• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Perspective.
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Perspective.
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Perspective.
    thewizardofroz on Perspective.
    riverdaughter on Perspective.
    James Bowater on Perspective.
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on In spite of it all…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on In spite of it all…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Happy Thanksgiving!
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Happy Thanksgiving!
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Happy Thanksgiving!
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Happy Thanksgiving!
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on In News: GA SOS thrown under b…
    Ga6thDem on In News: GA SOS thrown under b…
    William on In News: GA SOS thrown under b…
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    November 2008
    S M T W T F S
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    23242526272829
    30  
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Happy Thanksgiving
      Be happy and be well. Please be careful about Covid. Viral load matters for infection, spending hours in a house with people is a great way to get infected. Feel free to use comments to discuss topics unrelated to recent posts. I’m doing my annual fundraiser. If you like my writing and can afford to, […]
  • Top Posts

Where are we?

You betcha!

You betcha!

Now that the election is over I thought I would scout out some of my old stomping grounds to see if it was safe for the Kool-aid free to roam Left Blogistan again.  I popped into The Smirking Chimp and was delighted to discover I still have an account there.

Then I saw this in an article by Cenk Uygur (don’t ask me to pronounce it) titled “The Center-Right Myth” and I realized we have a lot of work left to do:

What is it going to take to get through the dunderheads in DC — this is not a center-right country! In the last two elections the Democrats picked up over fifty seats in the House. They also took commanding control of the Senate and have now taken the White House. How much clearer did the American people have to be?

Do you see the logical fallacy in that passage?  I’ll give you a hint:

A) All fish live in water.

B) Dolphins live in water.

C) Dolphins are fish.

Here’s what Chris Cilliza had to say today:

But look more closely, and you see a heavy influx of moderate to conservative members in the incoming freshman Democratic class, particularly in the House.

Democratic gains in the last two elections are more of a referendum on George W. Bush than a triumph of liberal/progressive ideology.  Hillary has always been considered a moderate and Obama ran to her right in the primaries and then ran farther right in the general election.  So far he has given no indication that he will govern any farther left than the center.  Things aren’t looking good for my personal liberal wish list (UHC, LGBT rights, end the war, stop global warming, campaign finance reform, sentencing reform) and I’m even worried about losing some stuff we already have. 

Now I tend to agree with Cenk Uygur that the nation isn’t center-right, but he frames his argument illogically and in partisan terms.  While the GOP is conservative, the Democratic party IS NOT LIBERAL OR PROGRESSIVE.  The leaders of the Democratic party are infected with High Broderism and are corrupt.  They follow what Arthur Silber calls “Digby’s Credo“:

“We’re 2% less shitty than Pure Evil! It’s all we’ve got!”

Riverdaughter gave us a homework assignment:

So, how do we get the unParty to go mainstream?  That’s where the book comes in.  I’m proposing a book club to discuss the concepts presented in The Tipping Point.  As you read it, ask yourself whether you are a connector, maven or salesman.  Think about what it is about PUMA that makes it “sticky”.  Think about structure, organization and size.  Think about the coolness factor.

I’m gonna add something to that:

Think about the message, about what we should stand for.  People are hungry for a new vision of the future, so let’s give them what they want.  Principles before party.

55 Responses

  1. PUMA has to be more than just anti-Obama. The corruption and misogyny that he exemplfies is what we are against.

    But what are we for?

  2. my iq is higher than bo so there

    neener neener roflmao , but then , I knew that 😉

  3. Fairness/Objectivity in Media

  4. Highest iq ever for a president… but no one knows what it is.

    ROTFLMAO

  5. Accountability; AND ONE VOTE ONE PERSON in the primary I wuold like to see a web sire where every member of congress and admin is listed with teir income taxes paid homes owned etc etc

  6. Well of course these elections weren’t a triumph of liberalism-the Democratic leadership (including Obama) refuses to offer liberalism as an alternative to the status quo. If it were offered, it might do very well indeed, but people can’t vote for something that isn’t there.

  7. What are we for? If we’re not for equality, social justice, human rights, and democracy then what’s the point?

    It’s time to take BO out of the equation. This movement needs to grow in spite of him, not because of him. We would have move forward whether he won or not.

