The Definition of Irony Is…

Obamans Are Funny!

Obamans Are Funny!

Obamabots attacking Sarah Palin for being young, fresh, and a Washington outsider.

Hmmm, let me think. Why were we supposed to elect Barack Obama again?

And….The New Democratic Party is born tonight! Click here or visit PUMAPac for more info!

Advertisements

15 responses to “The Definition of Irony Is…

  1. Right on! madamab

  2. republican in seattle

    Go Palin! She’s already getting blasted by women for having a 4 month old special needs baby and still being governor. I guess we really haven’t advanced if our attitudes are so antiquated that it’s just not possible for a woman to have a family and a career at the same time. Pshaw.

  3. So would they feel better if she put her baby in a home? The hypocrisy of some people should be punishable by death….sick of sooooooo many hypocrites, especially those in the dem party. To be honest, I find her quite refreshing….and her husband is easy on the eyes 🙂

  4. There are plenty of substantive reasons to oppose Palin without needing to resort to ad hominem attacks, to be sure. She opposes a woman’s right to abortion, even in cases of rape; she does not support the separation of church and state, and believes in teaching explicitly christian beliefs in public schools; she has worked in the interest of big oil in Alaska; and her environmental record is poor. These facts stand in opposition to the progressive platform, and to what senator Clinton herself espouses.

    It’s worth remembering that a vote against an arch-conservative christianist such as Palin is *not* necessarily a vote *for* Obama. Sure, due to the way that our politics work, it’s either going to be Obama/Biden or McCain/Palin in office, but a win by either ticket takes on a very different character if it’s by half a percentage point versus 10 or 20 points. Personally, I don’t want a vice president with the kind of repressive beliefs held by Governor Palin and Senator McCain.

  5. 8xyzzy8 –

    Nice try.

    It’s not what someone says he/she believes, it’s what he/she DOES ABOUT IT that matters. I am sure that McCain and Palin would not overturn Roe V. Wade or be able to pass anti-choice legislation through the Senate (too large a majority), so why do I care what they think about choice?

    But for the 8,000th time, I’m voting Cynthia McKinney. So please take it elsewhere.

  6. Grail Guardian

    8xyzzy8

    I don’t want McCain/Palin. I want Clinton/Tubbs-Jones. But since both those fine women have been removed from the list by the Obamacrats, I am stuck with sloppy seconds. Given the choices left, there are none that reflect my views or support my causes. McKinney’s too radical, Barr is too crazy, Nader’s too unlikely (and doesn’t really reflect my world) and Obama bin Biden is too unthinkable. So that leaves McCain as the only option. So today he announces that he’s selected a running mate that fights political corruption, government waste, and isn’t afraid of a fight. And, oh, by the way she’s a woman. And you’re gonna throw Hillary Clinton in my face? Puleeze!

    Honey, give me Hill as an option, and I’ll vote for her in a heartbeat. Otherwise, shut up and stop the hate. we’ve been through enough without watching you demean another woman!

  7. madamab, I am skeptical of that line of reasoning. It is not so much active legislation that is at stake in the next election, as it is such things as e.g. who is going to appoint (up to) three Supreme Court justices. The court is already leaning right, and Ginsburg is set to retire. The current court promises to set the social and political climate for some time to come. That is one important reason that I think we must carefully weigh a candidate’s stated ideals. That being said, you have a good point: Bush largely betrayed his far-right base, whereas he played earnest (and regular) lip service during the election(s) to their wishes. Politicians do indeed speak and act differently.

    Grail Guardian, it is not demeaning to anyone to simply point out facts. Palin has the strength of conviction and I respect that. Her positions that I described are, however, well known, and they are in fact to the right of Bush or Cheney. As a Buddhist and a scientist who tries to remain objective, I certainly don’t hate Governor Palin, I just see her championing socially and environmentally oppressive philosophies with which I cannot agree. I’m sure that she does so with good intention, but they remain at odds with what I believe to be right. And, of course, there remains the troublesome issue of the character of the Supreme Court.

    I am undecided about my vote right now, other than knowing that I cannot in good faith vote for McCain/Palin. Senator Clinton’s compassion both during President Clinton’s tenure as well as during her recent campagin moved me, and had she won the nomination, I probably would have voted for her.

    Namasté to you both.

  8. sister of ye

    You’re bringing up SCOTUS as a reason to vote for Obama. Really? Obama, the guy who was going to vote for John Roberts until an aide pointed out that it would hurt his ass in a presidential run.

