My mom's a total Puma. I'll tell her she's in excellent company, with YoMom.

I think a lot of older Indians (including my father) have difficulty voting for Barack because of his Muslim ancestry. This Hindu/Muslim thing runs pretty deep even for people who are quite intelligent.

I just don’t get this PUMA thing. Clinton’s and Obama’s positions on nearly all issues are identical. So maybe a PUMA is really a Republican in disguise, or someone who has suddenly lost all her thinking skills!

What did you just say about my mom?

can we have some PUMA clarification? Are the relatives just PUMA-sympathetic or self-identified as PUMAs? And did Mike "Exterminate Jew Power" Peters show up?

4 · Abhi said

What did you just say about my mom?

Yeah! What Abhi said!

"Ravi and I have been stalking the forrests of Denver looking for desi PUMAs but with to avail."

What about that male South Asian PUMA featured on The Daily Show as part of a group of disgruntled Hillary supporters who need healing time?:) He was the one who said, in his most smug, sarcastic voice, that he wouldn't be voting for "Barack Hussein (emphasis) Obama." With Democrats like that, who needs Republicans?

Hillary's speech had conviction in it, but it lacked the substance needed to motivate the PUMAs. She was stressing more on why not to vote for McCain. "You can't vote for McCain, and I'm not in the race - so you have no choice but to vote for Obama" seemed to be the message.

Yes. There's a choice. PUMAs can choose to do nothing on election day.

One thing's for sure: If Obama does not get elected, the Democratic party will see an upheaval that's not happened in a century.

M. Nam

YOO HOO to your moms :-). Mothers do know best...sometimes!

About finding desi PUMAs in Denver, I know of two Texan Hillary delegates who're desi and PUMA-ish, like Ann Price Mills. They may/can not be openly PUMA, but they could lead you to others who are.

Another great place is the PUMA headquarters, and there should be desis there as well - a Pakistani girl who grew up in Lebanon (very attractive) whom I'd met in Virginia and who comments on the Confluence.

And to the others, the vast majority of PUMAs are not usually racist/Muslim-phobic, etc. On the contrary.

If Obama does not get elected, the Democratic party will see an upheaval that's not happened in a century

Must... resist... jokes... about... cougars...!

Abhi: Not just your Mom :) At the risk of being labelled as a Male Chauvanist "Ham", aren't all females more or less categorized as: Puma, Wild cat? Grrrrrrrrrrr, Grrrrrrrrr, Watch out!! They don't need boots to walk all over you. I am just saying;) Seriously, stop looking for Puma and do some detailed meaningful reporting - In the words of CM "tell me something I don't know".

2 · atool said

I think a lot of older Indians (including my father) have difficulty voting for Barack because of his Muslim ancestry. This Hindu/Muslim thing runs pretty deep even for people who are quite intelligent.

Wow. I didn't even realize that was an issue in the South Asian community. I feel totally Pollyana-ish.

On another note, does anyone's dad have a problem with the fact that Hillary's ancestors were probably slave owners and tea stealing, opium selling imperialists? Just wondering.

"On another note, does anyone's dad have a problem with the fact that Hillary's ancestors were probably slave owners and tea stealing, opium selling imperialists? Just wondering."

Uh, Faiqa, what is that supposed to mean? Children are guilty of the sins of their fathers? Anyway, I think it's pretty disgusting if someone is afraid of voting for Barack because of some secret Muslim voodoo, but, frankly, it may be a projection of the Obama supporter above. Do you have any proof that is why some older desi's have trouble with Obama because of that? Don't go there. It's not fair. People can have genuine reservations about Obama's candidacy without being a bigot.

Here's a hint from a Republican who thinks all the candidates, right and left, have significant deficits: try the soft sell. Maybe, just maybe, experience teaches you a thing or two about life, and a young and inexperienced, although talented, man is a hard sell to someone who has seen a lot and is significantly older.

Try: I understand you are nervous about his lack of experience, but, ...fill in the blank (I can't, but I'm sure some of you can)
Try: I know. It's tough. She ran a great campaign and it is disappointing, but now, I think, we just have to do our best with the choices that are left. And I think, despite what you think of Obama compared to Hillary, it is still in our best political interests to support Obama. Perhaps Obama could pledge something? An important position for a woman, or women, up front in the administration? I dunno. Just brainstorming.

Etc. Etc. Says MD who used to be a Clinton supporter in the 90s. Try the soft sell, Obama supporters, and show some respect to the elders....let them vent, understand their objections, and engage them thoughtfully and gently. They have valid points. So, don't be afraid to discuss them respectfully. Okay, lecture over.

My impression of PUMA psychology....HRC standins like Ferraro were trying to create the impression that Obama is where he is because of some kind of affirmative action. But women of their age have been the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action in education & employment. I am not saying it was easy for them in the face of male chauvinism, but they should at least consider how silly that assertion sounds coming from white women from upper middle class backgrounds who benefited from "positive discrimination". I am against race based AA but I think not being able to recognize Obama's accomplishments as the product of his intellect & personality is indicative of some kind of prejudice. Before I get jumped on I am not saying that people who prefer HRC are racist, I am just questioning those who feel that Obama's success is completely undeserved. These PUMAs will wonder how sensible their scorched earth tactics are when their little Bobbys/Rajeshes get drafted

Ummm, MD? I'm Muslim. I was responding to someone else's comment that Obama's heritage might preclude their parents from voting for him. My conflation of Hillary and imperialism and slave owning was directed at creating a sense of irony. It's called sarcasm.

>>I think a lot of older Indians (including my father) have difficulty voting for Barack because of his Muslim ancestry.

Better reasons for older desis to not vote for Obama are:

1. Most older desis are on the verge of retirement and will count on Capital gains and dividends for future income. Obama has promised to tax these more.

2. Obama's healthcare plan will reduce choices for them when they need it most - in their old age.

3. The Democratic party's estate taxation policies will ensure that it will be more difficult to bequeath property to their children or grandchildren.

4. Most if them bought their homes in the 70's/80's and have paid it off by saving diligently. Obama will now punish them by taxing them more to bail out those home-owners who speculated in the bubble and are under water.

M. Nam

15 · louiecypher said

My impression of PUMA psychology....HRC standins like Ferraro were trying to create the impression that Obama is where he is because of some kind of affirmative action. But women of their age have been the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action in education & employment.

So true! Geraldine ‘the original PUMA’ Ferraro has certainly gone off the deep end! Of course Obama has worked the system (possibly affirmative action, a black power base, etc. etc.) to get to where he is. And so too has Ms. Ferraro herself in different ways, and so too the Clintons, Bushes, Gores, et al. But from my observations over a long time, it's so much harder for a black man to reach the heights that Obama has reached, than for white women who actually have been quite pampered lately. No wonder Ms. Ferraro has been banished to Fox News to offer her ‘fair and balanced’ opinion there!

Abhi listen to yo Dad ... enough with this puma stuff. The problem with discussions of serious issues in this country is that we are constantly diverted into talk about the political equivalent of a jerry springer show which only helps us elect the wrong people.

More about "PUMA" the PAC. It was started by a McCain supporter, who never made any donations to Clinton!

http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/pumas_are_swiftboats_darragh_murphy/

All McCain has is the dirty tricks to get a shot at this election.

susan estrich was on fox saying 50% of clinton supporters aren't going to vote obama, which means he's toast. i hear trading contracts for a repub woman VP are soaring. if mccain goes that route it could be the endgame.

i fear clinton's strategy to divide the party along race, religion, and gender lines has worked. there's now a good cop/bad cop show going on with hill/bubba, with her saying the right things while bubba undemines him. He continues to bring up the explosive issue of race, perhaps in coordination with mccain (cough, hugh rodham, cough), saying he's not prepared to be prez, and won't be attending his speech...sending a clear signal to his many supporters.

meanwhile, prominant hilary fundraiser like Lynn de rothschild are sying they are not voting for obama. begalia and carville are undercutting him, and clinton supporters say the speech didn't heal.

the clinton's are set up to take the party back if obama doesn't come up with a second act.

19 · nil said

Abhi listen to yo Dad ... enough with this puma stuff. The problem with discussions of serious issues in this country is that we are constantly diverted into talk about the political equivalent of a jerry springer show which only helps us elect the wrong people.

The problem with comments like yours is that it's presumptuous to assume that some of our readers don't want to read posts like this. This topic is hardly Springer-esque.

There are and will be other "serious" posts, about different aspects of the convention, as soon as our bloggers have the opportunity to write them. Instead of typing unproductive comments, please keep that in mind.

I think a very important part of her speech was when she asked people if they were voting for her name or the soldier in Iraq or the family that is dealing with the choice of cancer drugs or food or that family that is losing their home.

These Puma's were voting for a name and couldnt give a damn about the issues and that's a fact jack!!!

High five's self for finally getting to say "Thats a fact jack"

susan estrich was on fox saying 50% of clinton supporters aren't going to vote obama,

Fox is full of S-tothe-H-tothe-I-tothe-T. Barry will win; Michelle will rule. I will visit the USA sometime next year for the first time, to witness real change. It should be a riot.

7 · Whose God is it anyways? said

What about that male South Asian PUMA featured on The Daily Show as part of a group of disgruntled Hillary supporters who need healing time?:) He was the one who said, in his most smug, sarcastic voice, that he wouldn't be voting for "Barack Hussein (emphasis) Obama." With Democrats like that, who needs Republicans?

I believe a child psychologist's methods were deployed to 'convert' them. The most common complaints I've seen from PUMAs are:

1. We don't know him well enough.
2. Florida and Michigan weren't dealt with in an acceptable manner and, because of this, Barack would have not secured enough delegates to win the nomination

translate this into desi terms:

1. He is not from a good family/unknown stock--though he has been heavily covered by journalists of all poltical persuasions and his basic biographical details subjected to extreme scrutiny, we feel it is necessary to first have 4 years of a known quantity before living under the unknown.
2. He is cutting the queue.

I think this constant focus on the puma story gives a slanted view of this race, it is a story that is sensationalistic and it helps sell a certain viewpoint but misses the big picture in this election, I was commenting on that. I'll move on.

i hear trading contracts for a repub woman VP are soaring. if mccain goes that route it could be the endgame.

I dont think so. According to a poll done a while back, most Americans would rather vote for a Black man than a white woman. Amrika is soo third world, when it comes to electing women to political office!

Point 1: A lot of third world (or developing) countries have elected women leaders

Like .........................India, Israel, Chile, Liberia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Argentina, wagehera, wagerhera.
During the most trubulent times in terms of external pressures..........both India (around 1972) and Israel (Munich Olympics, Yom Kippur War), both of them female leaders.

Point 2: Some of them come from powerful families (with powerful fathers and husbands) but some don't.

Point 3: Some factiods from Africa (source CS Monitor)

• Rwanda has the world's highest ratio of women in parliament - 49 percent. Also, of the 50 legislatures with the most female members, 11 are in Africa.

• South Africa's recently installed deputy president is a woman - as are the vice presidents of Mozambique and Zimbabwe.

• Five members of Sudan's new postwar cabinet are women - a significant increase from the last one.

Point 4: Maybe, from India, you have heard of Mayawati (she does not come from connected family - husband or father). She is one of the most powerful politican in India at present, only second to Sonia Gandhi.

21 · Manju said

begalia and carville are undercutting him, and clinton supporters say the speech didn't heal.

GOP's rapid response team in action ;)

Meanwhile we hear Arnold is going to skip the GOP convention altogether.

26 · nil said

I think this constant focus on the puma story gives a slanted view of this race, it is a story that is sensationalistic and it helps sell a certain viewpoint but misses the big picture in this election, I was commenting on that. I'll move on.

The impact of PUMAs on the general election will become the new hot almost-non-falsifiable proposition (last year? God! No God!...God!)

Is Huma a Puma?
It'd only be huma'.

You so called PUMA voters are complete idiots. Even Ralph Nadar voters, who brought us Bush, voted for someone they agree with. You people (yes, I'm talking down to you) plan to vote for someome who wholly and completely disagrees and will destroy everything your beloved Hillary stands for. You are incredibly stupid, swayed by foolish emotions based on non existent slights. Even Rush Limbaughs Dittoheads have more intellect and sense than you do. You, the PUMA voter, are an imbecile.

"I believe a child psychologist's methods were deployed to 'convert' them."

That was very funny, especially Samantha Bee's song. Looking forward to The Daily Show's take on Hillary Clinton's speech (which was actually quite good. Although some of Michelle Obama's expressions were priceless - but she tried very hard).

As for the Florida/Michigan thing, didn't Clinton herself agree not to count their votes last year? And, according to another thread, South Asians and cutting queues go together, so South Asian PUMAs (an acronym that's rather disrespectful to and does no justice to the graceful, elegant cat given the specimens they've been pushing on TV :)) should love Obama.

These jolly jamborees make for very entertaining/sometimes cringeworthy viewing.

Faiqa Oh. Okay. I guess. Sarcasm tag might have helped me out, 'cause, I read your post a couple times and still don't get it. Seriously, I don't get how your point is a sarcastic rebuttal to the point the other commenter was making, but, maybe I'm just being dense. I got that you were responding, I just didn't get the point you were making.

*Actually, take back what I said. Remind PUMAS about what they don't like about John McCain and see if you can get them upset enough with the idea of a McCain presidency so that they are voting against McCain and not for Obama. That might make them feel better about the whole thing.

**Aren't a lot of those women elected in parliamentary systems, and not for Presidency, so that people are voting for a party. If that were the case here, wouldn't Pelosi be the Prime Minister or something? Yikes.

lets see, we got k baily hutch, condi, todd whitman, liz dole...hmmm? i got a feeling its going to be a woman vp.

This PUMA thing is scary. I was very much pro Clinton but there is NO WAY I will a) not vote or b) vote for McBush. It must be Obama all the way at this point. At some point one has to look at the bigger picture. The "lack of experience" thing does not cut it for me. Look at what our esteemed, experienced, ex-Gov has brought us to.

amen Chaos!

Though to nitpick, they probably won't be voting for McCain - they just won't be voting for anybody. Which frankly is just as good as a vote for the old geezer.

What about that male South Asian PUMA featured on The Daily Show as part of a group of disgruntled Hillary supporters who need healing time?:) He was the one who said, in his most smug, sarcastic voice, that he wouldn't be voting for "Barack Hussein (emphasis) Obama." With Democrats like that, who needs Republicans?

There are many indian-americans with that petty and obscene mentality, including right here at sepiamutiny. Recall all those smug and sarcastic chauvinists who railed against Governor Bobby Jindal for converting to catholicism: how they went on and on ad nauseam mocking his american name "Bobby".

These Puma's were voting for a name and couldnt give a damn about the issues and that's a fact jack!!!

This is the underlying assumption of quite a few Obama supporters who do not like Clintons, however Clintons at least have a track record on the ISSUES.

If (God forbid) Obama loses this election then it will be Obama's loss, at the moment it is his and his campaign's JOB to persuade Clinton supporters, he is not going to win this without their support.

32 · Chaos said

You so called PUMA voters are complete idiots. Even Ralph Nadar voters, who brought us Bush, voted for someone they agree with. You people (yes, I'm talking down to you) plan to vote for someome who wholly and completely disagrees and will destroy everything your beloved Hillary stands for. You are incredibly stupid, swayed by foolish emotions based on non existent slights. Even Rush Limbaughs Dittoheads have more intellect and sense than you do. You, the PUMA voter, are an imbecile.

You know what's classy? Intentionally cursing the Mothers of two of the bloggers on this site, which you are under no obligation to visit or spew on.

And you, Crimson-- what are you "Amen"ing?

Make your points without being jerks, if you are capable of such a thing.

Abhi, couldn't you ask your aunt to give your mother a call?

Between yours and Ravi's reporting, it sounds like a couple of undergrads sneaking into frat parties to report on the girls. Let's have some insightful and thoughtful posts. Some insightful reporting into Deomocratic players developing policies affecting India, technology, medicine, etc.

Let's have some insightful and thoughtful posts.

Dude 'v.v. varaiyyaa' get a blog of your own and start blogging. If you are good people will visit and read your insightful and thoughtful posts.

42 · v.v. varaiyyaa. said

Between yours and Ravi's reporting, it sounds like a couple of undergrads sneaking into frat parties to report on the girls. Let's have some insightful and thoughtful posts. Some insightful reporting into Deomocratic players developing policies affecting India, technology, medicine, etc.

Uncle?? Is that you?

Let's have some insightful and thoughtful posts. Some insightful reporting into Deomocratic players developing policies affecting India, technology, medicine, etc.

No offense to the bloggers (I'm enjoying the posts!!), but--that would tend to, err--lurch in the direction of--err--non-Democratic policies--i.e., if you care about free-trade creating jobs in India and in the US (contra Warner), progress in medicine/pharm (which requires a robust capitalism/venture capital), etc. Or so my little birdie tells me! ;-)

21 · Manju said

susan estrich was on fox saying 50% of clinton supporters aren't going to vote obama, which means he's toast. i hear trading contracts for a repub woman VP are soaring. if mccain goes that route it could be the endgame.

i fear clinton's strategy to divide the party along race, religion, and gender lines has worked. there's now a good cop/bad cop show going on with hill/bubba, with her saying the right things while bubba undemines him. He continues to bring up the explosive issue of race, perhaps in coordination with mccain (cough, hugh rodham, cough), saying he's not prepared to be prez, and won't be attending his speech...sending a clear signal to his many supporters.

meanwhile, prominant hilary fundraiser like Lynn de rothschild are sying they are not voting for obama. begalia and carville are undercutting him, and clinton supporters say the speech didn't heal.

the clinton's are set up to take the party back if obama doesn't come up with a second act.

Thanks again for your concern. Look forward to seeing you at the Obama inauguration along with the Clintons and James Carville.

Lets face it, any "PUMA" who still refuses to vote for Obama even after both Hillary and Bill Clinton have so unreservedly endorsed him is exposing his/her overriding reason for supporting Hillary: her sex and/or her race; rather than her ideology.

You have to wonder what kind of a feminist would prefer McCain who voted against equal pay for equal work, just to spite Obama who championed that core feminist agenda.

46 · Dr AmNonymous said

Look forward to seeing you at the Obama inauguration along with the Clintons and James Carville.

won't you be at the cynthis mckinny's bash sipping flat champaign with robert mugabe or something?

Lets face it, any "PUMA" who still refuses to vote for Obama even after both Hillary and Bill Clinton have so unreservedly endorsed him is exposing his/her overriding reason for supporting Hillary: her sex and/or her race; rather than her ideology.

Not quite.

Any PUMA who still refuses to vote for Obama is doing so because he/she is not persuaded by Obama and his campaign. Why are you assuming that a PUMA's indecisiveness (or a lean towards McCain) is out of spite for Obama. It could be that he/she is genuinely not persuaded that Obama IS the right person to be the president - even after a hearty endorsement from Clintons.

I really – REALLY! Hope that Obama campaign is smarter than most of the commentators on this board and starts working to win PUMA’s over, if Obama’s guys cannot get the PUMA votes then – tell me - what sort of chance they have to sway independent voters?

45 · rob said

Let's have some insightful and thoughtful posts. Some insightful reporting into Deomocratic players developing policies affecting India, technology, medicine, etc.

No offense to the bloggers (I'm enjoying the posts!!), but--that would tend to, err--lurch in the direction of--err--non-Democratic policies--i.e., if you care about free-trade creating jobs in India and in the US (contra Warner), progress in medicine/pharm (which requires a robust capitalism/venture capital), etc. Or so my little birdie tells me! ;-)

I recall robust VC investment & "liquidity events" during Clinton's reign (party like it's 1999?). I credit the Repubs for much of the philosophy behind that but the Dems have since coopted it and won't give it back. You'll find protectionists like Huckabee & Buchanan among the Repubs and Kucinich in the Dem party these days, I don't think there is much difference between the two parties on this matter

Next week, like him or not, the Republicans will back McBush hook, line, and sinker as a united force. The thing that is vital for democracy is dissent, but if PUMAs reject the Democrat's candidate for principle - is it at the expense of four more years of McBush? ((runs for the hills))

Sometimes, I wish we had a parliamentary system so we would be forced to make concessions and collaborations with other parties and dissenting voices to form a government of the people rather than this binary split that is not so binary.

48 · Manju said

Any PUMA who still refuses to vote for Obama is doing so because he/she is not persuaded by Obama and his campaign. Why are you assuming that a PUMA's indecisiveness (or a lean towards McCain) is out of spite for Obama. It could be that he/she is genuinely not persuaded that Obama IS the right person to be the president - even after a hearty endorsement from Clintons.

On what grounds? What I object to are inattention to gender, sexuality, imperialism, immigration, and a host of other matters on which John McCain will be worse than Barack Obama on. So it's either wounds that are too deep to heal or a real disagreement. If it's the latter, they, like me, should be looking for other alternatives to support the issues they're interested in (like working on issues and not personalities ;) If it's the former, well, what's it about really? The "why are you doing this?" line should be echoed.

48 · Manju said

46 · Dr AmNonymous said

Look forward to seeing you at the Obama inauguration along with the Clintons and James Carville.

won't you be at the cynthis mckinny's bash sipping flat champaign with robert mugabe or something?

Yes. More importantly, though, will you be compiling your posts into a volume called "Why I Am So Concerned About A Party And Agenda I Oppose?" or just admit that you're secretly a Democrat? :)

(click here)

if you care about free-trade creating jobs in India and in the US (contra Warner), progress in medicine/pharm (which requires a robust capitalism/venture capital), etc.

Do you have any idea what happened to the Indian pharmaceutical industry's growth after India signed the TRIPPS agreement? Neither do I, though I've heard that reverse engineering and moving up the technology ladder actually reversed. These are good reasons to stop all this free trade dogmatic nonsense and have a real discussion about the importance of policy autonomy, practical policies that work in context, and what kind of trade regime will best allow that to India and other developing countries (especially those worse off) rather than ideology (which is the product of U.S.-European backed institutions like World Bank / IMF and their fellow travelers like former IMF economist Manmohan Singh). Good Mushtaq Khan article here if you're interested in economics. Treasure trove here.

To say nothing of how damaging it is to American politics that neither major party strongly advocates for the economic interests of the American citizen working class--they don't just become susceptible to blaming teenage immigrant welfare mothers on drugs for no reason - they're people.

It could be that he/she is genuinely not persuaded that Obama IS the right person to be the president - even after a hearty endorsement from Clintons.

The choice is between Obama and McCain. Since you are so smart, do explain clearly for our benefit why someone who supported Hillary Clinton should reject her ideology now that she is out of the picture? To vote for McCain is to vote against the platform Hillary campaigned on.

MD- rebuttal in that I was showing how foolish it is to hold someone accountable or discriminate on the basis of ancestral grieviances...nobody associates her with imperialism, as they shouldn't because it is irrelevant, just like Obama's peripheral link to Islam...ok, you know what? Can I upload some power point presentations on this comment so I can further delineate my point?

Oooh, File too big. Consider this a tag to inform you I was being sarcastic .

The points you made after you berated me were actually quite good, so I'm going to throw in the towel here because we seem to agree with one another on the important issues.

55 · Valmiki said

To vote for McCain is to vote against the platform Hillary campaigned on.

Or a vote against Obama

21 · Manju said

i fear clinton's strategy to divide the party along race, religion, and gender lines has worked.

dude, with your feigned concern, and monomaniacal obsession with clinton calumny, your comments are sounding like that prema character's rants on indian racism/sexual impotence/general stupidity.

56 · Faiqa said

ancestral grieviances

I don't think the problem with a person with an Islamic background getting elected is an "ancestral grievance", while Imperialism is most certainly one...unless it is elections in Africa, where the platforms sometimes are "Anti-Chinese Imperialism" and I'm pretty sure the Welsh never invaded anyone (Raquib?)

While I do believe that things like race and religion should not be factors to electing a representative, the very concept of a "representative" is just that! And anyone who is a real practicing Muslim, adherent to the Sharia, would not really be a representative of anyone but a very minuscule minority.

That being said, Obama isn't a Muslim, him denying that he is one is not an insult and you guys should really stop nitpicking on that.

53 · Dr AmNonymous said

won't you be at the cynthis mckinny's bash sipping flat champaign with robert mugabe or something?

dr. a,

surely won't you join noted uber-lefty journo Alexander Cockburn (whom I read regularly in my 'we must bring down global capitalism to perserve third-worlders in pleasing poverty-amber which thankfully won't reflect light into my sensitive middle class eyes' days) in his choice of candidate based on 'concience' and 'issues'? (hint: he's not a peanut farmer).

Faiqa - fair enough. We were making the same point in different ways, but, I don't to see how my sarcastic comment in reply to your sarcastic comment was berating? Anyway, if it was, sorry! I didn't mean to berate, only sarcasticate (okay, I can't rhyme).

As for some of the rest of you - uh, insulting a person is not a good way to ask for their vote. The PUMAs have genuine reservations. Respect them, respect their opinion, but forcefully make the case for your candidate. Oh, and remind them why they should hate the other guy :) It's standard politics, and it works. I've seen it on my side, although their really isn't anyone I'm crazy about on the Right these days. Anyway, McCain is unpopular with his base, so making the case against Obama has made it easier to rally the base around Obama. You lot should try doing the same, but, I got to tell you. It's a mistake this McSame stuff. Don't say McCain is just like Bush, he's not, but that effectively the policies will be very similar. You don't make that distinction, you make a big mistake. Voters are not stupid. They can see they are two very different men.

Oh, I put in Obama instead of McCain in there somewhere.....

Also, don't freak out easily Obama supporters. You are still most likely going to win - this panicky stuff is hurting your candidate.

Barack Obama's speech in the football stadium will seem over the top and presumptuous and it will be spun that way too, by the McCain campaign.
The whole "rock star" acceptance speech clearly plays into the McCain campaign's "celebritiy" attacks and I think that choosing the football stadium as a venue is the biggest mis-step of the Obama campaign thus far.

dude, with your feigned concern

though, will you be compiling your posts into a volume called "Why I Am So Concerned About A Party And Agenda I Oppose?"

So how does this work? dems shouldn't critize bush's "black baby" strategy against McCain b/c its concern trolling? We should look the other way if racism and divisiveness is directed at people with whom we disagree?

58 · the doctor said

and monomaniacal obsession with clinton calumny, your comments are sounding like that prema character's rants on indian racism/sexual impotence/general stupidity.

i feel your pain, doc. its a hard pill to swallow. especially when you know they are not racists in their heart. and i'm certaily no saint to be so giddy that the clinton's and their allies have been exposed and some of the VRWC exonerated. i cetanly see how you can be annoyed. I leave you with a quote from James Clyburn, who can't be accused of feigning (and I never knew about the willie horton tidbit, if anyone could enlighten me, i'd appreciate it.):

I simply said that I thought that things were being said and done that could very well make the nomination of our party not worth having. I was around when the Willy Horton ads literally annihilated our candidate for president. That [sort of attack] didn't start out with Republicans; that started out in the Democratic primaries. Right now, we see the McCain campaign doing things that seem to be taken out of the Democratic primary. We see a tightening in this race. And we have nobody and nothing to blame except things that happened in the primary.

On what grounds?

Respectfully put this question to a PUMA, I am not one, I am voting for Obama as I know I can do much worse if I vote for McCain.

What I object to are inattention to gender, sexuality, imperialism, immigration, and a host of other matters on which John McCain will be worse than Barack Obama on. So it's either wounds that are too deep to heal or a real disagreement.

Keep objecting and and lose this election or borrow some humility, sit with a PUMA and pursuade him/her to vote for Obama. You cannot browbeat a voter into voting for your guy.

First things first - get Obama in the Whitehouse

So how does this work? dems shouldn't critize bush's "black baby" strategy against McCain b/c its concern trolling? We should look the other way if racism and divisiveness is directed at people with whom we disagree?

The way this works is that if I think someone is being disingenusous about politics, I tell them. But honestly, I think you should join the Democrats (not being sarcastic). It seems to fit. If you liked Clinton's policies and dislike policies that can only be called ineffectual and/or plutocratic from Bush that McCain shows no inclination of moving away from, then you're probably a Democrat.

Keep objecting and and lose this election or borrow some humility, sit with a PUMA and pursuade him/her to vote for Obama. You cannot browbeat a voter into voting for your guy.

I'm not browbeating anyone into voting for anyone. I don't think people who object to Obama vehemently SHOULD vote for him, though I wish they would in some states because I would like to see him get elected. I don't have time to argue with 2nd wave feminists and gay rights activitsts - rather hang out with 3rd wave ones.

67 · Dr AmNonymous said

The way this works is that if I think someone is being disingenusous about politics

my ulterior motive of proving some of the vrwc right while annoying liberals by putting them between a rock an a hard place doesn't mean i'm being disinginuous. I just happen to be in the wonderful position of having my low and high motives perfectly aligned.

Its like when I discovered wine lowers your blood pressure. One should enjoy these rare moments.

dr. a,

surely won't you join noted uber-lefty journo Alexander Cockburn (whom I read regularly in my 'we must bring down global capitalism to perserve third-worlders in pleasing poverty-amber which thankfully won't reflect light into my sensitive middle class eyes' days) in his choice of candidate based on 'concience' and 'issues'? (hint: he's not a peanut farmer).

Serious questions because I'm considering what you're saying: Does Barr believe the state has any role in assisting the disempowered? What is his stand on gay rights and gender and worker organizing? If he opposes hate crime laws, what are his remedies?

70 · Dr AmNonymous said

Serious questions because I'm considering what you're saying: Does Barr believe the state has any role in assisting the disempowered? What is his stand on gay rights and gender and worker organizing? If he opposes hate crime laws, what are his remedies?

1. As soon as you have a metric or empirical basis for measuring the extent of this disempowerment(inventing words left and right here), I'm sure he'd be happy to address that.
2. Private unions are really not the problem, it's public sector unions that are the problem. Legislation or referendum, however, trumps all and that would probably be his answer.
3. Enforce the laws that are already on the books (for staid unfashionable crimes such as rape, murder, etc.) That is unless you have proof of a strong causal link between hate crime penalties in sentencing and reduced crime rates against whichever hated group is in question. (in which case you've also made a strong argument for the state's right to kill yo ass!)

and in other news, more PumaPac hilarity! The Darlings! So cute!.

PUMAs are not happy with Obama. He has questionable ties to almost all of his associates. He flip flops on almost all of his topics. When our candidate was not elected, we carefully looked at both candidates and decided to go with someone with character and that we can trust. John McCain became that person. We are happy that he picked a female Vice Presidential Candidate. Something that Obama would never take into consideration. We are not just women and/or feminists we come from all corners of the United States (demographics), society, gender and race.

We do not feel the Democratic party gave us the right candidate. We were force fed this "celebrity" - well he does not represent us - all 18 million of us and come election day - our vote will count!

McCain/Palin - '08 Hillary '12