    If there is going to be an active resistance I would want to see is a movement of non-violent civil disobedience that resists any measures that come out of Congress and the White House that impinge on our liberties in any way. Of course we may end up having our hands full. BO is only one source of tyranny. We also have Naughty Nazi Nancy to worry about.

    I would like to see a multi-armed force develop. We need to advocate for marginalized communities like Pine Ridge and Indian Country in general. We need to lobby on behalf of LGBTs, women, children…and we should be following Hillary’s lead in that she has made it clear that those issues are not separate; they are all issues of human rights. That’s how we should frame it. If we don’t we will only continue to maintain the divides. When we stand up and say that women’s rights, gay rights, children’s rights, indigenous rights, everyone’s rights are human rights…then you’ve got something.

  8. WE SHOULD BE FOR OBJECTIVE ASSESSMENTS OF FACTS AND UNBIASED JUDGMENTS OF COMPETENCE! The Obaministration is giving reams of evidence as we speak that he wishes to employ dangerously biased hiring requirements (that neither he Biden nor Hillary, for example, could satisfy). This could be a repeat of Monica Goodling (or Gooding?) tactices…or worse!

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/us/politics/13apply.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

    Anyone else mildly concerned after reading the above?

  9. “I would like to see a multi-armed force develop. We need to advocate for marginalized communities like Pine Ridge and Indian Country in general. We need to lobby on behalf of LGBTs, women, children…and we should be following Hillary’s lead in that she has made it clear that those issues are not separate; they are all issues of human rights. That’s how we should frame it. If we don’t we will only continue to maintain the divides. When we stand up and say that women’s rights, gay rights, children’s rights, indigenous rights, everyone’s rights are human rights…then you’ve got something.”

    Yes, THIS needs to be part of our platform.

  10. I think the argument of center-left/center-right is muddled by lack of a clear definition. Poll after poll show that a solid majority wants abortion to remain legal, hardly a center right position. Most people seem comfortable with civil unions for gay couples, but oppose the more liberal position of gay marriage. Clearly the majority has moved beyond racism.

    As I write this I am listening to a man on NPR arguing that we are center right because gay marriage was voted down. He then calls this a leftist position, as if this were the only left of center position possible. Both Obama and Clinton favored civil unions but not marriage – are they right of center? The idea of civil unions is a big change from twenty years ago when gay people were routinely ostracized. When I was young, divorce was also seriously stigmatized.

    People solidly support programs like Social Security and Medicare and oppose privatization. School vouchers are repeatedly voted down. These are all solidly left of center ideas. The right would like to see SS and Medicare abolished and schools privatized. (Competition and the free market will cure all ills.)

    So many positions that were once considered liberal have become so mainstream that I think we have just redefined what center means. To me this country rejects both the hard right and hard left but has become a lot more liberal than when I was a child. Bill Clinton was so successful because he governed from the center right. And that is one reason the left despises him.

  11. I would like to see PUMA stand for it’s acronym, Party Unity My Ass. However, that should apply to both parties. Let’s hold them both accountable. The problem, the way I see it, is not left, right or center, it’s extremism. Besides, you could make the case that corporate/media influence in politics makes both parties pretty irrelevant anyway.

  12. Most definitions of liberal and conservative are really just a list of policies.

  13. OOO, Myiq- spiffy new pic! 🙂

    If in fact we spread ourselves over too many issues we’ll have no impact.

    But Myiq you suggested on an earlier thread People United Means Accountability.

    The underlying issue here is that WE THE PEOPLE have not held anyone accountable. Maybe we need to start!!! 🙄

  14. PUMA can mean more than one thing.

  15. Trying to tag the country on the arc of political philosophy is like arguing where a pendulum spends most of its time. It isn’t at the left or right apogees (it should be the same), it is somewhere in the middle and depending on the kinetic energy, that is in constant flux.

    On Nov. 4th, there was greater stored kinetic energy away from 8 failed years of W than anything for which BZero stands (if anyone can definitively point to something, anything). This election wasn’t about a mandate, it was an inverse mandate away from the excesses of overreaching courtesy of Cheney’s hairbrained theories espoused in the 1980’s on executive power.

    To answer MyIq’s question I’ve always been of the opinion that, “Good government makes good politics.” To take on that mantle, both sides are going to take some hits, but in the greater overall scheme of things, action based upon empirical evidence should win the day. When it is a close call on the empirical evidence, the call should go to that which is based upon our collective ethos. (Dusting off hands — job done.)

    BTW, MyIq I like the new glamor shot avatar.

  16. F*cking Raiders choked again.

    I’m going to try to get some sleep (I’ve been up since last night)

  17. myiq; The GOP and the Ass Party could both argue they are for those things that I stated above, but clearly that would be a gastronomical lie. They are for none of those things.

    In order to achieve King’s dream, which must be any civilized society’s goal, we must first recognize that political parties are not going to legislate any of the things I said above. They have no vested interest in doing so because as far as the partisans in government are concerned, their sole purpose is to gain and maintain power, period. If you don’t believe me then just look what Hillary did.

    She didn’t stand up for democracy. She stood up for Democrats.
    She stood up for party before principle. Now I’m sure people will argue that she did what she had to do and blah blah blah. That only serves to prove my point. And in the end, what has it gotten her? So far a whole lot of nothing, or did I miss Congress rushing to pass her economic rescue plan in September. Oh wait, that’s right…they voted against our interests and screwed us….again.

    People need to get out of the mind set that government is serving them. It isn’t. That’s how we got here in the first place. We must engage the people, not the parties. We need to effect a societal awakening that our rights are not being respected, and our needs are not being met. Once people accept the fact that their government, and the parties that operate it, are not working on their behalf, then you can start talking about changing things.

    How do you do that? With a pure, non-partisan populist movement.

    Whether people are Republican, Democrat, unaffiliated, left right center doesn’t matter at the moment. What most of us have in common is the desire to be free, to be safe, to be happy. We must be the advocates, not by lobbying a corrupt government, but by taking direct action to address the problems we face.

    We don’t like the bias in the media? We create our own media.

    We don’t like how women’s groups like NOW, NARAL, and Emily’s list sold out Hillary, and women in general? Then we create organizations to supplant them.

    We don’t like the fact that the Lakotah and other indigenous nations in America are living in Third World Poverty? Then we find a way, through direct action to help the people break the cycle of dependency that cripples Indian nations.

    The problems are vast. But the solutions are out there. The solutions will take money. More than a billion dollars was raised in 2008 for this election. There is obviously money out there. Solutions take time. This problem has been 200 some odd years in the making. We’re not going to fix it over night.

    We need to wake people up at a grass roots level with populism. WE THE PEOPLE need to do for ourselves. We need to establish our own power. We need to abandon our political parties and bring them to us. If 30% of the electorate is unaffiliated, just imagine what would happen if that number reached 50%. Then we control the agenda. We write the platform.

    Cut the power to the parties first, by leaving them high and dry, not by banging our heads against a wall trying to change them. And while we do that we work to fix the problems that government continues to neglect.

  18. While it may seem far too limited to think of ourselves as simply anti-Obama, there’s an important sense in which that really does define our current mission.

    The real current problem is that the Democratic Party, and the progressive movement, and certainly the left blogosphere, now seem to have no identity beyond Obama. Obama now defines the furthest reaches of their ambitions for the future. One can’t find enough room between any of these larger groups and Obama that you could stick a pin between them. They have simply signed over their identities to Obama in a way that I have never in my life seen before in Democratic or progressive politics. It borders on the unbelievable to see “progressives”, who were once the most die-hard of critics of compromising Democratic politicians, throw their hearts and lives behind a politician like Obama who has basically declared compromise as his unique, ‘transformational” feature. Obama isn’t opposed to the worst sort of Democratic politician: he is the worst sort of Democratic politician. The once reviled Pelosi and Reid are now held up as heroes by “progressives’, merely because they backed him to the hilt. Now, they are Obama; Obama is them; and the entire Democratic Party, the “progressive” movement, and the left blogosphere are as One with The One.

    How do you move a mass of people past such slavish, irrational devotion?

    In my view, there is no way forward for progressive policies without undermining the effect of Obama in politics.

  19. OMH –hi everybody — I’m just jumping on here for a second to tell you about the ad I just saw on tv — the “Yes We Can” dvd with the life story of B0. Good lord! I hope the Mayan calender is right — if this is what the world has come to, we have outlived our purpose.
    Gotta run — I’ll try to check in later, but if I can’t, everybody be good. 🙂

  20. shtuey: Fantastic post, thank you.

  21. We are for allowing personal choice and equality for ALL citizens.

    I would bet money I am a connector. I guess I should read first though eh?

  22. this would make a nice mascot T shirt — convert to line art from photoshop — pull thru illustrator and add the orange someplace?
    alongside the paw?

    with one of those brand statements?

    hugs.

  23. Shtuey, I am moved…great post. I agree, let the party (parties) come to the people.

  24. ChilePalmer

    You’re missing the point. Which part of Principle before party aren’t you getting? We aren’t going to play the little Democrat Republican kabuki game any longer. We don’t do organized party loyalty any longer, neither party deserves our loyalty.

  25. Collectively we have people from all over the country and some out of the country.
    We have people with “book smarts and people with street smarts and some people with both”.

    If we vet the candidates for intergrity, which one is best for the country as a whole and is held accountable for their actions, then only pick the best to endorse we could be a force to be reckoned with.
    When we endorse someone I want it to be like a hallmark stamp of approval.
    We do not need second best anymore for this country

    I do not want to be like NOW who did not investigate before they backed backtrack and now are surprised he does not respect women.

    Lets not waste all the talent and purpose here and fall apart.
    We can make a difference.

    WOMEN,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM, AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS

    PUMAS,BUBBAS, AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE

  26. shtuey, on November 16th, 2008 at 3:25 pm Said:

    “When we stand up and say that women’s rights, gay rights, children’s rights, indigenous rights, everyone’s rights are human rights…then you’ve got something.”

    Well, I’ll give that a great BIG you betcha, shtuey!

    Our high school put on the Laramie Project, the story is about what happens to the town of Laramie Wyoming after the brutal and horrifc Matthew Shepard murder. We must always ALWAYS stand up and that is one thing that I teach and preach to my daughters time and time again. Stand up, speak up, because if we don’t, who will?

    “In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
    And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
    And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
    And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.” – Rev. Martin Niemöller

  27. Helenk – absolutely!

    Great comments, everyone. We need to stand for something strong and simple. Equal rights for all Americans, the 30% Solution, and fair and transparent elections. Works for me!

  28. Shtuey,

    I don’t disagree with you at all, but I think you are getting way ahead of where we are. Personally, I am not going to get involved in Native American issues. My focus has to be on women’s rights for right now. I’m not putting my own concerns as a woman second to every other cause anymore.

    I wrote in my “going forward” post that the most important thing to me is to restore the U.S. Consitution. In that, I totally agree with you. That means repealing the Military Commissions Act, the Patriot Act, and doing something to stop domestic spying. If we can’t do that there is no hope for advancing the cause of equality for women (majority of U.S. population) or any of the minority groups. But I will be forcusing what time and energy I have available on women’s rights.

    If Obama does any of the things I want, I’ll celebrate. However I don’t think it’s likely, considering he lobbied for the FISA bill and the Wall Street bailout. I’ll be watching him, but I won’t let go of the way he won the primary and the general election. I won’t stop paying attention to his corruption and the people he is appointing to his administration.

    The GLBT community supported Obama; the AA community supported him overwhelmingly. I don’t know whether Native Americans did. From my point of view, these groups need to take the lead in advocating for their own rights and issues. If the lead, others will follow.

    But there are way too many issues that affect women for me to have extra time left over. Women are murdered in this country every day–BECAUSE they are women. Murder is the number one cause of death in pregnant women. Women are beaten up by their husbands and fathers every single day in this country. Women are paid less than men and are still discriminated against in many areas of business and academia.

    We need an Equal Rights Amendment. We could include other groups in that if they want to be included. Not that I’m expecting it to ever happen in the U.S.

  29. Some of us will choose to multitask, while others will choose to keep a laser focus on pushing in one particular area. I still think that the core value will be enough to bind and as long as one does not build itself on the backs of others that we can work without being at a cross purpose.

  30. BB – I absolutely agree with you. My focus will be on womens’ rights as well. However, I don’t know if that means we shouldn’t make PUMA encompass more issues than that. Different people within the UnParty can do different things, IMHO.

  31. bb — I am going to add that imo advancing women’s rights will go a long way toward advancing other minority groups, especially GLBT & children’s issues. First, other minority groups (AA, indigenous peoples) all contain women. Advancing women’s rights will benefit these women too. Second, gay discrimination is a sex/gender issue (i.e., gay men are thought to not “act” like “real” men because they do not fulfill the role that society says a man should). By advancing equality of the sexes, traditional sex & gender roles are shaken up (see SOD’s post yesterday about the saber tooth tiger). Finally, women have long been associated with children’s issues — advancing women’s rights (esp. via the 30% solution) will impact children’s issues.

    OK — back to work.

  32. CWaltz,

    I agree that people can multitask. But PUMA is essentially a movement that arose in response to the sexism and misogyny in Obama’s campaign and among his supporters as well as the way the primaries were fixed to elect the DNC’s chosen candidate. Those are the reasons PUMA went viral. If we dilute our purpose with dozens of other issues, we won’t be PUMA anymore. If we want to be something else–fine. But I don’t think one more organization that fights for minority rights is going get the response that PUMA did.

    We can address constitutional and human rights issues by supporting the ACLU, CCR, and Amnesty International. We can use our writing on this blog to highlight constitutional and human issues that are important to us, as Shtuey has been doing with the Pine Ridge situation. But I don’t see how that can be a primary purpose of PUMA.

  33. Madamab and Angie,

    Yes, of course people in our group will get involved in the issues that are most important for them. I just don’t think we should spread ourselves too thin. I thought that there was a consensus her that the 30% solution is a good beginning. Increasing the number of women in government is ultimately going to help men, minorities, and children, as Angie points out.

  34. angienc, I was trying to figure out a way to say that. Thanks.

  35. bb

    You are so right about diluting PUMA.
    I hope it remains a cause that addresses the treatment of all women.

  36. shtuey talks about a building an independent voters’ movement

    I like what he has to say but I’m not sure if it’s “PUMA”

    are there two separate missions?

  37. New THREAD on a slow blog day

  38. PUMA: WHAT is ROTFLMAO mean??

  39. I agree with you BB. Women have waited for equal rights long enough.

    Women have fought and died and been murdered and been sold into slavery long enough. I will put no other cause before the cause of women’s rights.

    I have 7 granddaughters and my love for them, even the obot pinhead, demands that women’s rights are my first consideration from now on. Since all other groups contain women, that fight will help/empower them too.

  40. After this ELECTION: no doubt in my mind:

    WOMAN RIGHTS is where we belong, united with our other PUMA groups.

    WE (the famales) ARE The PEOPLE for the PEOPLE,

    I think it’s TIME for woman of this WORLD: to come together—————-

    Dean’s an asshole and anyone who swallows his political pandering, is just plain busy or BLIND:

    The WOMAN’S rights need to Be DEALT with, EVERY DAY,———–

    NO ONE, will have their rights as they shoud, we’re the majority and look what they’ve done.

    They’ve been showing us for 20 months, WE don’t F@@cking matter. We always knew that, but they sure REMINDED US, at a GREAT LOSS———-

    Senator Hillary Rodham CLINTON:

  41. michelina

    Rolling
    On
    The
    Floor
    Laughing
    My
    Ass
    Off

  42. catarina:

    WHY, I wasn’t being funny, what did I do???

  43. michelina, on November 16th, 2008 at 6:32 pm Said:

    PUMA: WHAT is ROTFLMAO mean??

    ok, now i really am ROFL
    I thought you were asking what ROFLMAO meant..
    NEVER MIND!

  44. BB

    I think a large portion of us came here because of what we saw in FL and Michigan with all due respect. It wasn’t about misogyny for me as much as it was about fairness.

    Don’t get me wrong, I HATED the behavior I saw towards Sarah and Hillary but the straw that broke the camel’s back was the illusion of a democratic process rather than a real one.

  45. BB, I support your desire to advocate for women’s issues, and make that your main concern. Though, to be frank, if women don’t start framing their advocacy from the view that women’s rights are human rights there is always going to be “other.” That’s was Hillary’s message in Beijing in 1995. In the end I cannot advocate for one and not another. All people deserve to have their rights upheld, be they women, men, gay, etc. Cutting off a marginalized community because they supported Obama is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

    By that logic, anyone who supported Obama does not support women’s rights. It’s a false premise.

    And I do not understand why PUMA is being made into a women’s movement. I became a PUMA because of what happened on May 31, 2008. That didn’t happen because Hillary was a woman. It happened because the DNC wanted Obama. It is a mistake to muddy the waters and say this is a movement about sexism. It is not. Our pushing back against the sexism and misogyny is merely one aspect of the movement. It may be the most important to you, but it is not the only reason we are PUMAs.

    Hillary was not denied the nomination because she was a woman. She was denied the nomination because she could not be controlled, and represented a wing of the party that Dean and Donna wanted to cut loose. What they did to achieve that end, was sanctioning caucus fraud, voter intimidation, and threatening delegates. The sexism and misogyny was not the cause of this. It was a weapon to achieve an end. Did we stop caring about the caucus fraud all of a sudden? Did we stop caring about the destruction of democratic process? That is not sexism. That is not misogyny. It is fascism.

    There is not going to be any advancement on women’s issues in a dysfunctional democratic republic. If you don’t correct that problem you are going to be hard pressed to achieve any other goal. If PUMA is going to become a movement that only addresses sexism, misogyny, etc then there is no place in it for me. That’s not to say that I am not a feminist, I think anyone who has worked with me over the course of this campaign knows this. But if you lose your freedom of assembly, your freedom to protest, your freedom of thought; all things assaulted by the DNC and the BO campaign, then how exactly does a movement advancing women’s rights function? It doesn’t.

    Myopia will destroy this movement much sooner than expanding it.

    So, in summing up, stay in the fight for women’s rights. I’m right there with you. But if this movement only becomes about that one issue I’m gone.

  46. I sent an email to NOW today – telling them what I really think of their organization – I just couldn’t let it sit there anymore.

  47. CWaltz,

    Here is what I wrote in my comment.

    But PUMA is essentially a movement that arose in response to the sexism and misogyny in Obama’s campaign and among his supporters as well as the way the primaries were fixed to elect the DNC’s chosen candidate.

    Riverdaughter started this blog late 2007 or very early 2008. Those of us who followed her here early on were driven out of the A-list blogs by the despicable treatment of Hillary and her supporters. Some of us were men, but a large proportion were women. At that time, the assumption–even at blogs like DK and Open Left was that obviously MI and FL would have to be counted. No one knew that the DNC had already predetermined the candidate. As the primaries and caucuses unfolded, it became clear that the process was unfair and that MI and FL were all important.

    That is why I say there were two primary triggers for PUMA: 1) the shockingly misogenistic treatment of Hillary and those who supported her; and 2) the way the primaries were fixed in advance to favor Obama.

  48. Shtuey,

    The point I was trying to make in my comment is that we are at the very beginning of something. We can’t take on every cause at the same time or we will burn out rapidly. Of course I think that women’s rights are human rights! Frankly, I’m a bit insulted that you believe you need to tell me that. But I can’t deal with everything at once.

    I strongly agree with Garychapelhill that homophobia is related to misogyny. Hatred of homosexuality is affected by cultural notions of what constitutes “normal” male or female behavior. Gary argues that homophbia is a gender issue and I see it that way too.

    Gary is very angry that Obama voters (particularly AA’s) are the ones who ensured that Prop 8 would pass in CA. These issues are complex. One of the first things that turned me against Obama was his homophobia.

    All I was trying to say is that women have as much right to advocate for their own civil rights as do GLBT, Latinos, Native Americans and so on. I’m not making PUMA into a woman’s movement. I can’t control what other people do. I can only speak for myself. The simple fact is that here at the Confluence there are more women than men, so the sexism of the campaign have been very important to us during the past year.

    I only have limited time and energy and can only do so much. I think we should move forward slowly, not trying to take on too much all at once. Logically PUMAs should first focus on reforming the electoral system. But you argued earlier that we should forget about Obama and realize that our votes mean nothing.

    You wrote:

    It’s time to take BO out of the equation. This movement needs to grow in spite of him, not because of him. We would have move forward whether he won or not.

    “If there is going to be an active resistance I would want to see is a movement of non-violent civil disobedience that resists any measures that come out of Congress and the White House that impinge on our liberties in any way. Of course we may end up having our hands full.”

    I can’t take Obama out of the equation. I feel it is our responsibility to hold his feet to the fire and to fight back against the media narrative of him as the messiah who can do no wrong.

    In another comment you wrote:

    People need to get out of the mind set that government is serving them. It isn’t. That’s how we got here in the first place. We must engage the people, not the parties. We need to effect a societal awakening that our rights are not being respected, and our needs are not being met.

    Then you go on to suggest ambitious, long-term goals. That is the way you think, and that’s fine. I tend to think in terms of taking the first step first.

    As for the rest of your argument above, I completely disagree with you about what happened to Hillary. I believe that if she were a man she would have won the nomination no matter what the DNC and Obama wanted. She had to overcome the incredible misogynistic haka that the media and the blogs threw at her. It was too much. No human being could overcome it. The treatment Sarah Palin got was bad, but it pales in comparison to what was done to Hillary.

    I’m quite frankly stunned that you think my speaking about the goals that are important to me means that PUMA is going to do what I say. I’m just one person. I’m not a leader of any movement and don’t want to be. You should advocate for the issues that are important to you.

    Following your example, I guess I would have to say that if this blog doesn’t continue to support the 30% solution and address the misogyny that has been unleashed by Obama and his supporters in the media and the A-list liberal blogs, I would probably go elsewhere too. But this is Riverdaughter’s blog, not mine. I don’t make those decisions.

  49. I thought we were for hope and change… 😉

    I’m with bostonboomer, PJ and GaryCH. I really think that in addition to voter fraud, the misogyny and homophobia of ObamaNation must be aggressively addressed. And the 30% solution should be promoted as an essential curative to what is wrong in our government.

    shtuey, I believe that anyone who truly supported women’s rights would not have voted for Obama. That’s not cutting off one’s nose. It’s being realistic about the LACK of support our citizen’s have for women’s rights. It’s this myopia that doesn’t recognize the undermining of women’s rights that got us to this point. And it really sounds like you envision pushes women’s rights off the table and that is something I can not even remotely accept. Not after the incredibly destructive sexism and misogyny that ran rampant for the past year AND will only worsen if we all roll over and pretend it doesn’t exist or that it’s not as important as other issues. As a woman, I’ve had enough. I’m through with waiting our turn.

    Didn’t intend the long rant. I just dropped in to check in and say hello. Time for me to head to bed. Good night all.

  50. Hi gxm,

    See you again soon.

  51. PUMA should stand for truth. Wherever this may lead.

  52. IMO, the main function of the Pumas was an affirmation of our experiences of the election season. We came together in horror over the SEXIST treatment of Hillary, over the GAMING of the system by BO, and by the media narrative that DENIED what we were seeing and hearing with our own eyes and ears.

    Now that BO has managed to cheat his way to the top with the help of the compliant media- I intend to be someone who DOES NOT FORGET what happened.

    At the moment there is no alternative media other than blogs like this one,
    and I hope they continue to record events with the PUMA perspective.

    My own priority is OFFENSE against sexism and DEFENSE of women- with the long term goal of more elected women.

  53. We should send that picture of the winking PUMA with “You betcha” under it to Sarah.

  54. FYI Chris: We don’t use the term “you people” here. Go ask your Messiah or one of his AA supporters why not.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: