Why is The New Agenda smearing NOW’s Kim Gandy?

The New Agenda, a so-called “non-partisan group for women’s rights,” appears to be behind an Astroturf smear campaign aimed at National Organization for Women president Kim Gandy. Gandy is in the running to head up the Women’s Bureau of the Department of Labor.

What’s The New Agenda’s problem with Gandy? Well, I did some investigating, and although I got many answers, I still don’t know. The excuses The New Agenda offers are either outright falsehoods or weak dissembling. This long-ass post summarizes what I was able to find out.

PUMA-Lite: All the bile and only half the crazy!

For those who aren’t familiar with it, The New Agenda was started by Amy Siskind and other disgruntled Hillary supporters last year. Although she was definitely in the “Hillary or Fuck America in the Ass – Hard!!” coalition, Siskind bristles at the suggestion that she is a PUMA or that The New Agenda is animated by PUMA issues.

That’s smart, actually, since Siskind has achieved some level of media credibility as a generic “feminist,” appearing occasionally on CNN and other media outlets. Association with a group as floridly crazy as PUMA would undermine the credibility she hopes to build.

But as you can see from the original press release announcing The New Agenda’s founding (curiously gone from the site now), they weren’t always so coy about the “P” word:

Many of the women who attended The New Agenda’s first meeting got to know each other as a result working with pro-Hillary groups. Attendees included founding members of such groups as Together4US, Party Unity My Ass (PUMA), IOwnMyVote, Just Say No Deal and Vote Democracy ’08.

“This group is comprised of women who are “gravely concerned about the mistreatment of Hillary Clinton during the primary season, and the passion and emotion that resulted from Hillary’s mistreatment brought us together.,” says Siskind.

They’ll admit that they have PUMA members (always hastening to add that there are also Republicans, Greens, etc., on board), but if you bring up PUMA at The New Agenda, you’ll see how touchy they are about it, and it appears they have taken pains to scrub the PUMA cooties off their website, including their inaugural press release. Hmmm.

Anyway, so that’s The New Agenda’s background. I read some PUMA blogs occasionally as a kind of sick hobby, and I noticed over the weekend that all these screeds against Kim Gandy popped up.

I don’t know doodly-squat about Gandy, so I figured she must’ve done something to run afoul of the PUMAs. But then it became clear that Siskind — the alleged non-PUMA — was behind the anti-Gandy campaign. According to this site, Siskind sent the following email on the down-low to select “feminist bloggers” in order to sandbag Gandy:

From: Amy Siskind
Subject: CONFIDENTIAL – Kim Gandy seeks powerful position in DC in Obama Admin
Fellow Feminist Bloggers:
We learned yesterday that Kim Gandy has made public her intention to ask for one of the most powerful positions in federal gov’t for women – Director of the Women’s Bureau in the Department of Labor.
TNA has watched Gandy shift positions again and again to stand up for Obama and sell out women – for example, on Larry Summers:
Nov 5, 2008:
>NOW President Questions Larry Summers as Treasury Secretary
> Nov 24, 2008:
> http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/24/america/24rubin.php?page=2 Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women, said her group’s research actually produced material that recommended him. “One good thing about Larry Summers,” she said, “is that he has written and spoken fairly extensively on the issue of women’s wage inequality and the impact that has on the country.”
Our view is that she has sold out the women of this country for some back room deal – well now we know what the back room deal is!!!
We are asking all feminist bloggers to post a story on their blogs on Sunday, February 8th at NOON EST in protest of Kim Gandy. Feel free to use whatever rationale you see fit – I know that we each have our own gripes.
But letting this woman be in a position of power, as reward for selling out her constituents (women) would be a crime.
Please forward this to all the feminist bloggers you know that are like-minded – with one caveat: WHEN YOU FORWARD IT – IT DID NOT COME FROM ME OR TNA – AND TAKE OUT THE FIRST FEW PARAGRAPHS HERE AND JUST PUT IN INTO YOUR OWN WORDS!!!
Remember, post your story on Sunday, Feb 8th at Noon.

And gosh, look at the rogue’s gallery of PUMAs who responded right on cue. The case against Gandy in that email is pretty weak and unsubstantiated, and of course, the PUMAs as usual failed to add anything of substance. So I wondered, what’s so terrible about Gandy that Siskind considers her worthy of a highly personal coordinated attack?

The only specific item in Siskind’s email — the Summers thing — seems kind of trumped up. 20 seconds of online research reveals that indeed Gandy hardly gave Summers a ringing endorsement — she cited one positive trait in a sea of criticism here, which Siskind artfully cut and pasted into her Astroturf email.

Lord knows Siskind and company gave people like Sarah Palin a pass for far more horrifying offenses, so what the hell was up with Gandy, I wondered? Had she done the unthinkable and — gasp! — endorsed Obama over Clinton in the primaries as some of the PUMA knuckleheads reported this weekend? Nope, actually, she endorsed Clinton — there’s a YouTube video and everything.

Okay then, maybe she’s just not qualified for the post? Well, no. Even bovine-pattern clothing enthusiast Heidi Li Feldman, JD, PhD (henceforth to be known as “Cow Patty”) admitted in her hit piece that Gandy is a knowledgeable and tireless champion of women’s issues:

“Kim Gandy has clearly spent the better part of her life working on issues important to women; she’s probably quite knowledgeable about working conditions for women and in a position to hire high quality staff.”

So why do The New Agenda people and Cow Patty despise Gandy so much? Cow Patty claims it’s because Gandy sold women down the river like so much chattel (more on Cow Patty in a moment). But none of Siskind’s ostensible reasons hold water upon further examination.

I figured I’d go straight to the horse’s mouth and ask Siskind at her site. I wasn’t the only one. And when asked, Siskind dissembled and made easily disprovable statements about Gandy being silent about the sexism directed toward Clinton (she wasn’t) and failing to defend Palin against the misogyny directed at her (also demonstrably false).

When confronted with copious evidence that her statements about Gandy were flat-out false on Monday, Siskind promised a more complete accounting of the case against Gandy Tuesday. She said she knew Gandy actually opposed Clinton during the primary (despite video evidence to the contrary) and would include an account of that in her clarification. This is what she delivered — a completely fact-free and pathetic “parable.”

And to stave off dissent, she’s censoring or deleting comments from polite though persistent questioners like this woman and me, and she scrubbed her own comment promising a more substantive critique. In other words, Siskind has got nothing, and she doesn’t want anyone pointing it out.

Cow Patty’s POUTpourri

As for Cow Patty, when we last left her, she was attempting to shake down the morons at The Confluence by leveraging her tenuous connection to the ailing Justice Ginsburg:

Heidi Li, on February 5th, 2009 at 9:44 pm Said:

I know Ruth Bader Ginsburg slightly, and her husband, Marty Ginsburg, who is my colleague on the Georgetown faculty rather better. They are wonderful people, and of course my heart and thoughts are with them. A humble suggestion: If you care to send 51 Percent any amount (including .51 cents, with a message of support for Justice Ginsburg, not only will that be noted on the website, but I will make sure that all results and messages reach Justice Ginsburg).

So how does this paragon of integrity and good taste assess the Gandy situation? Here’s an excerpt from the essay she obediently produced in response to Siskind’s request:

I think she used that power to have N.O.W. sell women down the river when N.O.W. broke with its usual practice and made a general election presidential endorsement, picking Barack Obama, somebody who used and tolerated sexism and misogyny to gain the Democratic Party’s nomination. I use the expression “sold women down the river” with all its metaphorical baggage: the image of humans being treated like chattel sold down to the Delta to be auctioned off. I think N.O.W. had very little evidence of Barack Obama’s commitment to women’s empowerment, little evidence of even his commitment to women’s reproductive rights (the usual excuse used by mainstream women’s groups to go out of their way to support his candidacy). And still, under the leadership of Gandy, N.O.W. went out of its way to auction off women’s votes, encouraging them to turn out and make sure this man, who never once denounced the nutcrackers and the media comments and the misogynistic rappers singing him into office, became President of the United States of America.

Oh sweet weeping Jesus, is she fucking serious? Did Hillary denounce the racist goons who depicted Obama on a fake welfare dollar eating fried chicken and watermelon? Did she apologize for the musical abomination that was Hillary in the House — a far worse auditory offense than ten thousand misogynistic rappers? Did she call out the Fox News asshole who termed Barack and Michelle’s fist bump a “terrorist fist jab?” No she didn’t, and no sane person expected her to be responsible for every loon who took up her cause. And it’s a good thing too, or God knows the PUMAs would’ve driven poor Hillary to die of shame.

The bottom line

I don’t know Kim Gandy from Adam’s house cat. Maybe Gandy isn’t the right person for the job. But nothing The New Agenda or Heidi Li Feldman said makes that case. They seem intent on smearing a true advocate for women’s issues on the basis of — what? Some bullshit sense that she didn’t support Hillary enthusiastically enough? Or perhaps due to some petty jealousy because Gandy is an actual high profile advocate for women’s rights while these goofballs are still somewhat fringy wannabes? I don’t know, and they aren’t giving straight answers.

It’s one thing for the brain-dead nitwits at PUMA PAC or The Confluence to issue hysterical screeds smearing people they know nothing about. They’re just internet crazies, and nobody gives a shit what they say except for the entertainment value it contains.

But Feldman and Siskind purport to speak for women in general, Feldman from her perch on the Georgetown Law School faculty and her crappy 51% organization and Siskind via The New Agenda and from her status as a go-to “feminist” for our stupid media. Therefore, the standard of proof is higher. I say they either produce evidence of the offenses they’ve accused Gandy of or retract the scurrilous attacks which they’ve thus far failed to substantiate.

[Cross-posted at Betty Cracker]

34 Responses

  1. I love the cloak and dagger aspects of this backstabbing.

    Gandy should thank these lunatics. By the transitive properties of PUMA FAIL she is in.

  2. This a brilliant piece of work, Betty, and I can see why it took you a while to put it together. It needs to be read far beyond this blog and your own.

    I had to laugh at this:

    We are asking all feminist bloggers to post a story on their blogs on Sunday, February 8th at NOON EST in protest of Kim Gandy. Feel free to use whatever rationale you see fit …

    IOW, “Just make up a heap of post-rationalizing shit as usual – if short of ideas, check out Riverdaughter or Murphy, they’ve got it down pat. It doesn’t need to make sense, just give some cues so your bots know which way to cheer or boo.”

    It reminds me of a story about UK politician Jack Straw. He was booked to make a speech in a debate at some gathering. He did so with aplomb, marshaling arguments expertly, making emotional appeals etc. etc. When he left the platform, someone told him he’d been supposed to be arguing for the other side. He immediately went back on the platform and made an equally expert and emotional speech for the opposing motion. The difference is, he was good at it.

  3. “Selling women down the river” is NOT a metaphor. It actually happened. Amy Siskind is just another idiot racist piece of PUMA shit if she thinks that using that term “metaphorically” to describe “mean shit some people in the media said about Hillary” is A-Okay.

    Oh, what am I saying? She hangs out with PUMAs. Of course she’s an idiotic racist piece of shit. Who will fail miserably at everything she attempts in life, will never be happy, and will always cry “victim!” to explain why things don’t work out for her.

  4. Heh, Pete — good point.

    Thanks Brit. Just posted it at Rumproast too.

    And Kerry, just to clarify, it was Heidi Li Feldman who employed the “selling down the river” expression. (I think Siskind said “selling out.”) If you enjoy bashing your head against a brick wall, give The New Agenda blog comments sections a try. Your comments will get deleted in a heart-beat though, so it’s really not worth it. And I fucking hate it when people go back and edit their own goddamn comments so they won’t have to eat their words, so I don’t think I’ll bother with them anymore — even if I could sneak past moderation.

  5. Betty,

    Did you catch Ms. Siskind’s latest piece of awesome?

    When someone (not me) pointed out that the TNA announcement denouncing Gandy didn’t have any specifics about why she was a bad choice, Ms. Siskind replied,
    “we very purposely chose to not list line items as to why we do not endorse Gandy. But suffice it to say that it was unanimous (less one) amongst our Founders group who are prominent women from around the country and perhaps, through our connections, we know more information than you know. Could that be?”

    As I remarked on my own blog, what kind of “grassroots” movement has this sort of “I’m more important than you so I don’t have to explain myself” leadership?

    I almost thought this might be ascribable to Ms. Siskind’s coming from an i-banking background, where the investor-sheep were regularly led to the slaughter and expected to take recommendations without any serious explanations. It’s quite different from my experience in studying economics, political philosophy and law, where you always have to show your work and don’t get away with this “trust me, I’m an expert” stuff. If I tell a client that I’m following a strategy she finds inexplicable, it’s my job to explain it until she gets it, not to say “I went to law school, perhaps I know more information than you know. Could that be?”

    Anyway, Siskind’s evidently banned my IP entirely — my comments aren’t even going into moderation — after I pointed out that one of TNA’s candidates for the Women’s Bureau has no experience in labor/ work issues whatsoever, yet they want her to lead part of the Department of Labor.

  6. Eh, it’s hard to tell those PUMAs apart. Even when one does dress in Gateway Computer Cow-ware.

    I thought Bobby Rush, Clarence Thomas, and Rod Blagojevich were tools for using the word “lynching” to describe “something that threatens my job or someone else’s job.” Any woman — particularly any WHITE woman — who uses the images of slavery as an equivalence for media bias is just a fucking unconscionable tool as well.

  7. As I remarked on my own blog, what kind of “grassroots” movement has this sort of “I’m more important than you so I don’t have to explain myself” leadership?

    *Cough* PUMA

    Hats off, PG. You, Betty and a couple of others put up a good show there before you got banned or gave up in understandable disgust.

  8. Damn you Bettycracker!

    I was gonna thank you posting this and sifting through all the bullshit Feldman is peddling, then you had to mention ‘Hillary In The House’. It’ll take weeks to get that song out of my head!

    “She’s never quiet as a mouse….”

    I guess the pumas will just say Gandy was “asking for it”.

  9. TNA certainly shares the PUMA trait of editing any dissent and banning those who try to bring reality in to the discussion.

    So, yeah – PUMA

  10. Did you catch Ms. Siskind’s latest piece of awesome?

    Gyads, PG, that’s unbelievable! Well, it looks like they’ve given my IP the heave-ho as well. I wear it as a badge of honor!

  11. The Po Widdle Weak Wimmens of PUMAland can’t possibly create the most awesome political movement EVAH without being shielded from dissent!

    Fucking decide, losers! Are you strong HAKA ROAR! warriors who can take on the entire universe like Helen Reddy’s “I am Woman” on crystal meth, or are you Sad Widdle Putty Tats Who are Victimized Because of Your Vagina-American Status and therefore are excused from taking adult responsibility and agency for your actions and comments?

    Considering that none of the PUMAs ever did jack shit about electoral reform or feminism until they lost the sweet promise of Big Tough Mama Cat Hillary Tucking Them In At Night and Giving Them Free Healthcare and Vicarious Empowerment, I think we know the answer. Passive Putty Tats Waiting for the Clue Bus. And then that mean inadequate black male Oblahblah tosses them under the bus after shoving himself down their throats!

  12. Apologies for hijacking the thread, but did anyone notice this?

    marie 02.10.09 at 11:44 am
    As a blogger at Hillis44 put it
    Some time back, I had an 88-year old lovely female patient (Jewish) German from Dresden – branded number and all – who confided to me after taking care of her for quite some time, that “Hitler really wasn’t so bad…if you were good and were able to fill up a book with good behavior, you were given a Volkswagen,” as in a wagon for ‘the folks.’ Something about hearing her description of life then, and her escape in first person, the ULTIMATE historical primary source, only to unbelievably STILL be brainwashed as an 88 year-old, will never leave me. The remnants of the mind control NEVER leaves.
    The remnants of the mind control NEVER leaves.
    That is so true.
    Obots are a good example of the past repeating itself not in the same sense but just an example of mind control. It must really hurt to think for yourself I live with an Obot who wants to take up for this guy at every turn He is the President why does he need everyone to defend him the most powerful job in the world and they have to speak up for him.
    This shit is ironic, delusional and he is a fraudulent person. This is a joke of a presidency and its just beginning.
    He has so much hatred for ordinary people as he puts it and now the elderly.
    To paraphrase Martin Niemöller:
    First they came for the elderly, but I was not elderly, so I did not care.
    Then they came for the disabled, but I was not disabled, so I did not care.
    Then they came for the infirm, but I was not infirm, so I did not care.
    Then they came for me, and there was no one left to stand up.

    They compared us to nazis.
    I’ve hit people for lesser insults than that.

    Also, dija completely raped and mutilated Niemöller (may she burn in literary hell), patronised a Dresden survivor AND implied Obama is going to create concentration camps for the elderly.

    That is all, excuse me while I go vomit.

  13. Yeah, marie was so pleased with that one that so far, she’s posted it on TexasDarlin, UppityWoman and PUMA PAC.

    It’s pretty stupid. And I pity her Obot housemate.

  14. I bet that crazy lady from the McCain rally is a PUMA.

    Sorry there is a rerun of SNL on.

  15. Jeebus, Nikki. Yeah, such an accusation in person might prompt me to leave the accuser crawling around on the ground frantically searching for her teeth. I understand the anger and nausea.

    But in a grand scheme of things — karma perspective, well, it sucks to be her, right? She’s the one who is scuttling around like a craven worm for no earthly reason. She is almost as worthy of pity as she is of contempt.

    But no one is a more worthy object of pity than the person who lives with her. I’m not even religious, but I strongly believe that he or she should be immediately canonized upon death.

  16. Great post btw. The New Agenda seems to be undermining their own agenda.

  17. “When someone (not me) pointed out that the TNA announcement denouncing Gandy didn’t have any specifics about why she was a bad choice, Ms. Siskind replied,
    ‘we very purposely chose to not list line items as to why we do not endorse Gandy. But suffice it to say that it was unanimous (less one) amongst our Founders group who are prominent women from around the country and perhaps, through our connections, we know more information than you know. Could that be?’ ”

    Wow, this fricking blows me away! And she criticizes “obots”? Just follow me off the cliff, don’t ask any questions. Like your analogy, PG, that’s like me giving clients their tax returns with all the numbers covered up and I say “just sign here, don’t ask questions. Of course it’s all right.” And I think coming from an investment background doesn’t excuse her either. Clients not expecting transparency from their investment adviser is what led to the whole Bernie Madoff swindle. Maybe some of Amy’s prior transactions need to be looked at a little more closely?

    Is the TNG (or NAG as our Mrs. Polly acronym’d it) PUMA? Well, you know what they say – if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck . . .

  18. Whoa! Is this blog for real? Reading PUMA blogs is my secret hobby and i thought i was the only being fascinated with those lunatic people. It’s a bit embarrassing but i even listen to their blogradio shows.
    I have to share the latest rant from jenniforhillary:

    ” We are in a fight for the world. For Power. For Domination. Forever. Sen. Gregg has just chosen the RIGHT side, and Barney Fucking Frank and the rest of the obots AND those in denial and those working with obots and those not listening are on the WRONG SIDE.

    This is a serious world-changing life-changing fight that, once lost, can NEVER be re-won.

    Fight on Pumas…fight on…”

  19. Lol @ jack z – I know I was quite pleased to find it as well and hats off to the site admin. YestoDemocracy.com is a good site, it has however taken a more serious route and gone after the Birther Bigots. A sad combination of real NeoNazis, PUMA NeoNazis and Conspiracy Theorists.

    I like the lighter approach of just laughing at the stupid PUMAs.

    I have to admit to lurking at PUMA sites just for shock value. Kind of why a Liberal would sometimes listen to Limbaugh or watch Fox. More often than not PUMA types are just so stupidly stupid, that they are just funny. The only shaming thing is that some of these dirty bigots were ever associated with the Democratic Party.

    Today for example NoQuarter attacks Andrew Sullivan for “betraying his Party”. Someone said Americans do not understand irony. Certainly the bitter bigot SusanUnPc does not.


    “And now here’s the pathetic Andrew Sullivan sullying the pages of the once-esteemed The Atlantic magazine:

    Sullivan has gone bats over the Gregg story. And, forgive me if I have a faulty memory, but hasn’t Andrew Sullivan been essentially a Republican until Obama? And wasn’t he in favor of the war in Iraq, as well as much of Bush’s policies? I mean, wasn’t he a reliable conservative all these years?

    Until, for reasons unfathomable to other sentient beings, this man went so ga-ga for Obama that he can’t even think straight anymore?

    And why would he even complain that the Republicans are indeed “at ware” with Obama, since that is precisely what opposing parties do? ”

    Hypocrite much?

  20. Hats off to you if you can actually read no quarter. I can’t read that shit. I’ve been PUMA watching for a while, so I had a good laugh at no quarter with the nonexistant whitey tapes, and then again with the nonexistant “chief editor korrir” tapes. What I learned is that if I need to sell some bullshit, racists are a good market to target. Fools.

    On another note, I defy anyone to try to read “hillary is 44.” What the “hillary is 44” person could have been thinking when designing that site is a mystery.

  21. You guys are slipping. No comment on the super-pro-ERA Murphy writing this:

    “Vote for every single damn woman you can. I don’t care if she’s Phyllis Schlafly or the soul sister of Andrea Dworkin.”

    Schlafly made a career out of vehemently opposing the ERA. That right there is a special kind of stoopid.

  22. Yes, Darr-ugh! All of us wimmens be the same! Jest vaginas devoid of independent thought, political persuasion, personal history, education, moral value systems — we ain’t nothin’ but a collective of cunts!

    Sweet Flaming Balls of Jesus Christ but she’s a disgraceful idiot.

    And if all that matters is women gaining access to power, why are they opposed to Kim Gandy? And remind me again how supportive they were of Caroline Kennedy? And of what they call Michelle Obama?

  23. Holy shit – did you see this from Nijma?


    lack of self-awareness is apparently a feature over there, not a bug.

  24. Tom – I’ve made my reaction to Nijma’s recent output known directly to herself elsewhere on this blog. Don’t hold your breath for a substantive reply – the tactic of selective response to an isolated point in a comment is the closest I’ve seen to one recently.

    No idea why this surprises anyone. She does stand out among the PUMAs in some ways, certainly there’s nothing I’ve seen her say about Islam or Israel/Palestine that I disagree with, but she was also at Denver, which might indicate she was pretty hard-line to begin with. She’s also pallin’ around with Obots, so I guess she has to put up a show for her PUMA stalkers.

    And if anyone’s still bothering to post over there, you might want to gently point out that while she’s been busy editing out mentions of p*nises, she’s left a full-blown, uncensored c*nt in the middle of one of Mrs. Polly’s posts. Wouldn’t want her to lose her child-friendly status, now.

    Damn. This asterisk thing’s contagious.

  25. YAFB, Ever the good Girl Scout, I actually alerted her to it. Of course, my posts are generally full of uncensored c*nts flapping about, so no wonder her guard was down.

    Her posts from before PUMA were lively, observant, intelligent, sensitive. Then she enters the 2D world of PUMAPAC, and becomes a rather coarser version of herself. It’s a shame.

  26. Asterisks be damned.

  27. Very pubic-spirited of you, Mrs. P. (Sorry, I couldn’t resist channeling a third-grader there, though it’s a typo I’ve had to deal with a few times in my work.)

    Not really ironic that it was in a quote from Frilly Ninja Hero, eh?

    Shame – to be able to impress on Nijma the depths of the frilly one’s rabid effusions, in case she’s got a similar blind spot to the one evidenced above, one needs to quote them.

    Then they end up more asterisks than words. Which always looks a bit cartoon-y to me, like when a comedy show bleeps a word for laughs.

  28. Reading her site is like watching “Casino” on network tee vee.

    PUMA = Piece of Shit. No exceptions. Anyone who can justify hanging out with those assholes after the steady stream of racist, xenophobic, conspiracy-mongering BS served up on a daily platter (while all dissent is barred by Dear Leader) is just delusional. If someone is seriously interested in feminist activism or electoral reform, there are plenty of non-insane organizations out there that actually have a history of achievement. Njima may sound a little less crazy than the rest from time to time, but she is “one of them, one of them, gooble gobble, gooble gobble, one of them, one of them!”

    Of course, PUMA was formed out of a grand delusion that pro-HRC Obama haters existed in such vast numbers that they were gonna totally rock the vote this past November. They’ve been sent crashing back to reality sans helmet so many times in the past few months that I seriously think they have permanent brain damage. Nijma even seem to detect “secret PUMA supporters” on this site!

    (Oh shit! Which one of you gave away the secret handshake and decoder ring? DammitI Now we’re all compromised!)

  29. the sweary asterisks always remind me of stripper pasties. they don’t cover up anything, just draw attention and make it seem “naughtier” than it is, in a coy sort of way.

  30. Well, since we seem to be at the bantering stage of this cross-forum blind dating thing, I couldn’t resist (we could use an open thread here, IMO) .

    The Eightfold PUMA Path

    1. When in doubt, shout “Women-lynching!”

    2. Pretend to read. In particular, pretend to read the Stimulus proposals. It’s taking too long? Then just jump to your long-prepared conclusions and hit the Prowl button. While you’re at it, plagiarize whole screeds and graphics, then warp them to your own ends. Nobody reads that stuff at the top except to get a vague idea of what today’s hatefest is meant to be about anyway.

    3. Collect grievances. If you can’t find any, make them up. When you complain about something on your grievance list, don’t use specific quotations or link to anything. You don’t want anyone to find out that you made the whole thing up. [No changes needed there.]

    4. Charge people for posting pics of their pets on your blog. They may be cute, but there’s Murphy’s salary to pay.

    5. Swear. If you’re jenniforhillary, this will usually pass without comment, and on occasion be greeted with widespread cheers. If you run a blog with a supposedly child-friendly rating, post comments by others criticizing genital mutilation out of context, then censor them, then castigate the original poster for being evil for posting them on your site. Repeat, despite clarifications. Good shticks are hard to come by.

    6. Outright abuse will lose you your five-star halo, so just tolerate or pretend never to have seen any indefensible comments from fellow PACers, even if you were posting on the same thread at the same time. Racial slurs are fine as long as they’re deleted for posterity.

    7. Giving the appearance of thought is essential, but thought itself is dangerous, and must be censored if it gets out of hand. If you do think, blame an external agency – say, Rumproasters – for any cognitive dissonance you may be suffering.

    8. If you can’t think of a good argument against someone, don’t bother responding. Use distraction, or respond offhandly to one relatively insignificant detail, then run away. Call it a dialog. Claim victory.

  31. Great one, YAFB! Glad to see it got its own post.

    And why do I suspect that Darr-dugh had no idea who Phyllis Schlafly was until she read about her on anti-PUMA sites mocking the PUMA “community” and their longlost devotion to ERA — because voting for McCain as a feminist act is exactly like putting Phyllis Schlafly in charge of getting ERA passed.

  32. once again, YAFB, kudos to you for working out the wonderful “Frilly Ninja Hero” for Jenniforhillary. It could do more for her self-esteem than a dozen wet smooches from Darruuuuughhhhhhh.

    Whose name presents some possibilities. Thank goodness we still have some long winter nights left to work them out.

  33. […] on February 24, 2009 by bettycrackerfl The New Agenda — also known as PUMA-Lite. Some other commenters and I recently discovered just how much The New Agenda relies on moderation to stifle even mild […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: