Let’s Face It, PUMAs—Uninformed, Conforming Voters are Our Worst Enemy….No Matter How Smart They Are (Updated 1X)

Sigh.  I had gone through this months before with a woman I’d see while walking the dogs. This was before the Obama machine had really swung into full gear with its divisive and strong-arm tactics. It was before even I had decided he was NOT the one.

I had raised a few questions about Obama and why I had some doubts and was met with an “I don’t care, I LIKE him.”  My parting words were “I hope you’re not disappointed.”

This woman was my age, so hearing this sort of thing was a bit unnerving at the time  I would have thought that someone older and wiser would have had more substanative reasons for “liking” a candidate.

Last night I had a conversation with another woman, this time a 26-year-old PhD candidate studying “counseling psychology.”  Now, months later, as the talk turned to politics, the conversation was even more frustrating.

I couched my end of the discussion with phrases like “I know you’re so busy,”  “I know being a grad student can be rather isolating,” “I know you probably have less time to really read a lot about what’s going on than I do,”  etc., etc. I was trying to make it easy for her…

Continue reading

John Edwards is Back…With, Of All Things, the “Fear Card”

SInce his stage act with Barack Obama in May (only a week after telling People Magazine that he wasn’t ready to endorse anybody), John Edwards has stepped out again, this time with a fundraising letter from the DSCC and its KickOut campaign, complete with a somber pamphlet in brown depicting “the havoc Bush has wreaked on America” (sic).

As you may recall, Al Gore stuck his toe in the water with a fundraising letter for the DSCC in early June. (See below for related posts when the dam broke for Obama.)  When I first wrote about the Gore letter, some people questioned whether is really was from the DSCC because of the address.  Well, Edwards letter comes from the same address–Merrifield, VA–so I don’t think there’s any question about the address this time!

The Gore letter made me queasy at the time, because I thought it was paving the way for a full-blown endorsement of Obama but by the time he actually took the stage with Obama a couple of weeks later, I wasn’t shocked at all, because by that time, the Rules and ByLaws Committee on May 31 had enraged me so completely by their actions that I no longer considered myself a Democratic. (What perfect timing THAT was, Al!)

It was the initial endorsement of Edwards that was the opening body-blow as far as I was concerned. He had been my candidate, mostly because he was so outspoken about corporatism.  Embracing Obama so quickly after Clinton’s big win in the West Virginia primary really got to me. Edwards’ endorsement was part of that pattern of people coming out to prop up Obama after losing.  Edwards had run against corporate power and Obama was the darling of the Wall Street crowd in terms of money. I was nauseated by what Edwards did. What made it even worse was the fact that he had told People Magazine only a week earlier that he wasn’t ready to endorse anybody.  Snake…it was all in the works then, no doubt.

Then came NARAL, and later Wes Clark, whom I had supported in 2004, jumping on the bandwagon as soon as it seemed that Obama was the “presumptive nominee,” in a move so fast it reminded me of how when he quit the race in 2004, he dashed over and hugged John Kerry and shed his dignity in the process.  At least McCain waited a few years before hugging Bush…

So here’s Edwards, this time exhorting me to “Stop Senate Republicans from Blocking the Will of the American People.”  Yeah, right–because the Democratic Senate has been so strong against Republicans!

Memo to J.E.–please tell me what you think of Obama voting for the FISA bill…

The whole letter is pretty strident, with underlined statements like these:

But what truly frightens me–and should frighten you, too–are the 49 Republicans in the Senate who are already planning to stonewall Barack Obama and continue George Bush’s agenda even after he’s gone.

Oh, please!  Obama doesn’t need to be “stonewalled”–he’ll bend over for Republicans any day, as he showed with his rewrite of his nuclear safety bill at the behest of the GOP for the benefit of Exelon. And his vote for FISA already has HIM continuing the Bush agenda…

As Democrats…as Americans…you and I MUST take action to restore America…join me in supporting the DSCC in its mission to elect more Democrats to the Senate who will aggressively oppose the GOP’s agenda.

Yawn. Like who? Someone to join the bend-over Democrats we have now?  Don’t point to Tom Udall as an example yet, either–yeah, he sounds great on the environment, but he’s beholden to Big Pharma, so he’s not immune from being converted into Senatorial mush…

Then comes the clincher…

Having been on the receiving end of their tactics, I can tell you we should plan for the worst–and expect it, too.

Dear John, your own party and Obama have already given us the worst, as they’ve thrown democracy into the dumpster using many of the same tactics the GOP uses.  And the ‘havoc,” in many cases, has been aided and abetted by your chums in the Senate.

A couple of months ago a letter like this would have gotten me extremely upset, but since the rise of PUMA, at least I feel some support for my utter disgust at this sort of crap. This time, I was inspired to DO SOMETHING!

Instead of just withholding a donation (which is supposed to be tripled–didn’t Gore’s beg letter also talk about doubling or tripling the donation, too? I can’t quite recall which…), I went over to Bed, Bath, and Beyond and bought a collapsible pet carrier and brought it to the animal shelter, which is trying to become a no-kill facility and has put out a call for donations for things like leashes and carriers.

Afterwards, I felt wonderful.  Spiritually clean and joyful!  When I got home, I kissed my dogs and shredded the letter…which will become part of the piles of shredded paper that will go to the animal shelter for cage bedding.

At least this DSCC mailing will get used properly…

Related posts:

More Bilge from Obama–Another Empty Fundraising Letter (Which I Reflect Upon with Help from Charlie Chan) (UPDATE 1X) 7/8/08

Al Gore Can Stuff It…(Obama Endorsement) 6/16/08

Al Gore Resurfaces for the DSCC…(Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee) 6/3/08

GUTSY Elizabeth Edwards Not Part of Endorsement–Outshines Husband in “Courage of Convictions” Department (only a week after couple tells “People” they won’t endorse) (UPDATED)(UPDATE 2) 5/15/08

John Edwards, MAJOR Disappointment…NARAL/Obama Doesn’t Surprise Me, A Perfect Fit 5/14/08

Just a Quick Thought on the Media and McCain…

Yesterday I happened to catch a quick look at a woman who works for The Hill. She was saying that McCain wasn’t getting any media attention which is why he spoke about offshore drilling. It was just a desperate attempt to get some media coverage.

I don’t know whether this is true or not since I tend to avoid listening to what the MSM crowd says.

However, if this wave of Obama stuff is really cutting out coverage of McCain…is this just a continuation of how they cut out Edwards, then Clinton??

Just asking…

What do YOU think??

****

JUST SAY NO DEAL

John Edwards, MAJOR Disappointment…NARAL/Obama Doesn’t Surprise Me, A Perfect Fit

John Edwards has been making squeaky noises in the last week about change and how Hillary has to be sure she doesn’t “damage” the party.

Well, he’s about to endorse Obama in a moment. Oh, yeah, all the props are there….SENIORS FOR OBAMA, etc., etc.

I don’t know what Elizabeth Edwards thinks, but I know what I think…Edwards is DEAD for me, and I supported him originally. I guess he was faking us out after all. All that business about the poor and the growing divide between rich and poor. A lot of people voting for Clinton fall in that category and, apparently, he’s put away his interest in them.

Reminds me of our Governor Richardson and Sen. Jeff Bingaman here in NM. Hillary wins the state, but they endorse Obama.

My disgust grows by leaps and bounds as every moment goes by….

PS–So NARAL endorsed Obama earlier. Well, that should tell you something. NARAL has already sold us out by endorsing “rape gurney,” “short ride” Joe Lieberman. And poor Kate Michelman, former head of NARAL when it really was for women. She endorsed Edwards…she must be as disgusted as I am.

Especially because Barack calls women reporters “Sweetie.” What a piece of sexist crap!!!

Oh, Edwards is talking about “kids going hungry.” He’s doing his poverty bit. Does Obama even care?? A lot of struggling voters don’t think so…

Let Me Tell You About Bill Richardson and “RICHARDSON’S RULES”…

On Thursday night (April 24) Bill Richardson and James Carville were on The Larry King Show (video). Richardson ran through all the little memes about Hillary Clinton that we’ve come to know and love recently, including comments about her the silly demand for debates, the outrageous demands to count the votes in Florida and Michigan, and her “negative” campaign.

At about minute 5:00 of the above-linked video, Richardson brought up the subject of Florida and Michigan. “All of a sudden” the Clinton campaign was bringing these states up and heck “we all agreed” not to run in their primaries. Well, we all know that the Clinton campaign has been on the trail of Florida and Michigan for weeks (Carville reminded Richardson that the Clinton campaign had proposed paying for a re-vote) and that not everyone agreed to take their name off the ballot in Michigan. As for Florida, Obama held a press conference and ran ads in neighboring states that reached Florida market, which, Richardson forgot, broke the RULES.

Richardson is very upset that we are even THINKING about Florida and Michigan, but, of course, he’s operating from the book of “Richardson’s Rules” which seems to favor disenfranchising the voice of the people.

“Richardson’s Rules” were in effect about a year or so ago when proponents of a spaceport (read: pork for Richard Branson) was being sold heavily here in Southern New Mexico. (It was sold again for a vote that took place this past Tuesday on a tax in Sierra County, and, unfortunately, it passed). At the time of the first vote here in Dona Ana County, Richardson pulled out all the stops, including addressing a school assembly where students were a captive audience and which their parents (potential voters) were invited to attend.

What about the citizens who wanted to hear what Richardson was saying who were NOT students or parents and who showed up at the school? Well, they WERE NOT ALLOWED IN…in fact, law enforcement was present to make sure there wasn’t any trouble.

Back when I was teaching, it would have been considered unthinkable to allow a politician to appear on school time to push his agenda, especially without an opposing view and especially with the public barred from attending!

So, we see that Richardson doesn’t want New Mexican citizens allowed into what should be public appearances, nor does he want the voters of Florida or Michigan to vote. Those are Richardson’s Rules. Do I want to see him on a ticket in November? NO THANKS!

On top of that, his comments about Clinton’s supposed negativity were just the usual Richardson hypocrisy.

Way back in October 2007, Richardson was still a candidate and was upset about negativity then, too. In a report filed on CNN’s website dated October 30, 2007 (Richardson: No More Negative Campaigning), he said:

To all the Democratic candidates, let’s stay positive,” Richardson said. “Let’s get rid of all this negative stuff that I’m seeing.”Richardson then singled out Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, and former Sen. John Edwards, D-North Carolina, for their critical remarks of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York.

“I’ve become very concerned about the negative tone of the campaign,” he said. “I think that Senators Obama and Edwards should concentrate on the issues and not on attacking Sen. Clinton.”

“The differences on the issues should be highlighted, but personal attacks I believe should not take place,” he said.

In recent days, Obama and Edwards have spoken out against Clinton’s decision to accept contributions from lobbyists. Richardson defended Clinton and reiterated that calling her “integrity into question,” was unnecessary and “personally negative.”

That, of course, was before he decided to stab the Clintons in the back and not only endorse Obama, but also talk badly about them.

Changing an endorsement is not the problem, but usually, politicians don’t go to the lengths Richardson has gone recently in his attacks on the Clintons. Oh, but that must be another of Richardson’s Rules–“Acting with class is NOT required.”

Note: to post a comment, return to HOME, and post to the comment there.