The Eightfold PUMA Path

Yetanotherfreakingbrit’s parody of this bit of PUMA dumbassery deserves its own front page post:

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.

Please consider this an open thread.

58 Responses

  1. Some light heartedness

    Q: What do you call a PUMA demonstartion?
    A: A bigot line
    Q: What kind of buns do PUMA supporters like with their burgers?
    A: Hot Cross buns
    Q: Where do PUMA supporters like to shop?
    A: Circle KKK. (Although they may have difficulty working the coffee machine)
    Q: Why do PUMA members were pointed hats?
    A: Easier to fit over the dunce cap (and you can carry at least 3 cats in them)

  2. I saw that Darhag Murphy is still misusing links on one of her latest examples of stupidity.

    Her article reads

    [blockquote]You know, just because something is historic, doesn’t mean it’s good news.

    The. Headlines. Ain’t. Pretty.

    The words “burned” and “stumble” and “AMATEUR” come to mind

    Each word links to a completely unrelated topic

    “good news” links to a picture of the titanic sinking. That was good?
    “The” links to a story about the rocky start for the revised bank bail out. What does the great Pooma want to do then?
    “Headlines” links to a very weak story about a “rocky start” for American Chinese relations.
    “Aint” links to an editorial saying that the four day old Preisidency had failed because it wants peace for Palestine
    “Pretty” links to a video that has been taken down. Stupid Darhag.

    So the first line is a POOMAFAIL.

    The next line

    “burned” links to the oh so impartial Dredge Report – on a story abut why some nut job thinks Gregg was burned out.
    “stumble” refers to the Canadian plans for recovery not yet working, resulting in a falling Canadian $. So as they keep pointing out to Canadian Obama supporters, what has Canada got to do with it?
    and finally “amateur” points to the blog of Ben Smith, who I guess makes more from his blog than the harridan of hate.

    So yet again Darhag – a POOMAFAIL.

  3. Thanks, Sean. Most days, I think it must take her at most 15 minutes to cobble her screeds together – it doesn’t need to be lucid for her self-selected audience, which after the initial “First!” tends to treat every post as an open thread anyway. (Oh, and as for the tags that work on this blog, they need to be enclosed in , and some smilies are available.)

    And Betty – oo-er., that was unexpected.

    OK, I got my open thread. Just point out that my 8-fold path up there was a parody rebuttal, and if I were starting from scratch, I wouldn’t necessarily have chosen the same talking points, and certainly wouldn’t have had trouble coming up with more than 8 if necessary (Nijma is apparently new to snark and seemingly doesn’t realize that it works best if well researched).

    I’m also wary that my own recent efforts might turn this blog temporarily too Nijma-flavored – she can be annoying and frustrating to some who had higher expectations of her (a lesson there perhaps, about expectations, apart from anything else), but as far as I’m concerned, she’s not the enemy.

    Oh, and a small prize from me if anyone can top Nijma’s conspiracy theory that Murphy’s pal Phillypuma is an undercover Rumproaster! That’s what you get for pallin’ around with wingnuts too long …

    Still, last I saw, jenniforhillary was due to come out of semi-retirement, having meditated her fill, so watch that space. If Israel comes up, I expect fireworks between her and Nijma, and a lot of prevaricating from Murphy as she battles to safeguard her source of income.

  4. NB: ” , ” above was supposed to be “angle bracket … angle” bracket. Same tags work here as do on Rumproast in general.

  5. You got it, Brit. Sloppy of me not to have done so before.

  6. ‘Thanks, Betty, but ’twas me that was sloppy!

    “Just point out …” should have read “Just to point out ….”

    I’m evidently having a bad finger day, so I’m off do do some gardening before it’s completely dark here (we usually get the remnants of the waether that you folks have done with over here, and right now it’s overcast as all heck). If I manage to maim myself with the secateurs or fall off the ladder, my day will be complete. 🙂

  7. The extremely bigoted of bigots, Uppity Harridan of Hate, has been at it again.

    On her own bigot page and the bastion of hate and lies NoQuarter, it has been spreading lies about health care proposals in the Recovery Act.

    What the stupid of stupid bigotbots probably does not realise is that the article that she bases this display of ignorance from originally came from a Bloomberg OpEd,

    The OpEd was written by Betsy McCaughey. Betsy is a paid lobbyist for the Pharma Industry, who completely oppose any health reform.

    Needless to say – even the Bloomberg article – written by a Health Industry lobbyist – is no where near as ignorant and paranoid as the PUMA FAIL article.

    Why is this another PUMAFAIL. This lovely Betsy, works for the lobbyist firm that ran the Harry and Louise lie ads against Hillary Clinton in the 1990s. The last time that America was looking at universal health care. So Uppity Harridan of Hate, you fail. Go back to spreading paranoia about Muslims.

  8. I see my last comment has not made it through moderation yet!

    Anyway, I had a look round the bigotsphere and found this post from Darhag I never donated to Hillary Murphy.

    It has a collage of PUMA bigots.

    Now I know PUMA has (had) some token AA supporters. Bigots Murphy and “DanceswithPumas” have not even bothered woth them. Nope this PUMA collage is strictly whites only.

  9. Brit: if I were starting from scratch, I wouldn’t necessarily have chosen the same talking points

    Um, so why didn’t you?

    Oh, right, rule #7: “Don’t think of anything new of your own.” Can’t do anything original, even if it makes sense.

    But “the bantering stage of this cross-forum blind dating thing”? Really Brit, even if it IS Valentine’s Day. Next thing you know, it’ll be “my place or yours”.

  10. Um, so why didn’t you?

    Because I had a whim to do a quick, throwaway parody, and there was more than enough material readily available. PUMA is too incoherent and founded in attachment and delusion to truly aspire to an Eightfold Path of its own.

    I don’t think we’ve hit the “get a room” stage yet. I need to be wooed. 😉

  11. I’m going to repeat the comment I left for Nijma, who had nothing to say to Kerry but “What, no Latin?”:

    When it comes to PUMAs, difficile est saturam non scribere!

    (It’s difficult not to write satire.) Thanks, Juvenal.

  12. Nijma, see my previous comments. PUMAs are the dumbest pieces of fuck that no one wants to fuck, and that includes you. Plus, what do you do when someone talks dirty to you in bed? Pull out cue cards with asterisks?

  13. Also, I don’t think Nijma’s attempts to get those with “secret PUMA leanings” into the sob sisterhood of loserdom are going so well. Might be amusing if she decided to identify just who she thinks might be “on the fence” about the PUMAs. C’mon, Lil Prissy Powerless Pussy Pants. Stop being such a Kowardly Kunt and name names!

    (“Wah! Harsh language offends me! But that doesn’t mean I’m not TOTALLY ready to take on the smelly kitchen of politics with my other Warrior Wimmen! Haka WHINE!”)

  14. I fear that flirting with frat boiz is a star-crossed venture that will only impede my own progress toward detachment, breaking the the veil of maya that is this existence, and escaping the bonds of the wheel of reincarnation. However, compassion dictates that the journey on the path to my own enlightenment should be postponed long enough to reach down to the suffering Rumpsters and try to help them reassert their faltering dignity.

    On another level, why would someone want to put a euphemism for copulation in their blog name, exactly how many British Rumpsters are there if one more is deemed to be “yet another”, and why would a Brit be at all interested in an American blog like Rumproast? Unless they’re just in it for the animal pictures.

    For anyone who wants to get to know me better, may I recommend my soul-torn confessional:

  15. I didn’t know “camelsnose” was a synonym for copulation! But now I remember when Joe the Camel was protested, partially for the resemblence of his face to male genitalia.

    And there is the h*mp thing to be considered, too. From now on, I shall think of it as “cameling”.

  16. The extremely bigoted of bigots, Uppity Harridan of Hate, has been at it again.

    On her own bigot page and the bastion of hate and lies NoQuarter, it has been spreading lies about health care proposals in the Recovery Act.

    What the stupid of stupid bigotbots probably does not realise is that the article that she bases this display of ignorance from originally came from a Bloomberg OpEd,

    The OpEd was written by Betsy McCaughey. Betsy is a paid lobbyist for the Pharma Industry, who completely oppose any health reform.

    Needless to say – even the Bloomberg article – written by a Health Industry lobbyist – is no where near as ignorant and paranoid as the PUMA FAIL article.

    Why is this another PUMAFAIL. This lovely Betsy, works for the lobbyist firm that ran the Harry and Louise lie ads against Hillary Clinton in the 1990s. The last time that America was looking at universal health care. So Uppity Harridan of Hate, you fail. Go back to spreading paranoia about Muslims.

  17. I dont know if anyone saw the hypocrisy of Racist in Chief, SusanUnPC the other day, when it attacked Andrew Sullivan for disloyalty to the Republican Party

    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?

  18. “Boiz?” Geez, Nijma, does Darragh even make you spell things stupidly? You do know that as Chief Heather, she’s always going to knock your ball into the weeds no matter how much you kiss her ass, right? But keep sucking up to her. Lord knows emptyheaded pathetic little approval junkies like you need to feed your jones in whatever sleazy dive you find it in.

    Your fake-Buddha-bullshit-speak doesn’t disguise the fact that you cannot honestly answer any questions that are put to you here. Just who do you think is so eager to join you in PUMAland?

  19. In the interests of enlightenment …

    On another level, why would someone want to put a euphemism for copulation in their blog name,

    This is rich comng from someone with a blog called Camel’s Toe.

    Good grief, woman, are you obsessed? “I suppose a freak’s out of the question?” isn’t idiomatic English where I come from. Until now, that is. And sorry, this frat boi passed the half-century not that long ago. I know I look younger onscreen, but honesty now may forestall disappointment later.

    exactly how many British Rumpsters are there if one more is deemed to be “yet another”

    Precisely one identified as such on the (actually quite serious) Rumproast thread where I first used the name. Since we were a statistical cluster, it seemed apt, and like my earlier YTD ID, Abroadsider, wasn’t intended to be a permanent arrangement at the time. This accounts for the “freaking” bit of my name, as in “ZOMG, here’s another one,” which I rejected on grounds of length and euphony.

    and why would a Brit be at all interested in an American blog like Rumproast?

    Um, there was this thing, a kind of prolonged Doin’ the Dozens, last year, which you might have heard of, seemingly designed to figure out whether to hand the world to the neocons in perpetuity or not. Some people thought it a big deal, and it absorbed me and my SO, since she hails from the USA and didn’t want a Supreme Court stacked with rightwing nutbags in perpetuity.

    Most of the bloggers and commenters whose common sense and humor helped me get through that experience relatively unscathed end up hanging out on or around Rumproast. So I’m overjoyed to be able to spend some time in their company. The fact that Mrs. YAFB was born in the Bronx is neither here nor there, but does have a certain geographical neatness. One might also counter by asking why Canadians might be interested in a blog like PUMA PAC, but I’ll not hold my breath for an answer.

    Where do we hand these questionnaires in? I’ve never speed-dated before.

  20. YAFB, please rent “Play Misty for Me” before you engage any further in this online flirtation. I beg you!

  21. Njima is offended by “obscenity.” But she doesn’t consider racism, xenophobia, genocidal rantings, desires for mass starvation and death, and calls for castration to be obscene. Those are what the Kool Kuntz of PUMA like, and she wants them to like her, to REALLY like her! Because as a PUMA, she has no moral compass, despite her yammerings about “compassion” that she picked up from subpar self-help crapola in the supermarket checkout line.

    And again, “boiz?” Nijma sweetie, didn’t you copy that from Darragh? Couldn’t you “think of anything new on your own?”

    And care to explain why you tolerated and admired the phrase “bitchslap” in PUMA-World, but went into conniptions when Bettycracker used it? You’ve been asked this before. PUMA own your tongue? Not allowed to speak unless you run your comments by the Boss Ladies first? Good little house slave! Oh wait, I know the reason: you’re an idiotic hypocritical piece of fail.

    Like the other PUMAs, Nijma is about as “feminist” and “progressive” as Lurleen Wallace. (Google her, honey.) Yeah, I’m sure she got all fluttery about the f-word too — in between cheering on segregation and jim crow and beating down those “inadequate black males” who dared to get in the way of the Superior White Women.

    Nijma, go join the Klan. You are a disgusting worthless piece of racist hypocritical shit.

  22. Too funny, Brit. Here “freaking” is about the same as “frigging”; the kind of freaking you refer to requires a two word verb, i.e. “freaking out”. We use “freaking” in the sense you describe as a verb, yes, but not as an adjective. And here I thought you were dissing yourself–or advertising. At any rate I hope I get extra Brownie points for changing it back–we cross posted and I did change it as soon as I saw you so despondent. Anyhow, even if you take it as euphemism for the F-word, for WordPress purposes it’s still disguised–and the substitution doesn’t seem nearly as funny now that the antibiotics have knocked out my fever.

    No, I have not heard of this Doin’ the Dozens thing before. It strikes me as a little immature. Perhaps also destructive and indicative of delinquent or just plain dysfunctional behaviour. If one has to have internet allies that help one “get through that experience relatively unscathed” that just says to me “what is wrong with this picture?” But it has actual rules? That’s a bit creepy. I don’t see why anyone would engage with that. It seems that would just disrupt any real cognitive process and reduce politics to nanny nanny boo boo.

    As far as speed-dating, I don’t think there’s anyone to hand a questionnaire to–if you want to pair off for private “discussions” you would have to go to a password protected zone. In the case of Puma, you would email DWP to sign up for a project then get a password for the relevant forum. I don’t know the Rumproast equivalent. The “blind dating” remark–highly unlikely but not totally out of the question to interpret it as anything more than yet another Rumpster quip–I did meet my BF, a Deaniac, on teh intertoobs, but as you say, we’re not exactly at the “get a room” stage. Still it’s nice to know you won’t get possessive if I want to flirt with other Rumpsters.

  23. It seems that would just disrupt any real cognitive process and reduce politics to nanny nanny boo boo.

    Well, a PUMA would know, wouldn’t she?

  24. And we’ll take Nijma’s failure to explain why she parrots Darragh’s use of “boiz” and her inability to account for her rancid hypocrisy in acting shocked over the term “bitchslap” away from PUMA World as further proof of her mental maladjustment. Or her innate cowardice, which comes with the territory with PUMAs.

  25. OK, para. 1, you’re talking to an old linguist of sorts here, who”s edited books for brbrbrl years, so you can probably assume I understand the nuances of most words I use, and also colloquialisms where “a freaking Brit” could be a Brit that’s actually freaking [out]. It’s part the old British self-deprecatory humor. Glad the antibiotics are no longer necessary.

    No, I have not heard of this Doin’ the Dozens thing before.

    To para. 2, my metaphor was actually referring to the whole election process, which, in both the UK and US and pretty well any adversarial two-party system seems geared to having the candidates badmouth each other to the greatest possible extent, with cheers and boos and occasional missiles lobbed from the peanut gallery. I know from my perspective which side of that divide at the candidate level seemed intent to break that pattern of discourse. It wasn’t McCain/Palin.

    As for para. 3, thanks for the insight into how PUMAs arrange these things.

  26. Linguist, huh. No wonder. By any chance do you lurk at any of the lingua blogs–LL and the rest? I just added Jabal al-Lughat to my reader.

    Doin’ the Dozens. The U.S. election process was unusually ugly this season. Never have I heard such unreasoned hatred as was hurled at both Clinton and Palin–as women and regardless of party identity or political spectrum. Never did I think the democratic party would split with one of its traditional bases–women. RD refers to this as blogosphere 1.0 and 2.0. She has a knack for putting into words what many have experienced as personal and/or political betrayal. The hostility towards women seems to be continuing, too, well after the election. I really don’t have any insight to this. It’s as if some powerful and evil thing was unleashed and now either has a life of its own or is being manipulated by some unknown group for some unknown purpose.

    Puma insight? Not necessarily. I never came inside the team forums, which is why DWP and I aren’t always in agreement. She won’t back the anti-Palestine extremist crowd, though, when she is moderating, so I do have some appreciation for her, and she does seem to like my reading lists.

  27. But you’re absolutely fine with the abuse hurled at Michelle Obama, Caroline Kennedy, Donna Brazile, Kim Gandy, etc., etc., etc. — not to mention the racist and xenophobic epithets that are given free range all over PUMAland.

    And we already know that PUMAs don’t believe that Hillary “hardworking Americans, white Americans” ever tried to play the race card, right? And we know she NEVER used a cheap racebaiting trick like trying to tie Obama to Farrakhan to stoke xenophobic fears among white working-class voters. Oh never.

    Care to provide proof for your assertion that the Dems “split” with their female constituency? I mean, considering that Barack Obama won 56% of the female vote, compared to John Kerry’s 51%? ( That fact would rather make a liar out of you, wouldn’t it? Or rather, YOU make a liar out of yourself by fomenting demonstrably false premises.

    The numbers among women by which Obama won are even greater, of course, if one looks just at black and Latino women voters, but we know how blacks and Latinos are thought of in PUMAland — where “BUBBAS RULE!” and Michelle is “Scoop Mouth!” and only Hillary is “standing up for white people.” So I’m afraid you’re either badly informed (and if you’re relying on PUMAs for your information, that’s no surprise), or deliberately choosing to misrepresent. Why would that be? I guess I’ll ascribe it to some evil thing unleashed by PUMA. Fortunately, it’s not an evil thing with any real power.

    Thanks for displaying your hypocrisy once again.

  28. Sorry, I got lost at the bit where Riverdaughter was held up as anything other than a self-promoting, truth-warping, egotistical, manipulative, game-playing shill. (Just saying.)

    I could illustrate, but it might take days, since we seem to be restricted to one URL per post here. A Google search on Abroadsider or yetanotherfreakingbrit should reveal my own take on events over the months (and some things which might come as a surprise) anyway.

    My own recall, in brief, is of the “Whitey Tape” being slavered over at length, Michelle Obama being smeared in horribly racist or divisive terms (like that non-existent slap-up meal she never ordered), let alone slights on her as a woman, and an enormous amount of racism of both the blatant and dogwhistle type being propagated (like that benighted young woman who scratched the backwards B on her face, leading to anti-Obot vapors at The Confluence, and and no retraction or clarification from RD when the truth came out, though at least Murphy admitted she’d been had by being fooled by baseless propaganda – I think it ended up being three times in a week with different stories, but I’d have to check).

    Some of this, appallingly, at least fell neatly into the game plan of Hillary’s “othering” campaign, if not actively being propagated by it. The remnants of all of this – along with some things that should not have been said about either Palin of Hillary – still echo around the blogosphere now. I simply do not believe this was part of Obama’s campaign strategy, and if you have evidence otherwise (I believe we do have evidence about the conduct of Hillary’s campaign), I’d be intrigued to see it..

    But other than that, Kerry’s mentioned some issues I’d also be interested in hearing a response to.

  29. This conflation of “women” and “PUMAs” is one of the things that drives me batty about the whole stupid “movement.” I resent their attempts to induct me into the ranks of the sob-sisterhood on the basis of my plumbing.

    As you pointed out, Kerry, there is absolutely no basis for asserting that the Democratic party split with “women” — the exact opposite is true: The Democratic Party made significant inroads with women this year.

    I’m sure it’s difficult for people who spent months feeding on a steady diet of grievance and resentment against the party to process, but it’s a fact. “Blogosphere 2.0,” “personal betrayal” and “hostility toward women” my ass.

    Newsflash, you puling infants, there have always been elements of rancid misogyny and racism in US politics, and the fact that y’all are so shocked — shocked! — by at least 1/2 of this development now shows just how deep your commitment to social justice runs.

    Separating the PUMAs from the Democratic Party obviously had no appreciable effect on the Dems’ electoral prospects. I think it’s entirely possible it will ultimately prove to be a boon just as the expulsion of the wretched “Dixiecrats” was — only without the associated significant loss of states. So good riddance, whinging toddlers!

  30. NoQuarter got their arse handed to them when trying to claim President Obama did not support the Equal Pay Act

  31. LOL, Sean, that’s precious.

  32. The comments on that thread are hilarious.

    Right after NoHalf (neat name!) posts the list showing Obama as an original signatory, blowing the whole post out of the water, there’s the good ole switcheroo:

    Comment by The Real HC | 2009-02-16 12:39:30

    Ledbetter is perfect for Obama. Feel good legistation he can point to over and over and over and over. Just like ending the Mexico City Gag Rule yet not pushing for FoCA at all, he prefers smoke and mirrors to real work.

    This is at least a little more subtle than the other posters who just pretend not to have seen NoHalf’s list. Shouldn’t confuse them with facts.

  33. And they’re still going on about him allegedly giving Hillary the finger. Next we’ll be hearing about the “99 Problems” tape at the Iowa victory party — another thoroughly debunked piece of deranged Clintonista crapola.

    And Betty, “puling infant” is the Bitchslap du Jour!

  34. I’m going to ignore all the ad hominems, straw man arguments, and when-did-you-quit-beating-your-wife hostile nonsense in the above posts that try to make me responsible for everything any body has ever written anywhere since the beginning of time, whether I have ever seen it or not. Looks like some people here have some boundary issues. I’m going to cut right to the chase.

    I am reminded of the question Brad Mays asked on the pages of Rumproast: “Why do you feel that so many men feel justified in using sexual imagery and language as a way of demeaning women engaged in political discourse?” I don’t remember hearing any answer to that question.

    What I’m taking away from the above comments is that the whole Rumpster viewpoint of hostility towards women is that it’s okay because
    1) someone else once did something icky somewhere
    2) it doesn’t matter as long as you have enough votes to win
    3) a person who once argued against hostility towards women has eeevil thoughts–because I say so.

    To this I can only say
    1) If little Johnny went and jumped in a lake, would you go jump in a lake?
    2) Would it be okay to use skin color imagery and language to demean racial and ethnic groups engaged in political discourse–as long as you could win an election? But wait, the election is over. What is left to “win”? If you go over to the ABC piece on Hillary’s computer changes at State department right now, you will find the same old hate, the b-word yet again, everything the Obots set in motion is still very much in motion. What is the end-game here? There is something else besides “winning” going on here.
    3) How do you know what someone else is thinking? And why can’t you make a valid argument against the ideas they are expressing–instead of trying to prove they are an icky person?

    So not only do the Rumpsters think hostility toward women is quite all right, they think verbal abuse is fine too; and judging by the way Murphy’s posts about violence against women has been mocked (see point #1 about women-lynching in the above post) they have no problem at all with hitting women and even killing women as well. That means Rumpsters totally approve of verbally abusing ME, assaulting ME, and even killing ME.

    That’s pretty freaking astonishing. And I mean “freaking” in that good British/New York way that means, you know, “freak”, and not in that other dehumanizing way

  35. Nijma, I think there are strawpersons galore here in your own post, and your earlier ones, so I can’t hope to address them all.

    You’ll have to ask Brad why he posted that question. I didn’t see it when he posted it as he evidently wrote it a couple of hours after the last poster on that thread, when there was already another post on the go (which may also be why he never got an answer there, though he’s had quite a few discussions over at Rumproast since then and doesn’t seem to have had many problems with folks). I have a vague recollection of his posting something very similar on PUMA PAC, though I can’t trace it – perhaps it was his standard opening gambit to figure out the lie of the land, perhaps it was something that was bugging him, only he’d know for sure.

    You were mentioned there, as were some practical things people could do to support women.

    As for “women-lynching,” that was touched on briefly in marindenver’s (a woman, in case that’s confusing) post linked above, but also discussed a number of times both on Rumproast and other Roasters’ blogs – IIRC, the concensus was that it was an inappropriate term for a variety of reasons (I could give a link to one concise, coherent rationale, but I’m assuming one link’s still my limit and it’s up to others here whether they want to address that at your behest). I personally don’t think it’s a helpful characterization of violence towards females.

    I have no idea how you take away the other impressions you describe above, though I will say you’ve appeared very quick to jump to conclusions even before any harsh words were said to you, and especially how you extrapolate that to saying, “That means Rumpsters totally approve of verbally abusing ME, assaulting ME, and even killing ME.”

    No it doesn’t. Hyperbole doesn’t help your argument.

    Rumproast isn’t a PAC, nor is it a pack. It’s not monolithic. Its visitors are individuals who seem to agree on a number of things and can usually argue fairly fruitfully about the things they don’t agree on, from what I’ve seen so far.

    As for the rest, I’m assuming that you’re a big, strong woman who can stand up for herself, or I guess you wouldn’t come back here. I’m not going to risk patronizing you by playing at chivalry with a total stranger. What you assume from that fact is up to you.

  36. Afterthought:

    I have a vague recollection of his posting something very similar on PUMA PAC, though I can’t trace it …

    Thinking about it, it might have been on The Confluence. The way posts get doctored after the event there, and given some of the rough treatment he and Lori experienced there in the past, it may well be gone for ever if it was there.

  37. Shorter Nijma: I’m going to ignore all these fact-based arguments that make my senseless hysteria and trumped-up lies as a PUMA even harder to defend.

    Before you post again, look up the meaning of “ad hominem: (why doesn’t “Obot” count,” Lil Miss Hypocrisy Prissy Pants? Or “boiz?”) and “straw man.”

    As an example of the latter, see below:

    Would it be okay to use skin color imagery and language to demean racial and ethnic groups engaged in political discourse–as long as you could win an election? But wait, the election is over.

    Oh, so we no longer have to worry about the racism and xenophobia used by Hillary Clinton and her surrogates, and that which is still used by the PUMAs? Were you always picked last for dodgeball in gym class? Because you suck at it. Why don’t you answer your own question — is it okay to use skin color imagery and language (i.e., “Scoop Mouth,” “Sambo”) as a form of “political” discourse? (Scare quotes necessary, as we all know that PUMA isn’t a legitimate political organization.)

    How do you know what someone else is thinking?

    Hmmm…how many times now have I asked you to identify those here who you believe have “secret PUMA leanings?” Doesn’t this suggest that you think you know what someone else is thinking? Shitbrain.

    If little Johnny went and jumped in a lake, would you go jump in a lake?

    No, but if Little Johnny “At least I don’t slather on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt!” anti-choice, anti-Ledbetter, Chelsea-Clinton-Mocking McCain puts a random vagina on his ticket, the PUMAs will toss every “lifelong feminist and Democrat” principle they claim to hold dearer than life itself to try to hand the anti-feminist ticket the White House. Of course, being PUMAs, they fail miserably. Always, always, always failing.

    “Why do you feel that so many men feel justified in using sexual imagery and language as a way of demeaning women engaged in political discourse?

    As in John McCain chuckling “That’s an excellent question” to the “How do we beat the bitch?” question at the town hall in reference to Hillary Clinton? That the discourse you mean? Nah.

    So not only do PUMAs think men who mock the “health of the mother” in discussing abortion rights are A-Okay, they would toss abortion rights and equal pay and god knows what else away for the luxury of indulging their hurt widdle fee-fees — and do so in order to benefit someone who said heinous things about the woman they pretend to support!

    So why don’t YOU answer why so many women in PUMAworld feel justified using violent castration language? And who are these “so many men” you’re referencing who are using sexual imagery and discourse here or on Rumproast? Links, please. Otherwise, I’m afraid you need to keep that straw man away from the open flames. (I use such language liberally, but I’m a woman, I’ve been doing feminist activism for 30 years, and I’ve earned the right to open a can of verbal whup-ass on racist pieces of puke who shit all over what the women’s movement stands for.)

    Once again, you try to dodge when someone catches YOU out in a lie (i.e., Obama “splitting” the Dems from female voters). Yes, this is a lie from YOU. Not some person on those message boards where you just hang out passively and helplessly. (Such empowered women over in the PUMA pens! You can say whatever you want at the Confluence as long as the Man in Charge, MyIQEatsPaste, gives you permission.) Gosh, you poor PUMAs have absolutely no agency or responsibility for anything your friends there say — though you somehow hold Obama personally responsible for everything the media has ever said about Hillary Clinton.

    Find ONE example of Barack Obama making a misogynist or violent comment about Hillary Clinton (and no, using the word “periodically” doesn’t count — any more than using “niggardly” is proof of racism). You PUMAs have been issued this challenge before, and haven’t stepped up with proof yet.

    And why haven’t you addressed the question of your hypocrisy (i.e., “bitchslap” is so terrible when Betty uses it — but you never questioned its use in PUMAland). Why don’t you try to answer those very direct questions about YOUR lies and your hypocritical behavior?

    Since you are a PUMA of Very Little Brain, I will point out that what we mocked in Darragh’s posts was her use of the term “woman-lynching” – clearly trying to tie domestic violence against women in an Oppression Olympics with the very real and specific history of lynching as it was practiced against black men (and black women, too) in the United States, and thus demeaning the history of racially motivated (and often state-sponsored and/or tolerated) violence and murder against African Americans as a means of terrorizing and controlling an entire population and prevent them from seeking their civil liberties.

    And again, PUMA didn’t form to help stop violence against women, or to participate in any substantive sweeping feminist or electoral reform efforts. It exists purely to hate Barack Obama. It was, and is, a combination of brain-dead Hillary Cultists, GOP ratfuckers (Murphy the 2000 McCain Donor) and those who are too stupid to realize they’re being had.

    We don’t mock “women,” numbnut. We mock PUMAs after they have proven themselves worthy only of scorn and contempt with their lies, hypocrisies, racism, xenophobia, violent castration and genocide fantasies, and bullshit aura of perpetual victimhood and passivity. As Betty made clear, your tiny little cabal of brain-damaged harpies don’t speak for all women. You sure as fuck don’t speak for me.

    When you come in where you’re not welcome (‘boundary issues?” Fuck you and the cross you rode in on) and start hurling bullshit at people who are several degrees smarter than the morons you’re used to arguing with in Hysterical Harpieland, don’t be so surprised when we shove that bullshit back down your throat. But hey, you PUMAs love that “shove it down our throats” fantasy, don’t you? You imagine that all kinds of people — mostly big rapacious black men — are doing it to you 24/7. Because that’s how the racist mind works in creating a Big Scary Other.

    No wonder you come off like a Victorian hysteric. But thanks for capitalizing “ME” so often in your second-to-last graf (and please provide proof of where anyone offered approval here of assaulting you and killing you — I believe I suggested that you “eat my fuck,” but it’s not toxic. As far as I know.) As for “verbal assault,” you come in with “Obot,” I’ll raise it to “cunt.” I like high stakes, what can I say? Dish it out, take it, etc. If you can’t stand the heat on the internet, go back to the kitchen.

    Like all the other PUMAs, you have totally misunderstood the old feminist principle of “the personal is political” and have twisted it to mean “my fee-fees are hurt because I didn’t get my toy candidate and I’m gonna make the whole world pay!”

  38. I did google your other freaking nom de guerre and all I found was a bunch of freaking obsessing about the freaking minutiae of what some person freaking said on some freaking blog I never heard of. And I mean freaking in a nice non-disrespectful way. It was all referential, meaningless to me, and said nothing–pretty much like you’re doing now.

    My words were not hyperbole at all. All the above comments are nothing but excuses for hurting women. Not once in the above thread has anyone come out and said, “No. Sexism is not okay. Verbal abuse is not okay. Using sexual imagery and language as a way of demeaning women engaged in political discourse is not okay. Beating women is not okay. Killing women is not okay.” If anyone is thinking it, they sure don’t have the guts to say it. If someone says it’s all right to do those things to women, and you say nothing, it’s only a matter of time before someone decides it’s okay to do those things to you. And in the meantime, you become very cold on the inside, and are capable of feeling nothing.

    If someone kills (lynches) a black person with a rope, because they are black, there is horror. But if someone kills (lynches) a woman with a rope, because she is female, that’s “an inappropriate term” or some other abstract discussion. Does anyone over there even have a clue?

    There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that if a Rumpster saw me on the street and identified me as Puma, they would have so many ways of labeling, demonizing and justifying violence against me they would not hesitate to kill me if they thought they could get away with it.

    The one thing that the Pumas have got all over you guys is they are not afraid to stand up to another Puma and tell them gently that they are doing something inappropriate. It’s hard to imagine the pain that is behind some of the senseless and cruel things you can see being said and done on the internet, but Pumas do try to help each other get to a place where they are feeling whole. People who feel whole do not strike out . I don’t see that kind of moral compass with the Rumpsters. They just laugh and point and think cruelty is funny.

  39. I did google your other freaking nom de guerre and all I found was a bunch of freaking obsessing about the freaking minutiae of what some person freaking said on some freaking blog I never heard of. And I mean freaking in a nice non-disrespectful way. It was all referential, meaningless to me, and said nothing–pretty much like you’re doing now.

    Then I call bullshit in spades. Perhaps you’re not a very adept Googler, so you’ll have missed, in that case, my reactions to the major jenniforhillary debacle and my calling of myiq2xu about his numerous misogynistic musings, for instance.

    You set hoops you expect people to jump through – like wanting them to state the bleeding obvious – when you have no intention of engaging in anything like a true dialogue, which would involve give and take and might actually lead somewhere rather than going round in pointless ever-decreasing circles. You started out hostile, and here you are now. Great, you won’t have to change anything.

    And I call double bullshit about your idyllic portrayal of PUMAland. We’ve observed it closely enough, remember.

    I’m done with this. Go work the chip on your shoulder off on somebody else. Go hang out with your PUMA PACers who’ve given you a heck of a lot less quality time than people here and on Rumproast have. Go share with them your fantasies about the murderous types you’ve been pallin’ around with, I’m sure they’ll love it. Go battle the strawpeople you’re so blinded by. Good luck with that.

  40. Nijma, you have nothing to offer here but bullshit, lies, hyperbole, unsubstantiated speculation, and race-blind equivocations.

    No one has said violence against women is cool here. Find an example, since your “Way of the Rumproast” post took pains to mock people who don’t back up their assertions. What you fail to understand is that using the term “lynching” (or “sell down the river,” for that matter) outside of its original context removes the POLITICAL motivation for race-based lynching. That is not an “abstraction,” as you so airily dismiss it. It is crucial to any understanding of what lynching means and why it was used. Do you really not have a clue?

    Lynching was a deliberate POLITICAL strategy, devised to instill terror in whole communities of black people and keep them from speaking up for civil rights. It often involved more than one lone victim — google “Rosewood,” since you apparently were sick when your civics and history class explained these things. Or maybe you were too busy nursing some private little grievance to pay attention, who knows?

    Is domestic violence used by men (and sometimes women) to assert control via terror over partners in their sphere of power? Sure. Has it been treated too cavalierly by law enforcement in the past, and sometimes today? Yes.

    Is it the same as a state-sponsored regime of terror, which is what lynching was? No. To conflate the two does no favors to those who work against domestic violence, or who have survived lynching (look up the site for the museum about lynching in Milwaukee, WI for more information). BTW, I’ve raised money for the legal defense of women who have killed abusive partners. You? Anything other than grandstanding gum-flapping? Yeah. That’s what I thought.

    The PUMAs started off by using the most vile racially charged and violent language possible against Barack Obama, his wife, and pretty much every man in the world (“Shoot their cocks off!” — and again, I’m dumbstruck that what you find objectionable there is that we would repeat the word “cock” on a “child-friendly” site without the teaser asterisks – NOT the sentiment behind the words). We called PUMAs out on their racism, conspiracy-mongering, hate speech, and advocacy of violence. Repeatedly.

    Again, I defy you to find a place where sexual violence has been advocated here or on Rumproast, as it has been so often on PUMAPac. I defy you to find a place where violence was advocated against anyone who didn’t first come in with a string of abuse of their own. (I believe I came up with some creative anal-enlargement ideas for someone who meandered over to Rumproast with a string of insults for the women there — but if you start shit with me, be prepared for me to return the fire tenfold.)

    You can’t find any such examples. Because we haven’t advocated mass murder and genital mutilation the way your friends have. And you’re a fucking liar. You don’t stand up to them.

    If you all really “stood up” to other PUMAs, JenniForHillary wouldn’t still be on her castration kick (I believe the latest was “twist all men’s penises off to change the world!!”) How much “help” have you all given her, other than some variant of “You GO, girl!” So you’re a foul fucking liar when you say that PUMAs call out other women for violent racist, xenophobic, and misandryst language. To the oontrary, they are rewarded for such discourse. Hey, beats hell out of organizing, fundraising, reading bell hooks, etc.

    Still waiting for you to explain why you lied about Obama’s vote totals with women, your hypocrisy about supporting the misogynist McCain ticket over Obama, your proof of a single misogynist thing Obama ever said about Hillary Clinton, and your justification for your hypocritical hissy fit about Betty’s use of “bitchslap” and your failure to “gently” tell your PUMA pals that you find that term “inappropriate.”

    And who made you the Queen of Appropriate Discourse, anyway? You came to a site called “Stupid PUMAs,” and you’re shocked that people here treat you with derision as a member of that group. Crawl back to your moderated den of failure and victimhood.

  41. Nijma, first of all, this: “they would not hesitate to kill me if they thought they could get away with it.” is melodramatic nonsense. For heaven’s sake, breathe into a paper bag until your head clears.

    The ugliest PUMA trait, although it’s hard to pick one, is their delight in victimhood. You thrill to have this image of wild-eyed college Obots who would run you down and, and, what? Carve a backwards B on you? We are a bunch of copy editors, critics, tech professionals, many in our 40’s and 50’s, and a good half of us females, fed-up females. We yell at PUMAs because they tried to hand the country over to the same crew who’ve been wrecking it for the last eight years, out of PIQUE. Being yelled at won’t kill you: you deserve to be yelled at.

    About lynching: it is a specific sort of violence. Women actually participated in some of it, so there goes the moral superiority of women down the drain as far as I’m concerned. Whole towns, men, women, and children, went to see lynchings; they were a special occaision. There are pictures of women smiling beneath the trees on which are hanging, as Billie Holliday sang, strange fruit.

    Violence against women is a separate subject . Confusing the two for politics’ sake doesn’t help combat either. Quantifying the amount of suffering, so that women can win the suffering sweepstakes, is gross, but that’s how Darragh likes to play it. She actually ran a post comparing the number of black men lynched to women beaten.Why is it necessary to promote one over the other as the most terrible? Why can’t each be left in its own, unique, poisonous sphere?

    PUMA brings out the worst in you, Nijma. You lose your powers of observation, you’re snide, you employ meretricious reasoning, you selectively ignore the unanswerable.

    When you leave PUMA behind, and talk about, say, Odin’s horse, you’re a different person. A better person. A non-whiny, non-plaintive, non-accusatory, non-sour, entirely other kettle of fish.

  42. Great rejoinder, Ulla! (You’re so much nicer than me!)

    What I would add is that many lynchings came about because white women lied about black men violating them, stealing from them, disrespecting them, etc. Kinda like how PUMAs lie incessantly about Barack Obama’s misogyny. And again, Nijma, you’re welcome to provide evidence of that any ole time. Hope you have better luck proving that than you did your fantastical assertion that Obama separated Dems from the female vote.

    I have no desire to know who Nijma is outside of PUMA. By choosing to associate with them, she has clearly stated how she wishes to be viewed in the world.

  43. OK, I make that #1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 – not a full house, but not bad given nobody here’s dumb enough to give a PUMA money.

    So she scuttles off in a drunken haze to suck up to her pathetic klan and pen paeans to Guy PUMAS.

    Hope she enjoys cuddling myiq, but she’d better watch his hands. Or maybe swap notes on Islam with BrianH. Or maybe she could discuss lipstick and pigs with mawm. Because, you know, PUMAs are so productive and successful and have such a track record of being right about … well, anything. 🙂

  44. I won’t bother addressing Nijma since my fellow woman-lynching, copy-editing, art-critiquing tech professionals here have done such a marvelous job of dispatching her manifold libels and hysterics (and since it’s clearer than ever she’s not interested in real dialogue — quelle surprise!).

    But Ulla has got me thinking — I haven’t seen Nijma’s non-PUMA writing nor that of any other PUMA for that matter. But to paraphrase something I said to Brad Mays awhile back here, I don’t doubt that despite their appalling politics, individual PUMAs have redeeming characteristics as human beings: the ability to win at Scabble, cook a mean omelet, have meaningful insights on subjects other than politics, etc.

    Could it be that if you met one of the wingnut scumbags from Red State at, say, a fishing tournament, you might enjoy his company as long as the subject of politics did not come up? I know this to be true. Fully half of my relatives are unreconstructed rednecks whose views on firearms and race relations would find validation at PUMAPAC (or a Klan rally).

    They are perfectly lovely people as long as they don’t decide to entertain you with “Sambo” jokes or regale you with details about the technical capabilities of their many firearms and what they’ll do should anyone ever give them an excuse to test out the equipment. I know the type.

  45. Interesting point, Betty. I think there’s also the factor that some people feel so constrained in their offline lives that they can let it all hang out online.

    Part of my early 20s training (at the tender mercies of non-separatist ex-Greenham Women) involved seeking to go beyond obvious differences and looking for common ground, while not sacrificing one’s own integrity, and certainly not being a doormat.

    Since Mrs. YAFB and myself are still after 20-odd years identified as national-profile protesters against the armaments that provide a livelihood for a large proportion of people in the community where we live, it’s a grounding that’s served me fairly well. One can be a lightning rod or a confidant, or just another local, depending on the person and their own hangups or lack of them.

    Another part was a spell as a residential social worker in a hostel for single, homeless late teenagers who’d been kicked out by their often dysfunctional families or gone through the juvenile justice system. With the more troubled residents, dealing with projection, different forms of aggression, and the whole panoply of adolescent testing behavior was all part of the job, and it was a fine balance helping build self-esteem while preventing them knocking chunks off each other or the staff.

    It was tiresome enough when I was paid a pittance to do it (and in the end we were just providing a sticking plaster over society’s ills in the face of full-blooded Thatcherism). It’s doubly tiresome as an amateur pursuit faced online with people who haven’t been given anything like the rough deals those young people had been through and who exaggerate their grievances. But I guess it passes the time, and unlike in that job, it’s permissible to point and laugh.

    Now, I are mainly going to be working on a text about Kim Jong Il’s foreign policy (oh joy!) written by a furriner (oh double joy!) – and, a rarity for me nowadays, on paper to boot (whee!).

    bbl, as they say somewhere somewhen, but I’ll be online just a little less in the next few days till I’ve wrangled the damn thing into something resembling submission.

  46. Well, here’s hoping we’ve seen the last of that tiresome idiot and her put-upon airs of aggrieved gentility.

    Still, I will never stop being surprised by people who toss around BS insults (i.e., ‘Obots’) and are SHOCKED that they are then insulted in return. PUMAs are the rhetorical and political equivalent of the defendant who kills his parents and then pleads mercy from the court because he’s an orphan.

    It’s a lot easier to plead victimhood than claim agency. I make no bones about the fact that I have zero tolerance for hypocritical liars who try to claim the moral high ground, and I make no apologies for the language with which I will dispatch them. But I nearly always wait for them to land the first blow. If they’re PUMAs, it’s usually some lame windmill thing that lands wide of the target, leaving them wide open for my superior invective to land.

    I would be happy to have a reasoned discussion with any Hillary supporters who believe they have compelling evidence that Obama and his campaign (as opposed to “the media”) deliberately used misogynist tactics. But thus far, none have come forward.

  47. Kerry, I asked a Hillary supporter to do that on my journal and because of DU rules I linked her to the post on here issuing just that challenge. She was not a PUMA, which may have made conversation more rational. The request ended the discussion.

  48. More puma fail.

    Not one bigotbot blog in the list. Nice to see Kos as number 2,28804,1725323_1727246_1727247,00.html

  49. A little fact checking on YAFB’s claim that “freaking” does not mean “copulating.” His exact statement, “Good grief, woman, are you obsessed?” Ha!

    I just got this back from an Englishman who lived in New York:

    ‘Freaking’ is a euphemism for the swearword ‘fucking’ in both England and New York, not just in the USA. He’s right that a Freaking Brit (I hate ‘Brit’) could mean a Brit who is freaking out, but it would be carrying a double meaning, as he must realise. ‘Causing others to freak’ is not a very practical usage, how is anyone going to know that’s what he meant?

    Nice try YAFB.

    What am I going to call the guy now? I can’t say something that means “yet another copulating Brit”, can I? I mean even if he’s willing to dis himself, it just isn’t right. And “Brit”? After all these years, more of an ex-pat, I should say.

    Ah, he’s run off to “wrangle” some paper thingy “into submission”. When you’ve got a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

    When you’re ready to take a break, “Yet Another” (that still doesn’t sound right), here’s something to ponder about domination:

  50. Hey Nijma, crawl back to your PUMA hole, we have had just about enough of your delusional rants. PUMA’s are irrelevant, learn to live with it.

  51. I’m English and freakin does not mean anything other than freaking out.

    Go back to being called a terrorist at NoQuarter. They really love you there, especially the ever delightful AleKKKisM.

  52. Also – just click on the category of Islam to show how much the PUMA bigots love your husbands religion.

  53. ” And “Brit”? After all these years, more of an ex-pat, I should say.
    Nijma, YAFB lives in Britain. The Intertubes are trans-Atlantic! The ex-pat is your NY British pal. Inaccuracy and false assumptions are certainly not helping you make your case.

    I took a brief glance at the YouTube. I realize that conquest was discovered to be a bad thing sometime in 2008 by PUMAs; till there was PUMA, nobody had the perception or the courage to oppose conquest ever before.If Hillary hadn’t been defeated by the Obamistadors, we still might not know that conquest was very, very bad. And anyone who opposed Hillary and PUMA is obviously in favor of conquest, domination, womanlynching, violence in general, and eating adorable babies alive, knitted booties and all. Even if the anti-PUMA is an anti-war acitivist.

    Nope, things good and altruistic are PUMA. Even castration fantasies are good, if it’s PUMA castration fantasies. And squeezing PUMAs for pennies is good, too. And no accountability, no financial officers, no treasurer, no separation of power, just a single PUMAqueen, that’s good too.

    So by all means, spend less time on corresponding with that Norwegian child about Odin’s horse and more time here, making wild accusations and snide remarks. Spend less time writing about making yogurt, less time meditating on the beauties of the Arabic language, and more time with people who think Muslims are all terrorists, saying the same things over and over and over. Makes perfect sense, doesn’t it?

  54. Nijma, you were asked to supply the following:

    1) An explanation for your outright lie that Barack Obama separated the Democrats from their female base.

    2) An explanation for why you hypocritically criticized Betty for the use of the term “bitchslap” while tolerating it in PUMAland.

    3) Proof of any misogynistic comment from Barack Obama directed at Hillary Clinton.

    Someone as diligent as you about “fact checking” should be able to provide these handily.

    Keep on failing. Freaking Loser.

  55. First, a round of applause for Kerry Reid. I really like your style. Fuck being nice.

    I see no reason to dialogue with Nijma or the rest of the PUMA borg. What’s the point? Nijma claims that her fellow PUMAii will issue “gentle” rejoinders when a fellow kitty is being inappropriate, but we all know that’s bullshit. And feminist, Nijma? Really? Are you truly familiar with either the term or the movement? Give me a fucking break.

    I read Tennessee Guerilla Women for years (at leat 4) prior to the great Michigan Debacle ’08. Egalia was a fierce voice for feminism and I appreciated that. When my guy was knocked out of the running (and I came to my senses after a little of my own pouting) I decided to withdraw my support for Mickey Mouse and choose between Obama and Clinton. While making that choice, I ventured into a comment thread at TGW.

    In that comment thread there was much hand wringing about the misogyny aimed at Clinton and women in general. In that thread (at a FEMINIST site) a woman named Jacilyn left this comment:

    You know, Michelle Obama is an ape. Not because she is black, but because of how she behaves.

    In case you hadn’t noticed, animal like insults are not limited to blacks. Those of us who are “white trash” have to listen to the same insults, and they are part of our vocabulary, too. Here’s just one example: We don’t go to the opera house because we don’t want to wear a “monkey suit” and thus be accused of “aping our betters”.

    But we understand: to you it’s all about race. Everything is about race. Both because you hate white people so much and because you know your candidate Obama has nothing without his precious race card.
    jacilyn | Homepage | 05.16.08 – 4:53 pm | #

    Then to clarify she said:

    And btw Michelle Obama is herself a reason why Obama should not be elected to anything.

    The woman is a disgrace.

    I can be as vulgar as anyone, but at least I have the decency to know you try to put limits on foulness when you aspire to be First Lady – a position that neither Obama has shown much respect for. Well, guess what – it’s a job description, too. And the idea of Michelle Obama as First Lady is disgusting. Not because she’s black – I have known black people who live on little more than Michelle spends on piano lessons, who nonetheless have more class in their little finger than Michelle Obama has in her whole resentful body.

    Michelle Obama rejects America and its values. Well, guess what, we reject her values, too.
    jacilyn | Homepage | 05.16.08 – 4:57 pm | #

    I read through the rest of the thread. Surely one of those “feminists” would denounce this woman’s OBVIOUS misogyny? Nope. Didn’t happen. Egalia, who I so admired, stayed mum and Michelle became a target of the loudest of the (soon to be) PUMA screeching monkeys. When someone who wasn’t one of them objected to such language being used against a woman they were answered with “She’s open game” because she’s Obama’s wife. Heh. Protectors of all beings bearing ovaries– as long as she’s white and right, huh?

    That was it. That’s when I decided that these women would be mocked and ridiculed and publicly shamed for ever and ever– A-men.

    That you so happily join their masses and excuse their ill behavior puts you square in the middle and paints a target on your back. But not for violent purposes, little paranoid kitty. We care only to ridicule you and bring to light your asinine logic and hypocrisy. By virtue of your association with those in the litter box, you are as nasty as the worst of them, which makes any attempt at “civil” dialogue with you a waste of everyone’s time. You don’t deserve it.

  56. P.S.

    Yes, I have a link. Or two (Michelle is fair game!). Or how about Egalia chastising Zee for calling someone a pig, but ignoring someone calling Michelle an ape?

    (I’d forgotten how angry that thread made me. Now I remember. Gah!)

  57. Thanks, Jenny. The most pathetic part of Nijma’s comments here (though it’s hard to pick, lord knows) are her whines that she shouldn’t be held responsible for things people say on threads at PUMA World (even though, as Betty pointed out in a previous post here, she was part of a PUMA thread where the term “bitchslap” was used and didn’t utter a peep in protest there — but got all fluttery and fainthearted about Betty using it).

    But she, like every other PUMA, also seems to think Barack Obama controls the media and is personally liable for every mean thing Olbermann, Matthews, et al said about Clinton during the primaries. And yeah, still waiting for that proof of Obama himself saying violent and/or misogynistic things about Hillary. *crickets*

    Meantime, she DEMANDS that we disavow any violent language used elsewhere on the internet — because she certainly hasn’t been able to link to any Rumproast or Stupid PUMA posters who have advocated violence against women, despite my open invitation to her to provide that proof.

    I guess she can’t be held responsible for not pushing back against PUMAs who advocate mass killing and castration because she’s only a weak widdle vagina-victim girly-girl who the Obots want to hunt down and kill! (“Verbal criticism on the internet is just like genocide! Only worse!” Because it’s directed at ME!)

    Whereas Obama is an Inadequate Black Male Empty Suit who somehow is ALSO powerful enough to put everybody into concentration camps and make them praise Allah and be slave labor for ACORN and build houses for the black apes who will turn around and woman-lynch the good, decent white females of America.

    Golly, it’s a wonder all the PUMAs aren’t in neckbraces — the way they have to do 180s on their talking points would give anyone whiplash. Or, more accurately, maybe they’re like Linda Blair’s character in The Exorcist, with their heads twisting completely around on their necks as they spew pea soup and obscenities about the Obamas. But it’s not their fault — they’re only widdle girls!

  58. Not once in the above thread has anyone come out and said, “No. Sexism is not okay. Verbal abuse is not okay. Using sexual imagery and language as a way of demeaning women engaged in political discourse is not okay. Beating women is not okay. Killing women is not okay.” If anyone is thinking it, they sure don’t have the guts to say it.

    Alright, Nijma, let me help you out, then. Beating, raping, and killing women: not okay. Using sexism/misogyny as a weapon to bring down women: also not okay. Y’know what? I also think such things as Jon Favreau’s assholery=not okay. A lot of commentary at a lot of places including RR–not okay by me, at least.

    But, you know what else -really isn’t okay?- Throwing in one’s lot with a bunch of Republicans who would, given their druthers, and still keep trying, to do everything they can to enshrine sexism/misogyny -in legislation-. And twisting reality into knots to pretend that it isn’t so, or at least that it’s somehow -worth- it because mumblesomething “fratboy”ism w/in the Democrats is -so much worse and more terrible than it’s ever been before and it’s all Obama’s fault.- Please.

    The whole “let’s re-invent the wheel, only square this time,” also pretty bloody stupid. So far, I’ve heard PUMAs condemning: Katha Pollitt, Gloria Steinem, NOW, Robin bloody Morgan (whom I’ve no time for either, but for different reasons), among god knows how many feminist blogs (Shakespeare’s Sister and feministe: Not Good Enough, even with SS’ staunch Hillary support and sexism against Palin “watch”) and even Hillary herself, for “selling out.” Oh, and some of y’all think reproductive rights are too controversial, now, or something.

    while meanwhile clasping to their collective bosom (variously) the likes of myewfactor2xU, right wing radio, Fox news, Sarah -Freaking- Palin (don’t even get me started), and -bloody- McCain, and oh yeah: despite the attempts at purges on either side, about half of y’all seem to think even Dubya is just ducky, or at minimum no worse than the dreaded Nobama.

    who’s kidding whom, here?

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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: