Murphy The Tax Resistor

Not much to say other than did everyone see this?

Disclaimer: Puma PAC in NO WAY endorses or encourages ANYONE to not pay their taxes. It is illegal to evade paying taxes.

If you’re interested in finding out more about this, please check these links.

Frankly, with the mentally deficient sycophants that hang around PUMA PAC, I think this is actually irresponsible. It wouldn’t take much to send some of them to their bunkers where they’ll wind up with a lot of trouble as tax resistors.

Murphy might be a little more cognizant of the kinds of messages she’s sending, but that would require she actually care about the people she’s leading around. What a horrible person.

Something I Forgot to Mention

Did anyone notice this from last Saturday? I meant to write about it at the time, but I was safely ensconced in the real world. The New Agenda (aka PUMA-lite) had a confidential scoop.

a confidential source,who is “in the know,” informed us that the reason that Matthews did not run for the PA senate seat was as follows: his advisors were concerned that he would get smoked by two strong opponents: TNA (womens group) and the PUMAs – yes this is true. So, if you think that our work together isn’t making an impact, think again!

And if you believe this I have some mortgage backed securities to sell you.

I have a friend who has done some work for NARAL/Pro-Choice America and I mentioned this “scoop.” Her response? “The New Agenda? Never heard of them.” After I explained they were an anti-woman-lynching (not anti-woman, pro-lynching, but anti-[woman-lynching]) PUMA offshoot, she looked it up and we had a good laugh. I kept my ear to the ground here in PA about the senate seat and the Matthews run, and nobody ever even mentioned the PUMAs. They are quite assuredly a non-factor.

Did they think Matthews was intimidated by there 20-woman mega-protest in Denver? The self-delusion would be remarkable if it weren’t a hallmark of the PUMAs.

Stupid PUMA Commentor!

This one is a minor thing, but too funny to pass up. Over at BJ’s “Free Us Now” blog* a bedeviled PUMA left this hilarious nugget of dumb.

FreeMeNow, why is my email listed in the Leave a Reply area? I gave it when I commented on one of BJ Kling’s posts only because it was required. Is it visable to everyone who comes to this site? If so, would you please remove it?
I’m sorry, but I’m pretty dumb about how these blog sites work; it’s just that I prefer to keep my email private. I’m sorry if it actually is and I have misunderstood. I don’t mean to offend. Thanks for listening.

It took me about two seconds to realize that this paragon of PUMA must have left a comment on a wordpress blog before, with cookies enabled, and so upon loading the page her email address was already in the “email” comment field.

So this genius, who is admittedly “pretty dumb with how these blog sites work” thinks this is how everybody viewing the page finds it, with her email address on display.

I’m sorry, I realize that the Granny Brigade of the PUMA army didn’t grow up with computers, but it is two-thousand-fucking-nine. That’s almost as stupid as blaming Obama for not signing a law that hasn’t been sent to him by the congress. Almost.

*(I don’t actually consider Betty Jean fair game for mockery anymore since she is suffering quite a bit of family hardship that could almost excuse her behavior online. She really needs to get off the blog and realize that the PUMA “support” is driving her mad, but I’m leaving that whole thing alone.)

Fess Up, Troublemaker!


Alright, which one of you wiseguys added these tags to the PUMA “narrative documentary” The Audacity of Democracy at Amazon?

I’m surprised nobody’s written a review yet. I guess once we get our hands on a copy.

Stupid angienc2! Stupid madamab!

Over at The Confluence in sm77’s bamboozle-palooza thread, angienc2 adds this cryptic “thought” to the conversation.

What women need to realize is that the ONLY Constitutional right that we have is the right to vote. What the f*ck is NOW doing about that? Nothing — all they care about is Roe. Well you know what? Let them have Roe. Meanwhile, the rest of us women with a tiny bit of sense in our heads need to work together, regardless of “party” (note, all the female Republican woman voted FOR Ledbetter & I bet $1000 cash money they would have voted FOR the Paycheck Act) to fix the root problem — the patriarchy.

Did I miss the penis clause in the first amendment? Or the second? Or any of them? What does this even mean?

It’s so obvious that the rights of the constitution are extended to women that it seems nit-picky to point it out, but then again, angienc2 capitalized “only.” Furthermore, “Roe” is not a right enumerated in the constitution. It is a right derived from the constitution by the supreme court, correctly in my view. It is also a right that is constantly under threat from one of the two major political parties in this country. I’ll give the PUMAs two guesses which one.

Right below, madamb demonstrates her research skills with this.

Downticket – I must have been confusing the Paycheck Fairness Act with a different one.

You are right – I can’t find any evidence that Obama was ever a co-sponsor of HR 12.

More lies from the NY Times.

This one is brilliant, really. Not to be missed stupid.

Ok. H.R.12 is the house version of the Paycheck Fairness Act that was introduced this year, on 1/6/09 to be precise. S.766 was the senate version that was introduced by Hillary Clinton in 2007 and co-sponsored by Barack Obama.

Notice anything? If you’re a PUMA, you might not have noticed that Obama only co-sponsored the version that was around when he was in the fucking senate. I know they’ve mostly blocked the election from their memories, but Obama resigned from the senate in November after he won the election, and as such it would be pretty hard for him to co-sponsor a bill introduced two months later in the house.

So, to summarize, when Obama was in the senate he co-sponsored the legislation. After he left the senate, he was unable to co-sponsor any new legislation. Was that really so hard?

Maybe I missed it, but I didn’t notice anybody at The Confluence correcting this eggregiously stupid mistake by madamab. Paging angienc2…

Riverchucky’s Sexual Hangups

Could Riverdaughter possibly write something about Obama without bizarre and gratuitous sexual imagery? As if everything she objects to being viewed as forced fellatio wasn’t bad enough, she brings us this.

So, in the picture, he’s sitting with his legs spread like he’s practicing for some cheerleader split, junk dangling over the edge of the chair. I’m sorry but he just looks stupid.

Ah yes, those dumb black men with their slovenly posture and junk hanging all over everything. Nice touch, Kim. I’ll bet anybody that Riverchucky is the lonely author of volumes of Hillary Clinton slash fiction.

An Avalanche of Stupid

I’ve been away from the bizarro PUMA world for over a week now, and I want to thank Bettycracker and JohnD for keeping the lights on with their delightful skewering of the PUMAs. They’ve even enticed a number of PUMAs over into the fray, an amusing feat in itself! I was enjoying the real world, but every time I think I’m out, they pull me back in!

Here are a couple of the things I recently noticed in PUMAdon that I couldn’t resist sharing, in no particular order.

Just this morning at The Confluence, Sm77 (their resident frontpage birther) took the first PUMA stab at attacking the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. It was a valiant if doomed effort, but it was also terribly stupid, about what you would expect from someone who thinks Obama’s not an American and writes for The Confluence.

Observe. After quoting from a piece that roughly explains the background of the Ledbetter act and the never passed Paycheck Fairness act (incidently, the piece she was quoting from was a press release from a law firm that defends corporate clients from such labor lawsuits as the one Ledbetter brought), sm77 says,

Help me understand this if I’m wrong: the Paycheck Fairness Act enforces and strengthens unequal pay claims while the Ledbetter Act just buys the claimant more time. Is that right? If that’s the case, it’s a another bamboozle by the Bamboozler -in-Chief.

Well, not really. You see, sm77, the entire fucking point of the Ledbetter Act was that the Roberts court ruled, astonishingly, that as long as an employer could conceal the discrimination beyond 180 days from the first paycheck, women had no legal right to sue for pay discrimination. It’s not “just buying more time,” it’s negating the travesty of that court opinion so that women are able to sue for pay discrimination at all. Someone who declares this “just buying more time” obviously doesn’t understand the first thing about the subject. But it gets worse!

Sm77, straining under her “car without wheels” analogy, concludes

If Obama co-endorsed the Paycheck Fairness act as a senator, what’s stopping him from signing it into law? Why sell us a car without the wheels? What good is it?

What’s stopping him from signing the Paycheck Fairness Act is that congress never passed the bill. Let me repeat that, with randomly capitalized words so that PUMAs can understand. Congress NEVER passed the FUCKING Paycheck Fairness Act SO OBAMA can’t SIGN it into LAW. Read your CONSTITUTION DUMBASS!

I’ll be posting the other bits of PUMA stupid that brought me back all day.