judgment like with Rezko. When will the rest of the public wake up and start paying attention? We may be political junkies but perhaps a little more scrutiny about this character is warranted by people other than us.

    Either that, or this campaign has some powerful hold over the media as a start. We have seen that hold translated onto the supers.

  144. jjmtacoma, your link doesn’t work. If you read my post, I said I appreciate them endorsing Hill’s agenda. But them saying they got together and came up with this on their own is ludicrous.

  145. Mawm,

    Judging by Mandos’ post on Corrente, he/she is a purist who doesn’t supporter either canadidate (although he/she sounds more like an Obama supporter) and has seldom found anyone he/she wanted to vote for in the past. I don’t know how many election’s Mados has voted in. He/she does sound young.

    I know I used to have the same purist attitude for many cycles after I voted for the ultimate purist candidate, George McGovern and ended up with Richard Nixon instead. My purism came to an end when Ronald Reagan carried MA. That was quite a wake-up call for this purist.

  146. Mandos,

    I don’t know who you are — I never saw you until you called us out in a post at Corrente last night. Is a public whipping is the best method of communicating? I don’t think so.

    I read through the comments more-or-less as they appeared last night but, I don’t remember any from you. Did you engage madamab or any of the commenters who so offended you in the thread itself?

    My instinct about a conversation with you is to glaze my eyes and back away. So I’m not going to address the content of your post. What you wrote at Corrente doesn’t matter to me.

    I’m speaking up to tell you that in my opinion, you’re a slightly higher class troll. You get points for being different.

  147. Mawm, You are so right!

    “They want you to spend all your time with your back against the wall defending flag burning. Clinton’s solution was right. She neutralized it, and didn’t fall for the “Democrats Hate America” trap.”

  148. Melanie, did they actually claim to have come up with the list? I did read your post and I tried to find more info… the WA senators are on the list, so it matters to me because they were endorsing Hillary until she suspended her campaign.

    I put a new link here with the right URL.

  149. I find it ironic that Mandos is arguing about flag burning here. Over at Corrente, if they let you join the site, your comments are often automatically put into moderation. And some are even told that their comments “aren’t up to par”.

    But he/she can come over here and argue the points as they like.

    (And to me, idolizing a stupid piece of cotton isn’t patriotism, it’s nationalism, something I’ve hated with a passion since 9/11.)

  150. Mandos’ post reminds me of the RFK fauxrage. Not as far as the facts, just hyperventilating attempt to turn mountains into molehills.

    “ZOMG! I could be cited and receive a small fine if I burn a US flag while protesting! This country is no longer free, it is a tyranny!”

    Gee, why not burn an effigy of the President? It will still be legal, and if you know any voodoo it could be a lot more interesting.

  151. Katiebird,

    Mandos isn’t engaging with us here either. I guess he/she is just the hit and run type.

  152. I am in moderation.

  153. I must get some work done, but will add one more thing to this coversation re Women for Change and the parallel one of Dems being on bended knee to Obama before I go. Actually, two…

    1. I agree this group is mixed, as it includes both McCaskill and Mikulski. Consider that the FOH (friends of Hillary) may be acting as a shield for HRC. There is no way on this earth they can be oblivious to what was done to Senator Clinton, except possibly McCaskill. I think some of them are taking the baton from HRC, to use a track analogy. HRC’s leg is done, and she gets to rest a bit. McCaskill is the hanger-on, there nearly always is one.

    2. Et tu, Brutus? Hope remains.

  154. Making a list of things you want to accomplish and actually getting them done are two different things.
    “Women for Change” is nothing more than Obama trying to pander to women.

    This is the sort of behavior I expect from Republicans.

    It’s Obama’s hijacking and disabling “Women’s Issues” that I find repulsive. Every time a woman bows down beneath Obama, it weakens the Resistance Movement.

    He’s trying to lull the public into a sense of “Obama is not so bad.” Propagands.

    Michellee made over, wearing a Stepford Wife dress on The View and saying “It’s nice to feel pretty.”

    Obama speaking about black fathers on Father’s Day at a Church.

    “Checklist for Change” – Women are excited about Obama and the CHANGE he will bring!

    etc.

    I am not buying this. They are using PYSOPs to make Obama acceptable.

  155. jjmtacoma, on June 19th, 2008 at 10:33 am Said:
    Melanie, did they actually claim to have come up with the list?

    I just updated my post. I called mcCaskill’s office and was told a group of women Senators came up with this list and Hillary is “not part of the Checklist for Change”.

  156. “Clinton’s solution was right. She neutralized it”

    That’s why they try to demonize it by calling it “triangulating.”

    They don’t want to neutralize it — they want it as an issue.

  157. myiq2xu,

    How about burning Howard Dean, Donna Brazile, and Nancy Pelosi in effigy in Denver? Back in the ’60s we weren’t afraid of being arrested for protesting. That is called civil disobedience. Maybe Mandos needs to read Thoreau? Or maybe he/she could read up on Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement?

    It does sound like “Mandos” is too young to recall what real protest was like. The point is to disobey laws and then pay the price to call attention to your cause. I think “Mandos” should go out in the street a burn a flag. That would be good practice.

  158. gosh, TWO MP videos with my morning coffee in ONE day, one here and one at NQ … must be my lucky day!

    Symbols can be very powerful but they shouldn’t have power over ideas. The constitution is the ultimate expression of what it means to be an American, not the flag and not the pledge.

    jmho

  159. The tone of Mandos’s post reeked of condescention. As someone commenting from 30,000 feet above the fray. A good argument is representative of both sides presenting an opposing point of view. His/her thesis sounded more like a riff and an opportunity to attack the Confluence. The responses offered to certain posters displayed that attitude from the altitude of height. You could almost hear the dismissive “sniff” coming through.

  160. It’s Brute, not Brutus. Sorry , couldn’t resist. The four years of Latin and Greek seldom have practicle use.

    I think that Brute is the vocative case.

    PUMA

  161. Ok, jimtocoma, I’ll update my piece again. What a class act this woman is. She literally requires no credit.

  162. When your act of protest alienates people who are supportive or sympathetic to your cause, it’s counterproductive.

    Nixon used some of the things done by a few antiwar protestors to portray the entire movement as unpatriotic and anti-American. The GOP has never let go of that advantage.

    Forty years later, the patriotism of Republicans is assumed, but Democrats have to prove theirs.

  163. Melanie .. that is disgusting .. tk you for the info .

    “I called mcCaskill’s office and was told a group of women Senators came up with this list and Hillary is “not part of the Checklist for Change”.

  164. I have posted here before. But I don’t plan on becoming a regular, because I don’t share your passion re the candidates or the party.

    I saw the original post after hundreds of comments had already been posted and figured I’d be writing to a dead thread.

    I have been told that my writing style is condescending before, but I write partly to entertain myself, so I don’t feel particular ashamed of it. I don’t blog necessarily to make friends (although I have).

  165. melanie – I got your back.

  166. Briana, see my second update(hat tip to jimtacoma). Hillary is endorsing the agenda. My guess is she was pushing it from behind the scenes. the woman is a saint. She doesn’t care about getting any credit.

  167. I blog to make friends, but it doesn’t seem to work for me. May I should learn to use Face Book.

  168. When your act of protest alienates people who are supportive or sympathetic to your cause, it’s counterproductive.

    The answer to me is to judge whether the source of that alienation is right or wrong, and if it is wrong, whether acquiescing to it helps or hurts you. I say that it is

    1. wrong.

    2. hurts.

    Consequently, the wrong strategy is to accomodate the sentiment. As the sentiment itself is designed to help your opponent.

  169. Oh my, how can the Dem party be endorsing this unqualified man. I’m so sorry to see these women ask for my loyalty.
    So sad.

    PUMA

  170. Mandos, writing is usually to communicate to another person. So when you say, ” I write partly to entertain myself”, are we not supposed to take you seriously?

    Is your writing a form of mental mast**urbation?

  171. Finally (guess I’m being sucked into actually engaging…): I might have supported Obama were it not for the Unity Pony. Frankly the most attractive thing about Clinton is the bizarre way in which some people hate her. There are lots of reasons to dislike federal politicians, but for some reason, the GOOD reasons are rarely invoked regarding her.

    That she has enemies and is the source of flamewars is a major plus point. Once you know where her enemies are, you get a better picture of how she’s constrained. Don’t get this from Obama. Unity Pony gives me the hives.

  172. Mandos, I appreciate what you are saying, but I don’t think liberals always appreciate other view points. Like when Obama protested the flag pin, I thought…stupid. Because I know too many vet’s who where an eagle around their neck, and it may be meaningless to you but it isn’t to them. When someone degrades the flag they feel degraded. Hillary found a way to neutralize the issue. That’s what the post was about.

  173. The answer to me is to judge whether the source of that alienation is right or wrong, and if it is wrong, whether acquiescing to it helps or hurts you. I say that it is

    1. wrong.

    2. hurts.

    Consequently, the wrong strategy is to accomodate the sentiment. As the sentiment itself is designed to help your opponent.

    That made absolutely no sense at all.

  174. bostonboomer, on June 19th, 2008 at 10:38 am Said:
    myiq2xu,
    How about burning Howard Dean, Donna Brazile, and Nancy Pelosi in effigy in Denver?

    ————————–

    I wasn’t all that eager to go to Denver, but if this happens I might be there. After all, our main protest is with the party.

    PUMA

  175. Mandos, writing is usually to communicate to another person. So when you say, ” I write partly to entertain myself”, are we not supposed to take you seriously?

    *sigh* Why is this a contradiction?

  176. Mandos, I have no idea where you are coming from. A lecturer, an analyst, a commentator, a rule breaker? I may be dense but I have little appreciation of what it is you are attempting to communicate. I admit to not holding a PhD. but I am just not getting it.

  177. Melanie: that response form McCaskills office is shocking. As the video poster shows, Clinton was indeed a promoter of the checklist for change.

    I’m going to call a few.

  178. Mandos,
    Ahh. “The evil men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones”.

    In Clinton’s case, though, it is the evil she didn’t do.

  179. I *don’t* appreciate certain (aspects of certain) viewpoints. Not At All. I *don’t* have qualms about condescending to them. Sometimes they deserve it. Whether they be held by Charles Cabbagemallet or by Mr. Working McClass.

    myiq2xu (love the handle!): The point is that Love For The Flag is actually a sentiment that necessarily serves the (R) party, where as suspicion of it serves it less. The right will always have an advantage on the King And Country front, by dint of its political ideology. Consequently, you can’t defuse the issue by “respecting” people’s love of the flag—it will bite you sooner or later.

  180. Thanks Melanie! I am more impressed with Hillary every day. Her strength and determination and willingness to loose herself to fight for what is right…

    AGAIN, those women should be ashamed that they weren’t more help to her before. McCaskill needs to stop letting her kids call her votes, they weren’t elected – she was.

  181. steveeboy,
    apparently Kerry had likened Dean to Osama Bin Laden in his primary…I guess calling Hillary an assassin (wannabe) is par for the course!

  182. You tell ‘em, sara.

    We must not let this travesty to gain credibility. Obamabots will be out in force using CfC as a talking point.

    But it is also a effort for Obama to humiliate Hillary and establish dominance over the women elected officials. It is an outrage.

    Melanie – Thanks for writing about this very important story.

    Every time Obama pulls another trick to divide us, we must expose his “Divide and Destroy” tactics.

    Women must learn to OBEY.

  183. Mandos, on June 19th, 2008 at 10:51 am Said:
    Mandos, writing is usually to communicate to another person. So when you say, ” I write partly to entertain myself”, are we not supposed to take you seriously?

    *sigh* Why is this a contradiction?

    Your sigh is a big tell to where you are coming from.

  184. Mandos, I have no idea where you are coming from. A lecturer, an analyst, a commentator, a rule breaker? I may be dense but I have little appreciation of what it is you are attempting to communicate. I admit to not holding a PhD. but I am just not getting it.

    Analyst and commentator who happens to come from a leftish sort of Naderistic perspective but is actually a Canuck arrogantly holding forth on the world’s largest military power’s internal politics (as well as living in the USA). Likes to entertain himself with admittedly weak sarcastic witticism.

  185. Yes. It’s that Josh Marshally kind of sigh.

    Blech!

  186. People who use *sigh* are usually tendentious wind bags.

  187. “Your sigh is a big tell to where you are coming from.”

    Sans doute.

  188. Mandos, are you looking for a place where you can engage in badinage with superior minds?

  189. arugula. the price. so very high. i weep.

  190. I thought William F. Buckley passed away?

  191. I just watched the Hillary video linked above.

    She is a lovely person. I miss seeing her every day.

  192. I guess I can’t complain because riverdaughter invited him here. But, I’ve got no interest in the path this conversation is taking.

    (glazing eyes) And backing slowly out the door.

  193. I don’t particularly look for places that way. I wasn’t really looking for this place at all. I saw it linked a lot from Corrente. I click over and occasionally see something I feel like responding to. I saw something that pushed my biggest buttons in the flag-burning/symbol post, thought I would Make A Larger Point via a Corrente post.

    Let myself get sucked into arguing here. Has become a meta-argument about Me. I will try to tear myself away so I can do real work.,

  194. Pat – Zut alors! Buckely, he is dead?

  195. Me either, katiebird. Be careful. It might put you to sleep.

  196. Arabella,
    sans doute! Il est mort!

  197. Laney,
    Thanks again for a good read while having my morning coffee..
    It is always very uplifting, keeps me positive during the day.

  198. Let myself get sucked into arguing here. Has become a meta-argument about Me. I will try to tear myself away so I can do real work.

    I am in sympathies with you, mon vieux. Nothid is so tiresome as a meta-argument about one’s self.

  199. I’m sorry, but I have never been able to stomach arugalla.

  200. Mort? Mort? Pas possible

  201. The harm in burning the flag (or standing on it ) is that it insults the people who have died or sent children into battle for what it represents. The flag burning helps Repubs BECAUSE they “get” the sacrifice of the millitary – creative writing class, well maybe not so much.

    How does paying a fine for using a flag represent a loss of freedom to burn it? Consider it a “flag burning tax”.

    It might encourage the people making the statement of disrespect to find another means to communicate the frustrations they feel – put your money where your mouth is…

    Now, if you REALLY want to get excited about the first ammendment, maybe you should be worrying about FISA? How about Protect America? There are bigger threats than a fine for flag burning – doncha think?

  202. It was really nice of Mandos to grace us with his wit though.

  203. Sheesh, show off my anglo-Canadian high-school French and now everyone wants in. :) It’s like Gomez and Mortitia in the Adams Family. (“That’s French!!!”)

  204. Another fatigued intellectual departs our midst. C’est triste, but what can you do?

    I guess it’s hard to talk in and echo chamber, or in a place with no visitors. I hope we don’t become a homeless shelter for bored bloggers.

  205. Parakeets are often mesmerized by mirrors.

    Just saying…

  206. Mandos will be back. He just got his with l’esprit d’escalier or whatever the internet equivalent is.

    PUMA

  207. Ok, I just realized that video is from 2006. So Hill has been dropped from the group while her agenda was co-opted. I’ve updated my post.

  208. Oh, OK, one more on point post. (Addicted now, must get fix.)

    Now, if you REALLY want to get excited about the first ammendment, maybe you should be worrying about FISA? How about Protect America? There are bigger threats than a fine for flag burning – doncha think?

    Sorry to bring a Supreme Court argument but I can just see the opinion being written. “Well, our constitution allows political statements like Flag-burning to be controlled via a fine, so FISA is just another way of…” Wedge strategy.

    I bet they’d do that even without an amendment, but with a law. “Well, in So-and-so vs. Mukasey, the court decided that it was constitutional to…”

    I understand the sad truth that people attach deaths to the flag. This binds them in blood to a system of national signage that I don’t believe can ever serve the interests of democracy, not really.

  209. I hope RD is not expected to provide cuttle bones for them.

  210. “Mandos will be back. He just got his with l’esprit d’escalier or whatever the internet equivalent is.”

    You’re right, I probably will be back. I get addicted too easily. Luckily I don’t smoke.

  211. Ah! Le voila

    I told you he’d get hit with l’esprit d’escalier.

    PUMA

  212. Mandos:

    Please take a class or two about Constitutional law before you argue on the topic.

    Your comments expose your ignorance.

  213. Oh dear. I hope I have not been a site violator by engaging in intellectual haka. Show-offy use of French, correcting a commenter’s Latin grammar.

    What ever was I thinking. I apoligize.

  214. Mandos – I wrote the post you commented on last night, and I was going to respond on my own blog about PUMA-ism and why I’m a PUMA, but…riverdaughter did it for me! :-)

    Brava, riverdaughter. Take many, well-deserved bows.

  215. Or whatever passes for wit these days. Remember, the French thought Jerry Lewis was a genius. Just a thought.

  216. I’ve met Mandos’ type before. In college I was president of the political science club.

    We had a couple members who would show up and argue about everything, quoting Foucault like he was the greatest philosopher ever.

    High-minded idealism completely detached from reality. I was never sure if their thinking was really so disorganized or if they thought that saying things that were incomprehensible made them look smart.

  217. Please take a class or two about Constitutional law before you argue on the topic.

    We are living in a world where one judge made a bizarre and meaningless argument to give Bush the presidency…

    But fine. The Supreme Court argument was an appeal to something someone here might care about, I thought. To me the real argument is that love of flag can be dangerous, and that the (D) party is at a disadvantage on that front for necessary reasons.

  218. Oh, goodie, I have a “type.”

    Let it not be said that *I* made it All About Me.

  219. Blame Canada!

  220. mawm, you’re posting under my name again!

  221. They gave us Celine Dion, the Toronto Blue Jays, Pamela Anderson and now Mandos!

  222. Mandos – Love of flag can be dangerous?

    Non, mon ami. This is where you are incorrect.

    There is nothing wrong with loving and respecting a symbol of your country. When Democrats look down on this love, instead of understanding and listening to those that feel it, that is when we get into trouble.

    Hillary’s bill was NOT a constitutional amendment. She voted against that amendment. Her bill was narrow in scope and was deemed to be Constitutional.

    Your idea that it is unconstitutional to burn a flag is not supported by reality or law. So what’s the problem with a little pandering to those who think a little differently than we do? Where’s the harm in it?

    And why don’t we Democrats do it more often? Why must we look down on our own voters?

    Elitism, perhaps?

  223. ***whoops – should have been “unconstitutional to prevent burning a flag”***

    Multi-tasking, it is not my friend!

  224. I have let the purist thing stand for too long:

    I think that pandering has its place. For instance, while the $300 gas thing or whatever it was may or may not have been good economic policy, it served an arguable political purpose: restoring faith in the “good”, New-Dealish part of government. That “pandering” has arguable benefits. The contempuous dismissal of it in some quarters was unwarranted.

    For me, though, even narrowly Constitution-fitting laws that affect flag-burning are a different kind of pandering. Not pandering to The People, but to a sort of political beast that has been created in the past few decades.

    To me it all boils down to the “Into the valley of Death rode the six hundred” business, only on a smaller scale, I guess. If nothing else, love of flag lets you distinguish the Loyal Citizens from the Bad, Defective Citizens. That alone is a problem. I guess some people need their collective symbols, maybe even I do, it may be human and all that, but it should be approached with a certain amount of trepidation and a lot of understanding for those who won’t or can’t give that love.

    Not the other way around.

  225. Barbara Mikulski
    Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
    Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)
    Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
    Mary Landrieu (D-La.)
    Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.)
    Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
    Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.)
    Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)
    Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)

    It’s bad enough they “support ” Bambie, now they steal Hill’s policies, which they have no intention of even reading, and eagerly goose step behind BO in this theater of the absurd? If this was in a comic political novel, this passage about the sad lady senators would be criticized as too over the top. BO’s handlers want to wreak the party….the easy part is the way the idjit Dems can’t help them enough. They made it clear during the primary that the Dem base embarrassed them. Believe me that goes both ways.
    I’m embarrassed that was my party.

    The Dems tenuous credibility has snapped and they are in free fall. There is nothing they won’t do , cash in or trash in their rush to try and prop Bambie up. And all it does is graphically show them up for sell outs.

    I also saw BO’s ” National Security Advisory Group ” list . Every Dem super hack retread from 30 years and more is there, suddenly as BO ’s ” team ”. This crowd has far more old Dem timers than Hillary’s ever would: some hope and change. It’s sad in many ways, to see the Dems like this, but it’s also like extreme surgery and it is getting rid of the diseased parts . They are doing Hillary a huge favor by keeping her clear from this blimp of fools ship wreck .

  226. Mandos has demonstrated him/herself to be politically clueless. Since he/she writes mostly for him/herself, I’ll cease and desist. If he/she becomes a threadjacker or abusive, he/she will be moderated.

  227. madamab: And why don’t we Democrats do it more often? Why must we look down on our own voters? Elitism, perhaps?

    And this is why Obama can’t win. He calls members of his own party’s base “bitter” and gun toting clingers to religion.

  228. Mandos: Tell us the truth. How old are you? You sound like you are about 15.

  229. We are living in a world where one judge made a bizarre and meaningless argument to give Bush the presidency…

    ___________________

    Ditto, the DNC. Both handed us an arrogant, immature, passive-aggressive, vindictive savior who’s going to bring religion to the Democratic party. Ugh.

  230. Henceforth, all Democrats are required to fight tooth and nail to keep flag burning legal. They are also required to denigrate and show distain for the flag and all symbols of the United States.

    In less than a decade the Democratic party will have joined the Whigs on the scrap heap of history.

  231. Mandos: I saw the original post after hundreds of comments had already been posted and figured I’d be writing to a dead thread.

    People keep posting on our threads for a long time. We get now comments on our introductory threads nearly every day. This blog has feeled an aching need and therefore we have quite a large and diverse readership. We don’t ask people to leave because their writing isn’t condescending enough in tone. We try to be open and inclusive while keeping out trolls.

  232. Mandos = Lord of Doom, quite apt in that I was doomed to not understand anything he tried so inartfully to impart.

  233. quick lunchtime peek

    Arabella Thanks for the correction, re Brute. May I return the favor? Practical, not practicle. I hate it when I’ve proof read something, but do not see an error until it is posted. I sent a post through this morning that had an “it” where there should have been an “if” or some such error. There comes a point at which I decide it isn’t worth correcting, everyone will know it is a typo.

    The Brute/Brutus wasn’t a typo- it was indeed an error on my part with respect to the quotation. Thanks again.

  234. Melanie, I guess I just really, really wanted to believe they weren’t THAT evil!

  235. Plukasiak: I agree with you in most everything. But we must be open to the or else we will look like sore losers.

    I disagree, RD. Indeed, the whole “ladies against women” effort — shows why I think you’re approach is wrong.

    Obama is more than happy to SAY just about anything, and promise us the moon. So if we still reject him after he meets all our demands, THEN we look like sore losers.

    I really think its a horrible idea to make any demands of the Obama campaign, because all we’re demanding is words — and talk is cheap.

    Our “flexibility” has to be in our willingness to have someone other than Clinton become the party’s nominee. We don’t look like sore losers as long as we don’t make it “all about Clinton” — by saying its all about “Nobama”, rather than about making Clinton the nominee, we maintain the high ground.

  236. myiq2xu, on June 19th, 2008 at 11:30 am Said:
    We had a couple members who would show up and argue about everything, quoting Foucault like he was the greatest philosopher ever.
    High-minded idealism completely detached from reality. I was never sure if their thinking was really so disorganized or if they thought that saying things that were incomprehensible made them look smart.
    ———-

    Door number two. That type never really understands Foucault.

    Or Hegel. They pretend to know Hegel too — they love that.

  237. Yes. That is how a primary election works. One individual wins, several others lose. I, personally supported Richardson. He lost. I’m with the big O now. Why? because I believe in what he stands for much more than for what McCain stands for. I ask you to drop your bitterness and rally for our side (yes it is still our side, if you disagree then stop calling yourself a democrat).

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 413 other followers

%d bloggers like this: