Comment of the day
From Janis. This could stand as the creed of the PUMA movement:
In order to keep at least one party on the straight and narrow in this country, we have to kick the Democrats in the teeth so hard that their heads ring like church bells. They need to be slapped down from this precipice so hard that they never, ever, EVER consider pulling shit like this again.
18 Responses to “Comment of the day”
-
FemB4Dem says:
Yes! If Obama wins, the Democratic Party as we knew it is gone. We must fight this fight here and now. There will be no other chance.
June 29th, 2008 at 3:59 am EST -
kenoshaMarge says:
Janis, that paragraph is genius. What’s more it will resonate with PUMAs everywhere!
P.S. I will steal your words frequently but will credit you. Anyone that knows me knows I couldn’t say anything that succinctly. If at all.
-
Pat Johnson says:
Janis’s comments made me “wish I could have said that”. Frustration and anger reduced to a readable, succinct message. The DNC is the most useless, corrupt, ignorant bunch of the least representatives of the Democratic Party and the values we support.
A complete housecleaning is called for.
-
parentofed says:
Janis: this is a great, great quote. I can only say [a la Obama] Me, Too.
-
Anna Belle says:
That is a great comment. I’ve said something similar, but not quite so well, to my husband on a number of occasions. I like to use the “choice” frame, as in, I’m fighting to preserve one!
-
ea says:
Strong arm tactics are not new to the DNC. Remember at the 2004 convention, for which Bill Richardson was the Chairperson (Pelosi’s role this year), Richardson tried to get all the delegates to vote for Kerry during roll call, as a show of unity. Kucinich delegates from Ohio refused to do so, and the chain of states proclaiming their unequivocal or unanimous or proud or whatever support for Kerry was broken by Ohio. I think that was the only time I cheered during the charade. Since the plan for a united front did not work last time, of course they will simply remove the option.
-
K.A. says:
What the Democrats (especially fauxgressives and the Obama set) are doing in conjunction with Republicans is tantamount to rights gauging: like price gouging, only with women (not) being considered human beings.
No more rights gouging.
Over at Pandagon, Amanda Marcotte, child-like empress of feminism, weighs in on the PUMA movement here:
Unearthing evidence of early McCain ties is valuable, but she deliberately misconstrues information and misses the point everywhere else. Wow, she can do background research! Kudos to her mad journalism skillz! No, wait, sorry: FAIL.
The supposed “outraged feminists” in pieces like the one Jesse covered this morning don’t exist—if there’s so much outrage, how come the journalists chronicling it can’t get one real world feminist to sign her name onto the outrage?
Every real liberal woman who is fucked off by the Democrats and advocating for feminism now never stated she’d vote McCain over Nobama! All the genuine Clinton sympathizers have suggested writing in Clinton or voting Green with McKinney.
Now, I’ll admit I hadn’t assumed most women expressing the “McCain is better than Oppossum” sentiment were never Clinton supporters from the get-go; I assumed they were moderate Republicans who were drawn towards Clinton because they wanted to support a high-profile woman in politics. Even still, it’s not like any of the Democrats-are-dickheads feminist activists right now were ever on board with the pro-McCain comments, so she’s deliberately misrepresenting the movement as a whole, even if the PUMA label is worthless.
-
Violet says:
Over at Pandagon, Amanda Marcotte, child-like empress of feminism
Amanda is not the empress of feminism. She is a popular blogger. Out in the real world, nobody I know has ever heard of her.
All the genuine Clinton sympathizers have suggested writing in Clinton or voting Green with McKinney.
Actually, I disagree. There are plenty of genuine Clinton sympathizers and feminists who are considering a strategic vote for McCain.
Something I keep trying to explain to people is that the old feminist movement of the 70s was much, much broader than modern feminism. Just as the civil rights movement commands the loyalties of African Americans whether they’re on the far left or the far right, so the Second Wave of feminism involved women of all stripes. And that has been one of the most striking things about the new wave of feminism awakened by Hillary’s campaign: women of many different political persuasions uniting to take a stand against sexism.
As for voting for McCain, there is a perfectly good case to be made for that. It’s a question of viewing the election cycle strategically, instead of thinking of each vote cast for President as your personal message in a bottle to the universe of what you believe.
-
sassysenora says:
Janis, well said. you express our fury at the Democratic Party (1) being undemocratic and (2) taking many of its most loyal supporters for granted very well. It’s not just about the upcoming election; it’s about whether any major party in the US will stand up for the fundamental principles of democracy and for ALL the people in the USA.
As for voting for McCain, there is a perfectly good case to be made for that. It’s a question of viewing the election cycle strategically, instead of thinking of each vote cast for President as your personal message in a bottle to the universe of what you believe.
Violet, i agree. i think that voting for McCain makes sense if you live in a state like OH, CO, or PA where the vote for POTUS is close. we will have more leverage if Obama loses than if he wins. voting for McCain makes much less sense if you live in a state like NY or MA where voting for McCain won’t give him any EVs or in a state like TX or UT where a vote for McCain might not even be noticed. i think it’s critical that our votes are seen as a protest vote against the Dems.
i think geography underlies much of the divergence of opinion about voting for McCain vs voting for a third party candidate or “staying home” (i.e., not voting for any POTUS candidate, even if voting in downticket races). i’m one of the many Clinton supporters who will probably vote Green in Nov but i’m urging my family and friends in swing states to vote for McCain.
-
Janis says:
“Feminists” like Amanda make me cringe that I ever identified as a 3rd wave feminist, ever. Foolish me, I thought it was about the next wave of building with the tools that the second wave had given us. We have these rights, now what do we do with them, that sort of thing. I had no idea it was all about cute dresses, glitter eyeshadow, and breast implants. No wonder working-class women gave them whole freak show a pass.
Amanda just got her own bell rung by charges of massive racism by another feminist blogger, so she’s more than anxious to vote Obama and slap the “I’m a nice white person, see?!?!?! This proves it!!!” sticker on her lapel. Ignore her, and her self-serving drivel.
-
K.A. says:
Haha, I don’t seriously think she is the empress of anything! I tend to see her motivations as being immature, hence the name. I was angry after reading it and being snide because it was yet another example of the reason she is so popular (online, as you note) and gets the book deals, campaign positions, and other career opportunities: because she caters to a specific subset of man — dumb, misogynist, liberal ones who want a medal for not being as sexist as the RR and genuinely believe they’re paragons of egalitarianism, which feeds their delusion of moral superiority. She can be only as feminist as they’d accept from her. I was just riffing off that general issue I have.
About attracting voters of all political stripes — that’s what I was saying I had assumed about the pro-McCain women later in my post (I should have reworded that sentence you quoted). I had assumed they were moderate Republicans who were sincere Clinton supporters then and current sympathizers now, rather than the phonies that Marcotte assumes them all to be like the PUMA founder.
But now I see what you’re saying about even far-left feminists going for McCain strategically to better ensure Obama’s failure. It would be the most reliable tactic for the express purpose of defeating Obama, I admit. But because I don’t overvalue the DNC as an entity that I’ve supported for many years like other life-long activists, I’m not interested in salvaging this party in particular, a goal I’ve seen expressed here besides boycotting the DNC’s sexism in general. If I can teach everyone a lesson about the cost of misogyny while simultaneously upending the two-party system* by getting the Green Party some funding, then that’s more progressive and exponentially more productive than defeating him the other way.
Of course, I happen to think McCain could easily beat Obama in the first place, which is as big a sticking point as not wanting to consider the DNC as good as dead. I’m guessing you disagree on both those sticking points.
_____________________________________________________________
*I don’t think it’ll become a “three party system,” but that it will force the DNC to adopt some of their more progressive stances. -
K.A. says:
^^ I have no idea why I used “DNC” instead of Democratic Party throughout the post.
Also, if you’ve already sufficiently covered this argument (about McCain votes being the only way to ensure defeat) and don’t want to rehash it, then can someone please point me to that thread?
-
Violet says:
K.A., I wouln’t say we’ve put the issue to bed. It’s an ongoing discussion, not only here but on other PUMA-associated blogs. I haven’t made a statement on it in a post, but it keeps coming up in comment threads. We actually started the discussion on this old thread (back when Hillary was still in the running) and then talked about it more on Archimedes’ Lever. And we’re still talking about it.
-
Violet says:
By the way, I forgot to say that Amanda’s post was silly. She didn’t do much digging if she still doesn’t even know when and where the PUMA movement started (and it sure wasn’t when Murphy registered the PUMA name as a PAC).
-
K.A. says:
and it sure wasn’t when Murphy registered the PUMA name as a PAC
Ah, that’s a pretty big point for her to have missed (I missed it too)!
I’ll check out the other thread to reduce redundancy. I mean, you’re right; it’s probably wishful thinking that McCain would take the election without us. I was latching onto a poll match-up from before the nomination that I recall put McCain ahead of Obama for the election (but behind Clinton, cough), though I haven’t kept up with recent polls or other PUMA blogs.
-
Kat says:
The supposed “outraged feminists” in pieces like the one Jesse covered this morning don’t exist—if there’s so much outrage, how come the journalists chronicling it can’t get one real world feminist to sign her name onto the outrage?
Eek! Not one “real world feminist”!? That made me laugh. Hee. Oops, there I go, laughing again. I guess she has a list of proper “real world feminists” who count?
Empress Syndrome is bizarre and insidious. I would never assume or expect uniformity of opinion in a diverse group of women. However, this sort of thing is one more variation on a theme: there exists no legitimate reason to dissent from the party or Obama. If you do, you are illegitimate (you are old [gasp!], you are a swiftboater, you are a racist).
I would hope I never become so rigid or brainwashed. I am optimistic at the plurality of strategies.
-
Violet says:
I mean, you’re right; it’s probably wishful thinking that McCain would take the election without us.
Hang on; I didn’t say that. ? Ever since the Wright fiasco I’ve believed that Opossum would lose in the general election, though things change daily and it’s hard to be sure. I still tend to think Opossum will lose regardless of PUMA.
-
SophieL says:
Brilliant comment!
As for my vote in the GE, still can’t bring myself to vote Rupug. My current plan is to either write in Hillary or leave that line blank.
I live in CT, which Ob carries anyway. My non-vote merely dilutes his popular vote and his mandate.
BUT–it’s not over yet! The convention is yet to come. We could still get the GOOD nominee.
