PUMA Politics For Dummies

Over the course of the last six weeks, more and more people are hearing about P.U.M.A and the Just Say No Deal Coalition and looking for information about this viral movement. Since the Main Stream Media (with the exception of FOX) isn’t about to give you the facts about PUMAs, I humbly thought it might be helpful to post my own observations about what I have seen and heard from PUMAs since the group started. For all of you out in the ether who are just hearing about PUMA and JSND and wondering about the many and diverse voices saying Nobama, Not Now, Not Ever; this might help you understand the coalition better. I have linked up Just Say No Deal’s YouTube channel to help get you up to speed.

There are some myths that need to be debunked also. Here is a quote from an American talking about other Americans (and I respect free speech):

MSNBC’s First Read’s story about Hillary as a VP choice.

Hillary’s supporters are not needed by Obama. He’ll have enough votes without them. Those fat old poor white women can go pound salt.

Ames Johnston, Battle Creek MI (Sent Saturday, July 12, 2008 1:51 PM)

The #1 biggest myth about PUMAs:

1. All Pumas are old, menopausal, bitter white women. Wrong! According to the Just Say No Deal founders, a significant percentage; as much as 40%, are men. Here is a PUMA man who is a Native American, college educated, veteran who is not bitter about Hillary being “railroaded”; rather, he is angry, to say the least, that Obama has continued to vote against Native American interests, has voted against the American people and with the Telecoms in regards to FISA, cannot seem to find a single position and stick with it, and that he has left his chair empty while campaigning. This PUMA man believes that when any single person is diminished in any way, then every person is diminished.

"I Dare You To Call Me A Fat Old White Woman To My Face"; Lee M., Nez Perce Nation

And here is an excerpt from No We Won’t Blogtalk Radio where Barbara, a black lady from Mississippi called in to tell the listeners that she marched with Martin Luther King and that Barack Obama is a “race-baiting phony.”

2. PUMAs are “cloaked republicans”.

According to the Anti-Puma sites that sprung up about the same time as H.O.U.N.D., we are all “cloaked republicans” working to ensure a 3rd Bush Term. Here is quote from one such site. Please note that PUMAs are all racists.

Love the site. PUMA is a fraud – a bunch of republican racists who were voting for McCain anyway.

No democrat woman would vote to assure the repeal of Roe v Wade under McCain. They aren’t democrats – never were.

by Dan July 8, 2008 at 8:50 pm

Once again, wrong. PUMAs come from all walks of life, are white, black, native american, asian, latino, gay, straight, male, female, and are from all political parties; Democrats, Republicans, Indies. We do not have a problem with the color of Obama’s skin, we have a problem with everything else about Barack Obama; his lack of experience, his voting or “not-voting” record, his un-american associates, his using the race card against a Former President and the American people, and how he failed his Chicago constituents are among a long list of deal breakers.

We all have the common goal of keeping Barack Obama and whatever agenda he wants to fly with today out of the White House, and is in part due to the decision of the Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting on May 31st, 2008. If the Democratic Party had followed it’s own “rules”, American voters in Michigan and Florida would not have been disenfranchised and ruled 1/2 people AND Hillary Clinton would have had the delegate lead to take the nomination. This is why you will hear PUMAs say that Barack Obama was selected, not elected. Why did states that were slated to be won by Barack Obama receive sanctions so that their elections would count and states that Senator Clinton was slated to win receive a punishment? Why does the DNC or fellow democrats think that the almost 2.3 million people who voted in those two states have anything to do with a contract that Senator Clinton signed saying that the votes wouldn’t count? These are American voters whose votes count because of the very charter of the party they are members of.

Fellow Democrats with selective reasoning want us to stop whining, sit down, shut up, fall in line, yada, yada, yada. Their argument is that Michigan and Florida don’t count. Obama won and Clinton lost; also not true. Neither candidate reached the required number of delegates to secure the nomination. I call it selective reasoning because the Democratic Party Charter has as one of it’s provisions the concept of “Fair Reflection”. What happened on May 31st, 2008 at the RBC meeting was the death of democracy. 600,000 Michigan voters were not fairly reflected. Barack Obama was awarded uncommitted delegates when he himself had voluntarily taken his name off the ballot. He was also awarded 4 of Senator Clinton’s delegates. How can anyone say that the decision they came up with doesn’t violate the charter of the party? Does this fairly reflect the Michigan voters that supported her? Does the 1/2 delegation from Florida fairly reflect all the people that voted there?

From the Charter:

Article Two, Section 4, (b) and (g):

Section 4. The National Convention shall be composed of delegates equally divided between men and women. The delegates shall be chosen through processes which:

(b) assure that delegations fairly reflect the division of preferences expressed by those who participate in the Presidential nominating process,

Democratic National Committee in the Call to the Convention,
(g) prohibit unpledged and uncommitted delegates, except delegates or alternates expressing an uncommitted preference shall be permitted to be elected at the district level, in which event, if such preference meets the applicable threshold and qualifies for at-large or similar delegates or alternates, such at-large or similar delegates or alternates shall be allocated to that uncommitted preference as if it were a presidential candidate,

What Harold Ickes had to say about the hijacking of delegates is completely true and inarguable.

Another reason PUMAs are so up in arms is a general provision in the very same charter. The decision to 1/2 Florida delegates and award Michigan delegates to Barack Obama was made behind closed doors with a secret ballot. Link here to CSpan’s video vault.

Article 9, General Provisions:

Section 12. All meetings of the Democratic National Committee, the Executive Committee, and all other official Party committees, commissions and bodies shall be open to the public, and votes shall not be taken by secret ballot.

Currently, there is talk about not putting Senator Clinton’s name into nomination at the Convention, though this is not unprecedented, it would be an insult to Senator Clinton, her staff and her 18 million supporters when the delegate difference between the two candidates is so microscopically thin, neither candidate reached the required delegate count for the nomination, the controversy surrounding the primaries and the RBC decision was so immense, and the true political nature of Barack Obama now coming to light. According to a recent Rasmussen poll, Senator Clinton is leading Senator McCain by 8 percentage points. Senator Clinton is the stronger democratic candidate.

Take a look at the Blogroll on the right. Pick a site and you will find an American voter, almost always a democrat, and the reasons why they won’t vote for, and in most cases, will work against Barack Obama’s nomination and election. Start with Just Say No Deal, No Quarter, The Confluence, ClintonDems, Hire Heels….you will find intelligent, thoughtful insight into why PUMAs Just Say No Deal and why we believe that Barack Obama is not the best choice for President.

If you are a PUMA, please leave a comment for others to read about why you are a PUMA. Mahalo, Diamond