If PUMA’s Are Democrats Why Do They Write In the Style of Right Wing Propagandists?

In the modern age, it has never been easier to pull CREEPy style dirty tricks---pretend to be a Democrat saying bad things about other Democrats when you are really a Republican operative working for their presidential nominee, as outlined in a plan created by Pat Buchanan for Dick Nixon in 1972. This is called divide and conquer and it is as old as time. And as I have documented in my journals, old CREEPsters like Roger Stone (famous for acronyms like C-U-N-T, his Hillary bashing group), Karl Rove, Pat Buchanan and Rev. Moon have been up to their old dirty tricks this election season.

In addition to the masters, there are legions of nameless worker plumbers. No, not Mario and Luigi. Anonymous dirty tricksters. The internet allows people to pretend to be one thing when they are really another. A twenty-five year old public relations guy in a Brooks Bros. suit can pretend to be a sixty year old veteran of the women’s movement who is pissed off that Clinton is not the nominee, and he can wreck havoc all over the Democratic Party. At the same time, he can pretend to be a teenager who hates all women and especially Hillary Clinton for standing in the way of Barack Obama.

The only problem with this strategy---the GOP has not invested in good writers. All too often, you can spot the Republican propaganda, because the faux Democratic rants are off. The issues addressed are Republican issues. The approaches are Republican approaches. Certain assumptions are Republican assumptions.

I stumbled across this site which claims to represent Democratic women who are splitters---they refuse to support Obama and would rather see four more years under McCain. They call themselves “PUMA’s” as in Party Unity My Ass .

When I first heard the title of the group, something did not sound right. Women almost never do anything that draws attention to their butts.



http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2008/06/02/monday-puma-power/



Ignore the inaccuracy of this statement (Leahy, Kennedy, Byrd immature ?). As I have pointed out in journals before, one of the characteristics that divide liberals from conservatives and Democrats from Republicans is the reaction to The People. Or, as the right wing would refer to them The Unwashed Masses.

There are two types of human being. One, like Thomas Jefferson, believes that all people are good at heart, and that rule by the people is a good thing. Liberals and Democrats are like Thomas Jefferson. Then, there are those who believe that people are naturally corrupt, and that they must be restrained, controlled, preferably by a strongman or leader or the fear of God. These are conservatives and Republicans. (There are Libertarian Republicans and there are control Democrats, but both are a minority so ignore them for now) The former are the type of people who applauded the Latino marches a few years ago. The latter are the type who panicked at the Latino marches a few years ago. The former question authority. The latter celebrate authority.

With this in mind, it becomes clear that the author of the PUMA manifesto is a card carrying conservative, so right wing that he or she would never have been caught dead shoulder to shoulder in a protest rally growling at the police. Look at the imagery. The author identifies himself with the parents which is like identifying with J.Edgar Hoover's FBI. The Obama supporters are cast in the youthful, heroic role, although in this case the word used is “immaturity”, because the author does not recognize that innocence is a virtue. How can he when in the conservative world view, anything that is not leashed is considered feral and therefore dangerous?

The two paragraphs which are quoted have logical problems, namely they are guilty of the crime of which they accuse the vast army of (brainwashed) Obama supporters. One line can easily be changed to read:



However, more important from a propagandist’s point of view are phrases like “conflicting desires” , “sweep to victory”, “purge the party”, “fantasy”, “without…work”, “elimination, purging the ranks”. This is the language of the conservative describing the anarchy of rule by the masses, in which people give in to their desires. They picture lawlessness, theft, rape----a riot. Take this two steps further and you have some southern politician warning of an uprising if the Blacks are not kept in check.

The next paragraph continues the imagery of lawless teenagers who can not be trusted with their own vote---an idea that is anathema to true liberals and Democrats but very much a part of the Republican and conservative mind set.



Since the RNC was smearing Obama and making it look as if Clinton was the culprit, one must assume that they were also doing the reverse. However, I want to focus on the language used in the above paragraph. What is up with the word hate ? Why on earth do they imagine that anyone hates anyone else? The primary was a political contest. No one hates the other candidate. Ali and Forman fought but they did not hate each other. Obama and Clinton competed for the same job, but it was never personal. Certainly, neither or them hated the others’ supporters. They coveted the others’ supporters.

When the word hate is introduced, this is another sign of conservative propaganda. The right wing deals in hate and hate speech. And always, they start with the proposition that the minority group or disadvantaged group hates the dominant group, and that is why the dominant group must be so vigilant---even brutal--- to protect itself. That is why the Klan must arm itself against Blacks and, more recently against Latinos. That is why the Bush administration must imprison ever Muslim without charges. Because they hate us .




Quick, what is wrong with this paragraph? Where the hell is health care, the number one priority of every American and every single Clinton supporter? And what Democrat is going to list terrorism as the number one problem? Are these propagandists even trying to put together a convincing document? We have failing banks, but no housing crisis. We have national security compromised but no jobs being shipped off shore----is this GOP Women for Hillary?



You know, Democrats like having a weakened executive branch and a strong legislative branch. It is the right wing that aspires to having Il Duce, a strong man who can override the Constitution with his Article II exemptions. A liberal would be concerned about a power mad Obama who wants to get into the White House and do illegal things like W. A Democrat would not be concerned that Obama is going to be “weak”, because so what? Then he would spend the next four years signing laws that the Democratic Congress would pass and enforcing the laws that they would write and not starting wars.



Since when has any Democrat—especially any Irish-American Democrat—ever been afraid to associate with a lost cause? This is a hard right wing Puritan stance, one that is based upon the belief that you can judge whether or not a person is among the elect by how his material affairs go on earth. I.e. God awards his elect with wealth and prosperity in all things. Therefore, the word “failure” is the last word that any Republican or conservative wants to hear. It is the ultimate insult. They run from it the way that they are supposed to flee from sin. On the other hand, liberals, Democrats, Catholics---all of them will embrace the cause of the underdog, the oppressed, the losing side and fight for dear life. The more lost the cause seems, the harder they will fight.

Of course, the game plan that PUMA sets up is a dead give away that they are a Republican operation. Just look at the rules that members are supposed to follow. Do not read newspapers or listen to anyone who my try to tell you anything except for us . I guess Karl Rove learned his lesson in 2006. That year he tried to use terrorism propaganda again, but he found out that you can not use a fear propaganda message if some news stations are not with you, because people will not stay afraid if even one source debunks your lies. As long as the women who sign up for PUMA only hear PUMA, then they will not be distracted with any other versions of the truth. Good thing Karl did not think of that in 2006 or he might have kept Congress under GOP control.

Send Clinton your money but dissociate yourself from your party---that means don’t send any to Obama---we all know whom that helps this fall.

Spread the word----wow, it’s a pyramid scheme!

You know, this is some god awful propaganda. I am amazed that anyone gets past this first page. I may delve deeper later. But before I go, just want you to know that the PUMA founder who claims that she is a lifelong Democrat---she changed party affiliations in 2000 so that she could vote for McCain and she gave him money, too. I found that out after I wrote this. Confirms what I suspected from reading this tripe. This is a McCain Supporters Site. Might as well say "Paid for by the RNC" all across the top.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/7/1/17911/82379

I think that site did start out as a pro-hill site but has become nothing more than a RNC affiliate

they're talking about how sexist Joe Biden is, blah blah blah

of course, they refuse to say that Palin is the biggest token pick since Dan Quayle

They project more hatred than the Freepers. Astounding.

a few Hillary supporters caught up in their tricks. The Denver Group and PUMA Pac were set up by the same people. Darragh Murphy the founder is a McBush supporter.


FEC Log
Darragh Murphy PUMA PAC

MURPHY, DARRAGH
CARLISLE, MA 01741
PUMA PAC/POLITICAL ACTIVIST

WOMENCOUNT PAC
06/03/2008 200.00 28932284336

MURPHY, DARRAGH C. MR.
CARLISLE VALLEY, MA 01741
HOMEMAKER

MCCAIN AND SARAH H. PALIN, JOHN S.
VIA MCCAIN 2000 INC
02/28/2000 500.00 20990076175

I don't disagree with your analysis of who set them up. But I also don't take them lightly. They are being whipped into a frenzy by the folks you cite, and many of them have gone completely off the deep end.

media attention than they deserved.

The blogs like Johnsons nothalfbigoted, used deliberate GOP tricks and they served as nothing but an early version of the 2004 Swiftboaters. They were also used to test out McBush campaign tactics (eg Country First).

These organisations actually worked against Hillary Clinton and no one has really called them out on it. They even lied on Fox TV about her debt being cleared by them. Real Hillary supporters need to know that these people are just GOP operatives.

with very freeperish rhetoric and RW talking points - and then screeching like scalded toads when it was pointed out that regurgitating Sean Hannity's daily menu of Hate Radio was not appreciated on a progressive website.

:thumbsup:

.

Always important to keep good threads kicked with tommyrot

is with you on the codswallop.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The real rubber meets the road moment will come when they come to terms with just how fine they are with Ms. Palin's fundie bullshit. The decision on which way to vote will separate Democrats from, well, a steaming pile of shit.

A lot of times their moran spelling and grammar give them away.

They are NOT all GOP trolls, ya know. Unfortunately, plenty of them are disgruntled, embittered
Hillarylanders with huge axes to grind -- many of whom were Clark, Kerry, and Edwards supporters
in 2004 here at DU. I personally know some of them (though all connections are dead at the moment).

On the good side, Obama seems to be drawing as much support from Democrats overall as McCain
is drawing from the GOP base. Now it's a fight for the swing voters from the middle.

I can't believe the fiery hate they have for Obama, and those who deny their existence don't get it. They do indeed exist, and their posts are extraordinarily threatening. From hillaryclintonforum.net, just a few moments ago (and you don't have to search for this kind of thing; this is what they post regularly):

From Angelica91:

"I hate that man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He must pay for everything he did to Hillary!
Hillary derserved to be President, she still deserves that!"

Those who laugh these insane people off are making a mistake. They are being whipped into a frenzy by Rove acolytes, for sure, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.

I shake my head at their Obama Hatred, too. They are absolute mental cases! They are faux Hillary advocates,
that's for sure.

donald segretti sitting around with his fellow felons grousing about how easy it is now.

"Why in the olden days I actually had to go down to Ed Muskie's office and pretend to join his campaign in real time, actually show up. That's how I got the stationary for the fake letter. I actually had to write that thing out, you know type it. We didn't have the luxury of sitting around in our mom's basement just pretending on a computer. In the old days, by god, we had to actually do something to really screw the country. Not like all those pansies now. Harumph"

Couple of things worth repeating. segretti served as a local chairman for mccain's campaign in California in 2000. Also, rove and lee atwater both worked for and learned from segretti. atwater had a sort of epiphanal series of confessions when he was dying and wrote letters admitting his sins to the democrats he had messed with, some of whose careers were ruined by his actions. I don't see any soul washing coming from rove though. He is made of the bile he spews.

It is called "Sometimes they write (fake) letters" so the irony of reading the posts, some of which are genuine and some of which are phony as a three dollar bill (I will let people here decide which is which) is exquisite. This is like participating in some type of group art experience in which even the audience gets to determine how the final work will turn out. Except that things like the life expectancies of working class people (which has been declining under Bush) and our environment (which is turning to shit) and our economy all hang in the balance.

I saw an excellent film called "Dog Eat Dog." The Hong Kong police man is trying to track down an assassin. He is beating the shit out of his drug addict informants for tips as to the guy's whereabouts. One of the drug addicts looks up and says "Why are you trying to find this guy? You don't even know how to find yourself."

http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2008/09/05/sometimes-they-write-fake-letters/

I don't think any Clinton supporters would really vote for McCain. I am not really that concerned. I think these sites are full of Republicans talking to each other--pretending they were once Hillary supporters. I agree with you totally about the propaganda. We should ignore these Rethug operatives. It is just another Rove distraction.

yes, they did start to sound exactly like the neocons they had been debating previously, down to the lying. That is one of the reasons I started posting here. It got boring. But, sure, some or most are Pubs and always have been.

They'd rather throw the election to Gramps and Gidget than voting for the only Democrat in the race.

a few of the DU Hillary haters borrowed wholesale from the rabid r/w - Hitlaryisms,photo distortions and all.

seem kind of insane from a Democrat.

Considering the laws Joe Biden has written and helped put into action it would also seem off the rocker to say he is sexist.
Then they claim they care about no issues, that they'll let the country suffer for four years and let Hillary rescue us. That's super insane!!!
If these are actual Democrats then I'd have to say they are either insane or have a problem with either men or blacks.

They pretty much have to be Republican rabble. If you're not a Reich Wing nutjob then I don't see how you vote this ticket. I'd take Bush/Cheney back in a heartbeat and it's not really close.

It isn't hard to figure out

In other words, give the Rethugs their own PUMA mess!

They don't have nearly enough publicity (though it was nice seeing Paul on Colbert.)

various stripes that means 126 people are NOT democrats.

Probably three guys in an office somewhere that just spew this stuff out for mass distribution.

And from experience, I have to tell you... it got really weird over there! I was frequenting Taylor Marsh and No Quarter (because frankly I was treated so badly here after being here 7 years! that I had to go.) Everything was going along fine, there were a few over-the-top anti-Obama posters but I just ignored them. I supported HIllary because I supported Hillary, not because I hated Obama. Then things started getting out of hand. It was like these new people started showing up and going full throttle against Obama, and it got uglier and scarier. I wrote post after post about refusing to make nasty comments about Obama or Michelle, or anyone's appearance, and trying to remind them that we're all Democrats.

I truly believe that 80% of the PUMAS that emerged from those sites, were republicans. And I visited TaylorMarsh's site the other day and there are still people coming on there attacking Obama and signing McCain/Palin's praises. I called them all out in a post, told them that after the selection of Palin and their continuation of the PUMA thing, they have proven that they are indeed republicans. Because no one can tell me that these women are such "patriots" (as they call themselves) that they'd support someone like Palin who is the total opposite of everything that Hillary and the Democrats support.

The PUMAS are full of shit, and are republicans. They are Joe Lieberman or worse, Karl Rove.

Compelling reading. Your perspective is most welcomed.

women I know here were for Hillary in the primaries. (I was for Obama.) We all felt passionately about our respective candidates but there was never any doubt that we would vote for the Democratic nominee, whoever that was. After the primaries were over, every single former Hillary supporter I know was backing Obama 100%. I know it's true because they have donated to the campaign, have bunper stickers, are wearing Obama t-shirts and sporting Obama pins. This is a group of women ranging in age from late 30's to mid-60's.

If she refused to listen to any news except the PUMA approved news and only subscribed to their version of events---Obama is part of a conspiracy to purge the Democratic Party of the Clintons as laid down in this Manefesto---and John McCain is actually a maverick and a good guy, then that woman could easily be brainwashed. Because some people really do cling to their bitterness. Amger is one of the stages of loss, and this site seems determined to keep Clinton supporters from moving through the healthy stages of loss. It offers them denial----note how it started with the premise that if enough women refused to vote for Obama, the convention would nominate Clinton. Now the message seems to be that if they vote for McCain, he will only serve one term and then Clinton will win in 2012 (and Obama and his superdelegates will be shamed forever). This is bargaining and lots of anger and denial. They are not allowing the Clinton supporters to ever venture into the realm of grief which is where they have to go to move on.

PUMA is one great big mind fuck. And I can easily imagine it working quite well on a number of Clinton supporters.

Hillary Clinton needs to address this issue. She needs to talk to her supporters about the stages of grief and help them to move on.

PUMA trap. But the point I was making is that all the passionate Hillary supporters I know are DEMS first and foremost - they weren't supporting her only because of gender, they were supporting her within the framework of a Democratic primary. And although they were disappointed that she didn't win, they would never consider voting Republican.

So I find it very hard to believe that these PUMAs are really Democrats - you can't believe in HRC and then do a 180 and support a Republican who is the antithesis of everything HRC stands for. That's what I meant by saying I don't believe in them - I don't believe they are who they say they are. I firmly believe they are all Repubs trying to cause chaos in our party.

However, I see your point - some women may not be ideologically committed to either party and were supporting her just because of gender. IMO, these may be the ones who can be manipulated by the PUMA BS.

I have a hard time believing true Democrats would buy into the idea of PUMA. I think they're mostly Republican operatives, with some folks mixed that are just not ready to elect a black man President, that won't own up to it. The fact that Hillary and Barack had very similar progressive policies (and opposite to McCain/Palin) makes PUMA members downright irrational. I just don't get their point.

Lack of experience? - What do they say about Biden and Palin?
No chance of defeating McCain in the fall? - And they're countering that by actually GIFTING their votes to Mac?
They are excited by Palin because she's a woman? - Isn't that condescending towards women in general?

I don't get it. I'm not overly concerned about them. Most of them are people that weren't on our team to begin with, and i'm sure they're few in number and low in spirit. The Democratic party is better off without them, and i'm certain we can pull it off without them, They have a loud mouth, but are as uninfluential as Limbaugh (whose favorite groups have lost every election in the past 4 years). They'll be forgotten in 2 months.