    Cass Sunstein, one of Obama’s closest advisors, believes Roe v Wade was decided wrong. This man might well be one of Obama’s SCOTUS nominations. Tell me he’ll protect abortion rights.

    In the last few year both McCain and Obama have changed their positions more often than they’ve changed their underwear. There’s no way to predict how either would behave in office. Once elected, McCain could revert to the moderate he once was. Whereas the eventuality that Mr. “we have to reach across the aisle,” will fight for Dem values seems unlikely.

  9. No, sister of ye, I have not been and am not not advocating voting for Senator Obama. Please reread what I’ve written.

  10. “am not now”

  11. It occurs to me that I ought to just nip this in the bud. I understand where you folks are coming from, and I would support Senator Clinton under certain circumstances.

    However, I represent the demographic you need. I’m the independent, undecided voter. Tell me NOW why I should write in Senator Clinton, as opposed to making sure that McCain doesn’t win, for example. Or any other variation.

    Look, I’m in her camp, I am. But I’m not in McCain’s camp. Arguments?

  12. 8xy – I’m not in McCain’s camp either. But, you are not necessarily the demographic that “we” are seeking. If you choose to align yourselves with us, you are more than welcome, of course.

    We are disaffected Democrats, and we are trying to take back our party from the Chicago thugs that have taken it over. That is our long-term goal. We are creating a New Democratic Party that will better represent our values in order to further that goal. Please see my “PUMA Action” page at the top of the blog for more information.

    Our short-term goal, as much as I detest it, must now be the defeat of Barack Obama and his coalition of Vichy Democrats. So for four more years, the Republicans will have control of the White House.

    In terms of the Scotus, though, if the Democrats do their jobs, any right-wing wacko will be blocked from the bench. They will have very close to a veto-proof majority in the Senate. That is why I am voting straight Dem downticket.

    I hope that explains things a little better for you. At first glance, our position seems counter-intuitive, but if you understand our long-term goals, you may see where we are coming from.

    Take care.

  13. I am always surprised when people assume that the President has the ability to just appoint someone to the Supreme Court. He (again, it seems) can nominate, but the Senate must confirm his choice. Of course, we have seen that having Dem majorities in Congress doesn’t mean squat; they have rolled over and played dead for the past two years. “OH NO!!! — they said ‘filibuster’! EEKS! We have to give in!!!”

    Roe v Wade isn’t going to be overturned for a very simple reason: an entire industry has been built on it, employing thousands of people on both sides. Right to Life doesn’t want to fold up their tent and have to look for new jobs; neither does NARAL (as we have so painfully been reminded recently). All these pro/anti choice organizations have a vested interest in continuing to posture and point fingers and maintain a deadlock.

    I almost commend Senator McCain for his veep choice. He could have made a really brilliant pick (someone moderate like Christine Todd Whitman), rather than someone who is apparently meant to shore up his wingnut credentials. He could have made me do something stupid like vote Republican, but I’ll have to go with McKinney this time around. I live in Michigan, so I can’t write in Senator Clinton unless she files with the state that she will accept write-in votes (otherwise my entire ballot is invalidated), and I don’t think that’s going to happen.

    The good news for the Obama crowd is that they only have to convince ONE college student to actually show up and vote in November, to compensate for my lost vote, rather than two.

  14. Same here, tle. McKinney for me.

  15. Ah, madamab, I understand. I agree with your basic approach. In the past, I have often voted against my core principles in order to try to ensure that the congress was controlled by a different party than the executive. I am a great believer in having the various branches at each other’s throats. The Bush years have clearly illustrated why one party in control of all the levers is a very bad idea, indeed.

    13, sometimes it’s just easier to write “who is going to appoint (up to three) Supreme Court judges” rather than “who is going to appoint (up to three) Supreme Court judges who of course must then be confirmed by the full Senate who will draw out the process interminably if it’s an opposition Senate or rubberstamp it otherwise” 😉

    Anyway, although we may in the end disagree (once I finally make up my mind), I understand your motives somewhat better now, and respect your position. I came to this site following a series of anti-PUMA links (and a comment by madamab), and I’m pleased to find that you’re clear-thinking (albeit politically passionate) folks.

    I still don’t like Governor Palin in the #2 slot, but I also still have a lot of examination of platforms and histories to do, so perhaps my earlier statment that I can’t vote for the McCain ticket was premature.

    Have a great long weekend!