First Democratic Debate Brings Out Bernie PUMAs

Image from USAToday

The first Democratic presidential primary debate was held in my old hometown of Las Vegas on Tuesday Night. By all accounts, it was a sober, serious affair, in stark contrast to the three-ring circuses held by the GOP in recent months. While there was some expected disagreement, and the occasional dig from one candidate to another, but the tone was noticeably more adult, more mature and more presidential.

Better yet, both of the leading candidates, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton acquitted themselves well, and made their own fans very happy. I wouldn't be surprised if Sanders increased his brand, since fewer people know it as well as the Clinton brand. And Clinton put many minds at ease with her personable, sharp and "ready" performance. It didn't have the zazz of the GOP free-for-alls, but it was more in line with what one of these things is supposed to be.

My assessment was that both Sanders and Clinton came off well, but that Clinton had the edge. Sanders got tripped up a few times, and Clinton for the most part didn't. The media, by-and-large, agreed with me, widely hailing Clinton as the winner, and proclaiming (without irony) that after months of media criticism, she now had a big boost. Sanders was acknowledged to have done well, with the same observations I made, where he could have prepared better.

But that's not the whole story. There's been something bubbling under the surface for a while now that really came to a head after the debate. Bernie Sanders supporters, who have long felt ignored, are making more noise than ever, and are not showing the decorum of their hero. Quite the contrary.

Okay, little sidebar here. I've contributed to a few message boards over the past 24 hours, using some of the arguments I'm using in this column. Doing so, I have incurred the wrath of Bernie supporters. This kind of proves my overall point, but I'm going to attempt to squelch what I can here, by saying: 1) I'm not referring to all Bernie supporters; 2) I make no comparison between Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders as candidates; and 3) I'm a progressive liberal Democrat who happens to like Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton.

In online polls, Clinton didn't win the debate. In many cases, she came in third or fourth (which is preposterous). Sanders won, and not just by a little. By a lot. By an absurd lot. By an old MSNBC Ed Show text poll margin. By a "Saddam Hussein won an election" margin. In one of the polls, it was Sanders at 81%. That's not normal, and it's not remotely believable. So, it was off into the blogosphere and social media to figure out what was going on.

Image from source, New York Times

Doing so was akin to wading into the piranha-filled waters of a NewsBusters or Breitbart message board. Inexplicably, the Bernie fans are filling the role usually played by extremist Tea Baggin,' Palin lovin' conservatives. The love for Bernie overflows, and the venom against Hillary is flowing freely, with spittle, foam and maybe a little blood. It's just bonkers.

My conclusion is this. Whereas in the 2008 election, Hillary Clinton had her "PUMAs" (which stood for "Party Unity My Ass") and Ron Paul had his disciples who would rig polls, use trickery and even break the law to try and engineer a win for their candidate, Sanders has his own "Feel the Bern" cult.  It's not too much of a stretch to believe that these extra-energized, strident and driven supporters will be more likely to participate in an online poll. So, I won't go so far as to say any of the polls have yet been rigged, or even that any shady business has happened. But I do believe these polls are overly lopsided due to a practice called "FReeping." It's completely legal, but it's not particularly accurate.

That said, I'm more than a little worried that this is going to get worse. I've already encountered Bernie supporters who loathe Clinton with every fiber of their being, and refuse to vote for her if she's the nominee. They're doing their level best to convert people not just to their candidate, but to their view of Mrs. Clinton. They don't save their vitriol for her either, questioning the intelligence and integrity of her supporters. Their abrasiveness and invective tarnish not only their own candidate, it spills over into the entire Democratic effort at electing a candidate.

Here's a response I got from someone I agreed with on the hostility level:

 "One told me to die in a fire on this board. Also said that if Bernie doesn't get the nomination, he doesn't care if the whole country burns. Kind of a fire theme. I don't think Bernie would tolerate such cultish behavior, and I wouldn't be surprised if he regrets creating this monster." (Source)


And that pretty much sums up my concern. It's their way or the highway, they will not vote at all if their candidate doesn't win the primary, they will trash the other candidate, and take no prisoners along the way. This is not needed when the Republican side is in such disarray. I hope that Bernie notices, and says something about it. And I hope the Hillary supporters don't take the bait.

[Excerpt]

Who Won and Lost the Democratic Debate? The Web Has Its Say

Bloggers, commentators and the Twitterati quickly weighed in on the first Democratic debate, scoring the winners and losers. Hillary Rodham Clinton was the clear victor, according to the opinion shapers in the political world (even conservative commentators). . .

Read more at: New York Times

Mittens Cleans Up, Assured the Nomination

Image of Willard from source, HuffPo

Well, we've known it for a while. Though Newtie and Ron Paul have been hanging on by their fingernails, Mitt Romney is now assured the nomination, barring a political bombshell or something. The FReepers have pledged not to vote for him. It will be interesting to see if "FReeper" is as useless as "PUMA" was in the 2008 election. And it remains to be seen if anti-Obama hate will equal pro-Romney love.

[Excerpt]


Mitt Romney Sweeps GOP Primaries, Promises 'Better America' 

Mitt Romney laid claim to the fiercely contested Republican presidential nomination Tuesday night with a fistful of primary triumphs, then urged all who struggle in a shaky U.S. economy to "hold on a little longer, a better America begins tonight. . ."

Read more at: Huffington Post

Hillary Clinton Calls for World to End Anti-gay Discrimination

Image from source, Los Angeles Times

Wow. This is really a first. An American call to other countries to end anti-gay discrimination?  That is very cool. And it was Hillary Clinton, part of the Barack Obama administration, who did it. I wonder if this will help squelch any lingering resentment from gays and lesbians over a) the Obama/Clinton fight in 2008, and b) the perceived slights toward the gay community from Obama? I think it might.

[Excerpt]


Hillary Clinton calls on world not to discriminate against gays

Reporting from Washington—

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called on world leaders for the first time Tuesday to stop discrimination against gays and lesbians, announcing that the United States would use diplomacy and $3 million in aid to help expand the rights of gay people around the world. . .

Read more at: Los Angeles Times

Rev. Phelps' Church to Picket AZ Tragedy Victims' Funerals

This post isn't really about outrage over Rev. Fred Phelps and his crazy Westboro Baptist Church (which is mostly populated by members of his own family). What WBC does is very predictable: take a high profile tragedy, and glom onto it in the most profane way possible. It's what they do.

Image of former Democrat, Kevin Dujan
from Joe.My.God.

What caught my eye was a post by a "former Democrat" Kevin Dujan, who runs the anachronistic website, Hillbuzz. Dejected after Barack Obama won the Democratic primary for the 2008 presidential election, Dujan became a PUMA, that unusual political breed of Hillary Clinton supporters who pivoted 180 degrees, and inexplicably became staunch tea baggin' conservatives.  He (and they) became so disenchanted after their preferred candidate lost, they decided to go against everything she stood for. Which makes very little sense, but there you go.

Such cognitive dissonance can generate amusement and/or frustration in a reader of Hillbuzz. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a regular reader, only clicking through when Dujan says something stupid or embarrassing enough to garner a mention on a site I do read. This time, I was at a worse site, FreeRepublic.com, having my curiosity stoked by Saturday's shooting spree at Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords' public event in Arizona. Any time something tragic happens, FR can be counted on for some of the most extreme, hyper-partisan, far-right wing stuff, and I like to keep tabs on that.

Anyway, someone at FR linked to Hillbuzz, which is odd, because Dujan is openly gay, something loathed and detested--it's a requirement to post there--by FReepers.  I guess when they agree with something, they can ignore certain things. There's that cognitive dissonance again. Hillbuzz wrote an article about Rev. Phelps' despicable plan to protest at a nine-year-old victim's funeral. But what does Dujan focus on? The fact that Phelps once considered himself a Democrat. Yeah, Kevin sweetie, I don't think the man's past affiliation with the Democratic Party is the lede here.  There isn't a Democrat alive (outside of whatever members of his church who might consider themselves thus) who'd claim him. And there isn't a thing about Phelps' whack job philosophy that lines up with Democratic politics.

Dujan himself once considered himself a Democrat. Democrats wouldn't claim him either.

[Excerpt (emphasis added)]

BRACE YOURSELVES: Democrat Fred Phelps and Westboro Hate Group announce plans to picket 9-year-old shooting victim Christina Greene’s funeral. A new low for Democrat hate groups.

The Left does some truly despicable things in this world, but this is a new low for Democrats.

Former three-time Democrat gubernatorial candidate Fred Phelps Jr. (commonly called just “Fred Phelps”) and his Westboro Hate Group have announced plans to disrupt the funeral of 9 year-old shooting victim Christina Greene. . .

You can read more (but I wouldn't recommend it) at: Hillbuzz

Tea Baggers: The Phantom Menace?

Image from source, The Daily Beast

The article excerpted below asks a very relevant question: is all the hype about the Tea Party movement just a lot of hot air? It's a good point. Remember before the 2008 election, how the "Pumas" were thought to be Barack Obama's Achilles heel? They turned out to be a paper tiger, utterly irrelevant in the scheme of things.

Here in Nevada, the 'baggers descended upon Sen. Harry Reid's tiny home town of Searchlight last weekend, and you'd have thought it was the largest political rally ever held. Baloney. There were more people at the Obama events I attended here in '08. Shoot, I'll bet there will be as many people in the crowd at this weekend's final Las Vegas Wranglers hockey game of the season. They're loud, they're colorful, and they can't spell worth a shit (TeaBonics: Crazy Tea Bagger Signs). But do they matter?

[Excerpt]

The Tea Party's Phantom Menace

For all the fountains of vitriol and frantic media coverage aimed at the Tea Partiers, the movement doesn’t have the money or sophistication to win anything, much less roll back the new health-care law.

Health-care reform, student-loan reform, momentum building toward significant financial reform—yet, day after day, all we seem to read about are the dangers the Tea Party supposedly poses to the republic. . .

Read more at: The Daily Beast

Did You Know The PUMAs Are Still Around?

Image from RiverDaughter

Remember the PUMAs? No, not tennis shoes, the group that got their acronym from "Party Unity, My Ass!" and later--correctly inferring that the phrase was rather classless--changed it to "People United Means Action" which is just inscrutable. But not as inscrutable as this video!

I had a run-in or two with the PUMAs during the waning days of the Democratic Presidential Primaries. They were a group of "disenfranchised" Hillary Clinton supporters with a huge axe (battle axe?) to grind. And they despised Barack Obama. To them, Hillary was robbed, and Obama done the robbing. They dealt in baseless accusations and a curiously one-sided take on "dirty politics." They started websites containing far more vile words than were ever hurled at Mrs. Clinton, though they inspired many in-kind replies. Oh, and they were basically just frickin' nuts.

Anyway, the PUMAs are still around (apparently hoping that somehow ol' Hillary is still gonna pull this thing off!), and they have an instructional video showing what they are all about. It plays like a cult indoctrination. A really bad cult. Low production values, bad still photography captures and terrible voice over narration doom the thing. That and the fact that the message is utterly incoherent. Anyway, check it out if you have a couple of minutes to kill.

Hillary Clinton to Accept Secretary of State Job?

Photo from source, Guardian UK

Well, hey. I'm OK with it. You?

I went into the Democratic primaries with neither love nor hate for Hillary Clinton (I'm an odd duck, I guess). My only problem with her was a nasty tone during the primary campaign. But oddly, in American politics, primary fights are usually water under the bridge after they are over. And if Barack Obama can overlook it, who am I to hold on to the rancor?

I've got to wonder how the alleged army of PUMAs is taking this though. This has to play ping-pong inside their heads. Poor PUMAs. . .

[Excerpt]

Hillary Clinton to accept Obama's offer of secretary of state job

Hillary Clinton plans to accept the job of secretary of state offered by Barack Obama, who is reaching out to former rivals to build a broad coalition administration, the Guardian has learned. . .

Read more at: Guardian UK

Bill Clinton Finally Fired Up for Barack Obama

Photo from source, Huffington Post

After appearing transparently lukewarm toward Barack Obama, Bill Clinton seems to finally be jazzed about campaigning for him. Maybe he was reading too many PUMA websites!

[Excerpt]

Bill Clinton Slams Palin, Shows Fire For Obama

Former President Bill Clinton revved up a crowd on behalf of Barack Obama in Florida Wednesday, his first since the Democratic convention. And though he repeated his mantra that Democrats don't have to "say one bad word" about their Republican opponents to win the election, Clinton actually snuck in a dig against Sarah Palin. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Prominent Hillary Clinton Backer Defects to McCain

Photo from source, CNN

The elusive PUMAs have been difficult to pin down, proving to be at least a little less numerous than they were made out to be in the early days of Barack Obama's presumptive nomination. But at last, one has made herself public.

What Lynn Forester de Rothschild could possibly find to endorse in the John McCain/Sarah Palin ticket is difficult to imagine. And Rothschild herself isn't very forthcoming, citing not liking or trusting Obama as her reason. Mmmkay.

[Excerpt]

Prominent Clinton backer and DNC member to endorse McCain

Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a prominent Hillary Clinton supporter and member of the Democratic National Committee’s Platform Committee, will endorse John McCain for president on Wednesday, her spokesman tells CNN. . .

Read more at: CNN

Thanks to Stupid Monkey Planet for the link

Voting for a Vagina

Posted by Stupid Monkey Planet

Let us focus on the extreme monkey manic cases here. The "Vote for a Vagina!" group. . . I am sure you know who you are.
Allow me to ask you a multi-part question. . .

Is that what it boils down to? A vagina? Are you so upset to lose the first vagina that you will settle for awful sloppy seconds? Are you stupid monkeys so desperate for a vagina in THE office that you are willing to sell your soul to any willing, wanting, wafting vagina on the market? Even if that vagina does not believe in the rights of said vagina. . . professes to teach vagina abstinence to her pregnant (possibly twice) unwed daughter. . . and willing to ban the vagina sex education that could save your children's lives??? You know all of this and yet you stupid monkeys are still willing to close your, obviously, blind primordial eyes and dive in? Just to be eternally lost in your just cause???

Must there be a vagina at any cost? If so, why go for the first vagina that crept up to you from out of nowhere, after your first vagina left you high and dry? Where has that vagina been? Does it matter to you? Is it because this is a HOT vagina?

If that is the case. . .now you ALL are thinking like the desperate guys do at the bar. . . "Oh man. . .a hot chick (read: stripper). . .Oh shit. . .here she comes. . .she is talking to me. . . I think I'm gonna get laid for sure. . .where's my wallet??? How many drinks did you buy, tips did you leave? Did it work out? Or did it just cost you money and leave you sitting alone at the bar half drunk with an empty pocket? Where is that hot vagina now? Down at the other end of the bar draining the next 'lucky' guy. Sound familiar? Four more years of that sounds great, don't it?

And let's say something crazy happens. . .you can and do get lucky with the aforementioned hot vagina. . .but you must make a serious commitment to the hot vagina before you obtain it. . .your money, your children, your rights and your dignity. . .will you do it?

Maybe I am reaching way too deep into this shallow pool. . .Maybe it is much more simple than that. . .Maybe you stupid monkeys just prefer a matching set. . .I mean, figuratively speaking, what good is a big prick if there is no vagina for it to hang around?

EDITOR'S NOTE: Ohhh, Monkey, you're going to get me in trouble! You couldn't say "va-jay-jay?" Or maybe "snizz?" I'll have to run one of those ratings programs on the blog to see if I jumped from PG-13 to NC-17!

The Great PUMA Fraud

Image from RiverDaughter

I had a hunch that the threat of "PUMA"s was overblown, and if the Democratic National Convention did anything, it took away any power they might have had. I'd be very surprised to see the mainstream media latch on to the PUMA train much, if at all after this.

And, if the wide proliferation of the piece below is any indication, this may be the PUMA's last call.

[Excerpt]

The Great Pundit Cable Republican PUMA Fraud (Brent Budowsky)

Yes, indeed, one of the pundits with the latest "Hillary supporters will vote Republican" words admitted she was repeating the GOP talking points, which indeed she was, along with the jib-jab of the cable talkies and the flim-flam of the so-called experts who treat smears as truth and talking points as news. . .

Read more at: The Hill

Are Hillary Clinton's Supporters Really a Big Deal?

Image from HipHappy

This morning, one of the very first stories I saw was one alleging a huge divide at the Democratic National Convention. According to the blaring headlines, Hillary Clinton's supporters are still balking at a Barack Obama candidacy, and ready for some kind of fight.

While I'll admit to having a gnawing fear in the back of my mind at some kind of surprise coup, I've thought for some time that the fear was overblown. And-if the voices I heard from the convention floor via radio are any indication--the story was overblown in the media this morning. Sure, there are PUMAs out there (some undoubtedly not Democrats anyway, and possibly even Rush Limbaugh kool aid drinkers), but I just don't think they're as big a force as they've been made out to be. I guess we'll all get to see soon enough how it will all play out.

[Excerpt]

Clinton asks her delegates to back Obama for the country's sake

Hillary Clinton made an impassioned appeal Monday for supporters to put aside disappointment over her failed presidential bid and unite behind Barack Obama, a move aimed at avoiding lasting divisions that could damage both the Democratic nominee and the New York senator's own political future. . .

Read more at: Canada.com

Hillary Clinton to Tame Her PUMAs?

A bit of PUMA art from Yes to Democracy

Well this is good news. Hillary Clinton is planning to tamp down anti-Obama protests at the Democratic National Convention. But will it work? While Clinton didn't seem to try very hard to temper tempers on her own campaign web site's blog, her supporters there were out of control. You could hardly go further astray from your candidates wishes than to pledge to vote for John McCain.

I continue to be baffled by the PUMAs, hoping that their numbers were smaller than advertised, and that they were infiltrated by Republicans to inflate their numbers. They are so allegiant to Hillary Clinton the woman, they are willing to go against Barack Obama because he isn't her. They will throw their votes to John McCain out of spite, even though his policies are 180-degrees from Clinton's.

So good luck with this plan, Mrs. Clinton. You're going to need it!

[Excerpt]

Clinton creates 'whip team' to quell anti-Obama protests

In an unusual move, Hillary Clinton's staff is creating a 40-member "whip team" at the Denver Democratic convention to ensure that her supporters don't engage in embarrassing anti-Obama demonstrations during the floor vote on her nomination, according to people familiar with the planning. . .

Read more at: Politico

Hillary Clinton's Campaign: An Autopsy

Image from Blog.Pumapac.org

The PUMAs continue to growl that they'll support John McCain over Barack Obama. Sure, McCain's policy proposals are 180-degrees from their own interests, and Obama's line up nearly perfectly with Hillary Clinton's, but that is of no interest to them. They insist that Obama played the race card, used sexism, and generally shat all over Clinton's campaign, while Democratic leaders pulled the rug out from under her.

They are short on evidence, and actually have more of a beef with the press, bloggers and some of Obama's more ardent supporters. They categorically deny that Clinton's campaign was to blame for her loss in any way. She was ROBBED! Bull crap.

[Excerpt]

The Front-Runner’s Fall

Hillary Clinton’s campaign was undone by a clash of personalities more toxic than anyone imagined. E-mails and memos—published here for the first time—reveal the backstabbing and conflicting strategies that produced an epic meltdown.

For all that has been written and said about Hillary Clinton’s epic collapse in the Democratic primaries, one issue still nags. Everybody knows what happened. But we still don’t have a clear picture of how it happened, or why. . .

Find out why at: The Atlantic

What You Must Believe to be a Republican (or PUMA)

Randi Rhodes, host of her own radio show on the Nova M Network often runs a comedy bit at the beginning of a new hour called, "How to be a GOOD Republican." It also sometimes has a title (paraphrasing here) like "What You Must Believe to be a Republican."

It just occurred to me that if all the faux outrage and stupid (stupid, stupid, stupid) emails that were floating around were genuinely believed by the candidates and voters, you'd almost have to believe that Barack Obama, his wife and Democrats in general, were evil incarnate. We know that they mostly don't believe this stuff, they just use it for political purposes.

But I thought it might be interesting to list a few things that they claim to believe, Let's see, you'd have to believe that:

• Barack Obama is a crazy Christian.


• Barack Obama is a covert Muslim too.


• Barack Obama switched bodies with Keith Ellison, and was sworn into the Senate on the Koran.


• Barack Obama hates the troops.


• Barack Obama hates America.


• Barack Obama probably hates the baby Jesus.


• Michelle Obama hates America. We're allowed to attack her mercilessly for a few ill-chosen words.


• Barack Obama doesn't qualify for President, since he was born in Hawaii to a Citizen.


• Barack Obama is scary because he's too young at 46.


• Barack Obama's popularity around the world is a bad thing.


• Barack Obama's middle name is "Hussein" like Saddam, and his last name sounds like "Osama." This make him a bad man, unfit to be President.


• Barack Obama knows some people who turned out to be bad guys. Ipso facto, Obama is bad too.


• Barack Obama has changed his position on some issues. he's a flip-flopper.

Then, you have to believe this:

• John McCain is a straight talker on religion. Even if he's claimed to be both Baptist and Episcopalian.


• John McCain loves the troops so much, he was against the GI Bill.


• John McCain--who has said he didn't love America until he came back from Viet Nam--loves America.


• Cindy McCain has had a few scandals in her day, but she's off limits. Leave her alone.


• John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, outside America. Do NOT question his citizenship. It's not like it was Hawaii.


• It would be wrong to point out that John McCain is 72. And an old 72. So what?


• It would be inappropriate to refer to "J. Sidney McCain," but "B. Hussein Obama" is acceptable.


• John McCain was one of the Keating Five, and had lots of shifty acquaintances over the years. So?


• John McCain has changed his positions as conditions changed "on the ground." This is different from flip-flopping. Somehow.

And most importantly:

• Emails with the tag-line, "Send this to everyone you know!" are to be believed as 100% true, as long as they are about a Democrat. Or a virus that will eat your hard drive.

Do yourself a favor if anything here feels true to you. Go to Snopes.com, and read for yourself why everything you know is wrong! Thankyouverymuch.

John McCain Against Gay Adoption

Image from Velvet-Mag

Former Hillary Clinton supporters are still making noise about how bad Barack Obama is, and how they--hardcore Democrats--intend to vote for John McCain. This is despite the fact that Obama's positions are nearly identical to Clintons. And it is despite the fact that John McCain's positions are 180-degrees from Clinton.

One of the big policy position where McCain ought to be a "no" vote to a Democrat is his intention to put Supreme Court justices on the bench that would overturn Roe v. Wade. There are many others, but here is the latest: McCain is opposed to adoptions by gay parents. Now, there is the strong possibility that these "Nobama/PUMAs" are largely made up of mostly of Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos, and not Democrats at all. But if they do exist, I'd love to have them come here and explain themselves.

[Excerpt]

The NY Times Interview: McCain Against Gay Adoption

Q: President Bush believes that gay couples should not be permitted to adopt children. Do you agree with that?

Mr. McCain: I think that we’ve proven that both parents are important in the success of a family so, no I don’t believe in gay adoption. . .

Read more at: The Independent Streak