Calling Out All PUMAs and Their Sympathizers

by xynz, Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 08:04:29 AM EST

I'm not as interested in Obama the politician, as I am interested in the movement that is forming around him. He's a politician who has astutely tapped into a tremendous amount of political discontent. He's done a lot of things that I'm not happy about. But, I see his candidacy as just another stepping stone towards a resurgent 50 state Democratic Party. That renaissance is bigger than any one candidate.

The people who are bitter about Hillary's loss and talk about "Obamabots"....these people who are still withholding their support from a national Democratic movement, well they're just shortsighted idiots who can't see beyond the candidates they love or hate. Anybody who claims that they are supporting Hillary, by resisting "the Obamabots": they're simply projecting their own enmeshment in a cult of personality.

This election and what it means for the Democratic Party, what it means for the American people and the world at large, is much more important than any single candidate or their proposed policies. If you can't see that, then I don't see any point in "reaching out to you".

I don't care about "being nice" to you.

I'm not here to court you.

I'm not here to woo you.

I shouldn't have to do any of that. You're supposed to be an adult. You're supposed to be someone who is capable of putting more important considerations ahead of your own feelings.

If you can't, or if you won't, put the welfare of the nation ahead of your hurt feelings, then you deserve nothing more than my scorn and derision. Dressing up your pettiness in "sincere doubts" about Obama is nothing more than self-serving bullshit. If you've ever wondered how people could delude themselves into believing that George W Bush is a good President, then you need look no further than your own "justifications" for helping McCain win. No matter how bad Obama might be, McCain will be worse. If the decades long history of Republican misgovernance hasn't taught you that, then you're no better than a Bush supporter.

I don't care if you don't love Obama. I don't care if you don't like Obama. Hell, right now, I'm not too crazy about him myself. But if you aren't dedicated to putting an end to Republican misgovernance, then fuck off and don't let the door hit you in the ass.




Tags: PUMA, PUMAs, John McCain, George Bush, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 199 Comments :: Post a Comment


I'm sick of the whining and the bullshit. (1.93 / 15)

There will be plenty of time to rip on Obama after November 4th. Doing it now only helps McCain.


by xynz on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 08:07:51 AM EST

surrender or die? screw you!! (1.00 / 1)

Baloney!!

How many times do we have to go through this before this nonsense stops? But then again since ths is infested with bots, I guess the nonsense will never stop. It doesnt matter. No one cares what you think and you dont care what I think. Its better that way than your "surrender or die" garbage. you are in no position to tell anyone what to do, just as Im in no position to tell you what to do with your vote in the GE

For most people who have doubts about Obama the last thing it has to with is the clintons or the primaries in fact. What it has to do with is this:

1) what leadership has obama shown in his stay at IL or US senate so far? (dont quote nonsense like co-sponsoring myriad legislation in the US senate or getting tons of favors from Emil jones just so obama could run for the US senate, after jones became the majority leader in IL senate)

he could have shown leadership and conviction through his commitment to progressive principles even at political risk in the past week by not switching his positions on NAFTA, campaign finance or FISA or other issues. Did he do that?

McCain has risked his political neck with his party and the party leadership at least in a few instances in his political career and shown his gumption and demonstrating leadership.

What we need in a president, is a leader, not somebody who lists policy position pablum on his website without any commitment to most of them and acting like a chameleon who changes his position based on the audience he is courting today. I will take a politician who displays leadership, commitment to principles once a while at least than one who has never shown any guts to stand up for something

2) Since he hasnt shown much leadership and no record of any worthwhile achievements anywhere including legislative achievements, has Obama at least advocated for some major cause (progressive or otherwise) like UHC, workers rights, civil liberties, poverty, income inequality or anything at all throughout his public life, even if he wasnt very successful in achieving the end goals? Just like edwards or Hillary or nader or kennedy or feingold or anyone else? Pls show us what he has done that makes him a leader that we can hand over this country to?

3) On the dem policy position blackmail, dont bother with this one. Because as I said earlier, the progressive policy position papers on his website dont indicate that he believes in them, as clearly shown by his own flip flop on many of them in the last week alone. The policies are not worth the papers they are written on, unless the candidate has consistenly shown that he has hte cajones to stand up for them no matter what political cost and no matter what office he is running for. Look at his new found faith in faith based initiatives, after the primaries, right before the GE. Had he really believed in this, he could have advocated or explained to progressives how this was alright. We scorched Bush for faith based initiatives for years. Now that obama says its ok just so he can appeal to the fundies, this becomes OK? I guess even the most vile policy positions now become progressive holy grail just because Obama says so. Thats not a movement. Thats a cult. and a dangerous one for real progressives, not the psuedo Obama cultists who call themselves progressives.

Heck I would have a leader who I dont agree with much in terms of policy positions as president and have him in check by having a congress that is progressive, rather than somebody who has shown no leadership and no commitment to anything other than his own electoral fortune and risked nothing for political ambitions. Although the dem congress has been even worse than Obama in flip flops. So good luck on achieving anything progressive with this kind of dem congress, even if Obama wins by 538 to 0.

I dont care if he has done everything that I indicate below to demonstrate he is a leader, but he should have done something to show he is a leader and will fight for at least some principles. He has failed to do that thus far. And thats why many have difficulty handing him over the keys to WH, not just the strawman nonsense you and your fellow bots construct


by pdxarch on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:22:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: surrender or die? screw you!! (none / 0)

bomb bomb bomb

bomb bomb I ran

Thanks to you & yours


McCain just lied again
by wrb on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 06:23:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

mature argument isnt a city in englang you know (none / 0)

I guess McCain pandering to the right is so unusual and so unbelievable, nothing that Obama would do in the primary!! and not to mention obama would do no tough talk when he has to show he passes the commander_in_chief test, like this for example

"Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government, a move that would likely cause anxiety in the already troubled region"

Have you heard of the term hypocrisy before? try the dictionary.

Thats all you got? OOh McCain the boogeyman is all you have to vote for the man who is a transformational change agent? I guess all that criticism of the republican fearmongering is only reserved for republicans. As soon as bots do it, now it is the new holy grail of progressivism and it is the hope of the century. Come on try arguing a little more maturely instead of this shitty bomb iran scare.

Start giving reasons for me to vote FOR obama not AGAINST McCain. Im already not likely to vote for McCain. I dont need the savior and revolutionary change agent to tell me the reason to vote for him is to NOT let McCain become the president. sorry no sale on that one.

At some point in this campaign one has to hope Obama will give a reason or two as to why he deserves to be trusted with an enormous responsibility like the White house.


by pdxarch on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 07:59:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Emphasized for the reading impaired: (none / 0)

Dressing up your pettiness in "sincere doubts" about Obama is nothing more than self-serving bullshit. If you've ever wondered how people could delude themselves into believing that George W Bush is a good President, then you need look no further than your own "justifications" for helping McCain win. No matter how bad Obama might be, McCain will be worse. IF THE DECADES LONG HISTORY OF REPUBLICAN MISGOVERNANCE HASN'T TAUGHT YOU THAT, THEN YOU'RE NO BETTER THAN A BUSH SUPPORTER.


by xynz on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 06:11:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Emphasized for the reading impaired: (none / 0)

I guess comprehension isnt your forte! ITs not like you quoted any worthwhile text, but yet another bot bogeyman, blackmail nonsense. Isnt a dem congress in power, unless it changed in the last few days since you wrote your drivel down. So, if obama and the rest of those who enable him claim that we will get a veto proof dem majority, then wont the dems be the governing majority? Well, they can govern if they want to and have the spine to, not withstanding a republican adminstration or impeach the govt and bring about the govt that works

But before we get to any of this, its not a principles be damned, no skills demonstrated, empty suit with a (D) next to his name that can suddenly govern because it is a democratic govt. If you didnt learn anything from the 2006 euphoric election of our very own dem congress then you have learnt nothing.

But then it is clear from your bot quotation, you have learnt nothing worthwhile except the bot manual. dont waste my time with these childish bogeyman garbage


by pdxarch on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 03:07:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Great message! (2.00 / 6)

Surrender or die!

I like it.  Should be very effective.


Another Clintonista against John McCain
by psychodrew on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 08:23:20 AM EST

Welcome to the real world Neo (1.87 / 8)

If the PUMA's want to get in our way then they are going to get run over.   You keep making the mistake of thinking these people are acting rationally.  They aren't.  


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 08:47:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Welcome to reality. (2.00 / 7)

Not everybody thinks the way you do.

I don't agree with the PUMAs, but some of my friends in the netroots are PUMAs.  They are not crazy, irrational, or emotional.  They are acting in what they believe is their own best interest.  If all you're going to do is dismiss them, you might as well ignore them.


Another Clintonista against John McCain
by psychodrew on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 10:10:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Welcome to reality. (2.00 / 7)

"They are acting in what they believe is their own best interest."

Ok, then I have to ask you this question?

To me, IF these people CLAIM to be progressives and they believe in what Senator Clinton stood for AND are so angry at the party for betraying their principles....

Why vote and CAMPAIGN for McCain?

Why not Nader?  Or Cynthia Mckinney?

At least THEY are espousing a progressive platform?

Voting and WORKING for McCain means one thing and I saw a very Truthful PUMA on Larry King say it:

"This is because of how Hillary was treated and we NEED to punish the Democratic party!"

THAT'S THE TRUTH!

This is Hillary rage, pure and simple.

They want to hurt Obama, hurt the Democratic party, because THEY are hurt.

They want Hillary as VP or the are going to vote for McCain?

They want Obama to lose, so Hillary can win in 2012.

To me, it's solopcism and narrcisim exemplified.


My mom believed in Jesus, the Pope and FDR..... Just not necessarily in that order.
by WashStateBlue on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 11:51:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Welcome to reality. (2.00 / 2)

one answer for you would be to look at the reply by Blue Neproset. Perhaps if they saw something other then gloating and poor attitudes they might feel more like a reapproachmnet. McLames folks ARE courting them and just throwing them away is stupid on YOUR part (not BHO's, YOUR's) and possibly self-defeating, depending on how many you and your type try to purge from the party. you may be succesful beyond your wildest dreams, and help select McLame as the next prez...


by zerosumgame on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 12:18:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Welcome to reality. (2.00 / 8)

No.  Fuck that.  Everytime someone reaches out an olive branch, it's smacked back.  Obama can do no right, and neither can his supporters.  And then, when Obama supporters have enough, you say "you're not being as nice as McCain's folks"?  NO.

If Bush "courted" your vote, would you vote for him?  Or would you be smart enough to look at the issues, look at the records, and see that you have a choice between electing 4 more years of Bush or the most progressive president this country has ever had.

I think, for most of these so called PUMAs, the answer it clear.


John McCain wants to stay in Iraq.
by ihaveseenenough on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 12:32:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Welcome to reality. (2.00 / 5)

Actually if you watch the action on the Puma sites there are some very professional McCain supporters who swarm whenever anyone questions the group think, even by contemplating voting for a 3rd party. No! they scream, the strongest way to punish the Democrats is to vote for the Hero John McCain!

There is also a well organized effort to "punish" down ticket democrats who supported Obama.

Rupublicans may not have started it, but they are pouring a lot of resources into using it to keep the presidency & and take back congress. And they are doing very skillfully.

This is a high-quality, well organized rat-fuck, this years swiftboat.


McCain just lied again
by wrb on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 01:30:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Welcome to reality. (2.00 / 1)

Yup, dirty tricks, and the gullible and angry Pumas are bieng lead by the nose.


My mom believed in Jesus, the Pope and FDR..... Just not necessarily in that order.
by WashStateBlue on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 01:34:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Welcome to reality. (2.00 / 1)

funny how they are supporting every negative stereotype about hysterical, petty, irrational women being unfit to lead.

Maybe next they cry to get their way.

Not feminism's greatest hour.


McCain just lied again
by wrb on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 01:42:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Welcome to reality. (none / 0)

That is the saddest part of it all.


by interestedbystander on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:59:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Care to cite a specific instance? (2.00 / 4)


¡Si, soy PUMA!
by RonK Seattle on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:04:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Care to cite a specific instance? (2.00 / 2)

only took a glance at PUMApac.org to turn up this

Brooklynny:

"There was an article on yahoo news today about Kerry being challenged for the first time in years by Ed O'Reilly and a nice write-up regarding O'Reilly. I think this should be one of our main functions as PUMAs: to actively support, financially and otherwise, challengers to the Democratic traitors who sold us down the river. John Kerry is in the top ten in my book, along with Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd (CT - now implicated in Countrywide mortgage sweetheart deals, etc).

However, I am looking past "party" affiliation and judging future candidates based on their policies, integrity and commitment to democratic principles (small "d"). If some of them are labeled Republicans that no longer is a hindrance to me. Some moderate Republicans may in fact be more in line with my views than extreme conservative Democrats or, for that matter, extreme left-wing Democrats. The bottom line in my decisions is no longer "party." I have learned in this primary that I can no longer expect the D party to be different than the Republican party of the past 2 decades. I want no part of either. I think it's time to reevaluate our prior assumptions in terms of policy, position, etc. The world has changed dramatically in the last decade or so and I feel it's really necessary to take nothing for granted. New creative solutions to our present state of affairs, domestically and internationally, and this can't be done if we just continue with the present simply being an extension of the past Democratic mantra."

Experiment- post something suggesting that you are wavering and might vote for Obama for policy reasons. I've seen the swarm reaction dozens of times


McCain just lied again
by wrb on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:20:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This supports your claim? How's that? (none / 0)


¡Si, soy PUMA!
by RonK Seattle on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:30:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This supports your claim? How's that? (2.00 / 4)

He claimed that some PUMA members want to punish down ticket Democrats who supported Obama.

You asked him to back his claim up.

He provided a quote from a PUMA talking about punishing Democrats who supported Obama.

What's so hard to understand?


by PSUdan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:47:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

wrb claimed this: (none / 0)

... there are some very professional McCain supporters who swarm whenever anyone questions the group think, even by contemplating voting for a 3rd party. No! they scream, the strongest way to punish the Democrats is to vote for the Hero John McCain!

And this:

Rupublicans ... are pouring a lot of resources into using it to keep the presidency & and take back congress. And they are doing very skillfully.

"Take back Congess"??? I think I'm going to have  a case of the vapours! And this:

This is a high-quality, well organized rat-fuck, this years swiftboat.

(I don't think the writer is familiar with the conventional meanings of "ratfuck" and "swiftboat", either.)

Of course, some PUMAs will take reprisals on down-ticket Dems. Some will take the opposite tack. Some will mix and match. Nothing that would raise eyebrows there, to anyone who understands the nature of the grievance.


¡Si, soy PUMA!
by RonK Seattle on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:03:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: wrb claimed this: (2.00 / 1)

Oh, we understand the nature of the grievance.


by Angry White Democrat on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:05:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

OK, I'm a racist ... AND a back-alley abortionist (2.00 / 2)

... and a Republican mole ... and a warmonger .... and what else? A cheese-eating surrender monkey?

After enough decades, name-calling has a limited effect on progressive activists. You're late to the game.


¡Si, soy PUMA!
by RonK Seattle on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:00:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hycporite much? (2.00 / 1)

Didn't you compare people on this thread as "brown shirts" downthread?

The major drama of the 20th century was the rise and fall of regimes that thought they could eliminate dissent by eliminating the expression of dissent.

Some of their ideological heirs are still here.

Obama would be Hitler then, huh?

Cute.

Oh, and is this your quote?

"Fight" doesn't mean "hide".

Chickenshits.

¡Si, soy PUMA!
by RonK Seattle on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:15:25 PM EST

2 hours earlier you wrote this rant.

Spare me the drama and stop playing victim please.

It's not working and your full of shit pal.


Mooseburgers? Careful Sarah. Moose bite back!
by spacemanspiff on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:25:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

My reference was to totalitarianism ... (none / 0)

... not brownshirts (but I have referred elsewhere to the brownshirt mentality of Obama fanatics).

BTW, is the comment you cite (and the comments it refers to) still hidden?


¡Si, soy PUMA!
by RonK Seattle on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:58:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: (none / 0)

It's not surprising to see you deny the obvious racism the PUMA movement is top-heavy with. It's sad, but it's not surprising.

Your hate is a sickness that blinds you to the truth.


by Angry White Democrat on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:31:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You've made 'racism' into a laughingstock! (none / 0)

That's progress, I suppose, in a post-racial, post-partisan kind of way.

Have you heard the news? Obama's "movement" has already gone post-movement ... while the "defining moment" has been downsized to just a "moment"!


¡Si, soy PUMA!
by RonK Seattle on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:37:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Racism is never funny (none / 0)

And that includes the racism behind the PUMA movement. Deny it all you like; we can all see that it's there.

The fact that you're okay with it speaks volumes about your character.


by Angry White Democrat on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:43:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

OK with it? Who's OK with it? (none / 0)

For me, BO08's decision to make a mockery of racism for political advantage was the straw that broke the camel's back. It's what convinced me he's unfit to hold office. ANY office. Ever.

But it's water over the dam now. From Obama's day forward, accusations like yours -- true OR false -- are laughing stock.


¡Si, soy PUMA!
by RonK Seattle on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 07:52:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

More evasions (none / 0)

You continue to throw out non-sequiturs, trying your best to avoid the subject. It's really getting pathetic.

The topic at hand is the racism at the heart of the PUMA movement. Either address the topic at hand or crawl back under your bridge.


by Angry White Democrat on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 07:59:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ha Ha! (2.00 / 3)

Check out the irrational PUMA trying to pretend they have a real grievance.  You sound like the spokesman for the People's front of Judea.  


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:10:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: wrb claimed this: (none / 0)

resourses

"Dems4McCain.info is also registered in a RED State, a very funky red state..... Arizona! McCain's home state! Ans what's even more astounding is:

clintondems.com,

hireheels.com,

gopumaparty.com

chicagoagainstobama.com

stop-obama.org

hillaryclintonforum.net- are all as well! They are all registered and launched in ARIZONA."

http://yestodemocracy.org/page/2/


McCain just lied again
by wrb on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:10:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Your source seems unfamiliar with the internet (none / 0)

... but willing to believe almost anything.


¡Si, soy PUMA!
by RonK Seattle on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:54:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

PS - 'at a glance', I don't find this comment ... (none / 0)

... in the past couple days postings.

And if I understand you correctly, you have been trolling the site and impersonating a PUMA supporter?


¡Si, soy PUMA!
by RonK Seattle on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:49:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PS - 'at a glance', I don't find this comment (2.00 / 2)

Reading

I find the workings of insanity, group think, and rovian manipulation fascinating.

I'm trying to spot which cutsie PUMA name is Karl himself.  It is fun.


McCain just lied again
by wrb on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:59:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PS - 'at a glance', I don't find this comment (2.00 / 1)

It's difficult for PUMA trolls to understand that we aren't doing the same thing.  They want to believe that to justify their own trolling.

Personally, I like knowing what my enemies are up to.  So long as I know it's not too effective, I'm not bothered.  But I do get upset about the casual associations of Obama (and supporters) to:
the holocaust
ethnic cleansing
Anne Frank
The Gestapo
Nazis and their ovens

They must be pretty unbalanced people if they really believe that's true.  And if they don't then they're merely completely insensitive and callous.


by Tenafly Viper on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:12:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

PUMA's work against the party as a whole (2.00 / 1)

At this point I don't really see how they can still be called progressive Democrats and PUMA's at the same time.  PUMA isn't just about not voting for Obama, it's about voting against anyone within the Democratic party who backed Obama initially or even chose to back him later.  

Do you realize how many good, progressive Democrats they would like to banish with their mad, self-aggrandizing scheme?  They are working against the party as a whole not just Obama.

It's an excessive, futile waste of energy that could be put to use for the good of all, rather than the vanity of a few.


by Tenafly Viper on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:56:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

oh please (1.45 / 11)

they aren't interested in rapproachment.  They're just trying to avenge a white woman who was dishonored by a black man.  No noose this time around but the motivation is the same.


by JJE on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 12:37:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: oh please (2.00 / 1)

Oh goody! Racism and sexism all rolled up into one! An equal opportunity offender.


by LakersFan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:04:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Dopey comment (2.00 / 4)

pointing out the PUMA crowd's mob mentality and racial resentment is neither racist nor sexist.

And Kobe still sucks.


by JJE on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:26:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dopey comment (none / 0)

mojo for basketball wisdom


McCain just lied again
by wrb on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:37:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Kobe = MVP = USA Gold (none / 0)

You'll all be loving Kobe when he wins us the gold medal in Beijing.

And you know I love Laker-Haters! Every word of disdain just proves how good my team is.


by LakersFan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:12:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not a Laker hater (none / 0)

a Kobe hater.


by JJE on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:23:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not a Laker hater (none / 0)

Kobe is a Laker for life. Sounds like you'll be a Lakers-hater for another decade or so.


by LakersFan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:43:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Maybe (none / 0)

Unless he throws another hissy fit and Buss and Kupchak finally tire of his diva antics.


by JJE on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 06:45:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Maybe (none / 0)

His "hissy fit" was the best thing for my team. It got Kupcheck worried and working hard, and got Buss to cut loose with the $$ . I am very pleased with Kobe's GM prowess. There were actually only one or two days last summer when he said anything negative about the Lakers to the media. But the sportswriters wrote stories about it for over a month. I found it hilarious that they had so little to write about that they kept rehashing the same story for so long.


by LakersFan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 09:08:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Dopey comment (2.00 / 1)

Pointing out their mentality may not be racist or sexist, but your choice of words certainly was.


by LakersFan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:14:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You'll have to do better (none / 0)

and explain precisely what was racist/sexist.


by JJE on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:24:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You'll have to do better (none / 0)

Your choice of words.


by LakersFan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:34:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

repetition (none / 0)

not persuasive.


by JJE on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:45:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: repetition (2.00 / 1)

How could anyone who lived through the Democratic primaries really believe that your choice of words wasn't sexist and racist?

You can always use the "primary test" (like the "grandma test" for profanity, but this one is for racist and sexist language): If Geraldine Ferraro, Rev. Wright, Bill Clinton, or Michelle Obama said it, would it be considered racist or sexist? If so, then it doesn't pass the test and probably shouldn't be said in public.


by LakersFan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:58:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Dumb (none / 0)

if it's obviously racist and sexist, you should be able to explain why without resorting to bizarre counterfactuals about how it "would be considered" (by whom?) if someone else had said it.  And yet several comments later you still can't explain what exactly it is that offends you.


by JJE on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:22:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Name-Caller (none / 0)

You've responded to me with both "Dumb" and "Dopey comment". You're being uncivil and I will troll rate you if you continue this.

And stop pretending to be so dense. You chose inflammatory language for a purpose, and got the response you asked for. Congratulations!


by LakersFan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:50:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Your comments were not good (none / 0)

I wasn't calling you a name.  I was describing your comments.  You may be a genius, but your comments were terrible.

I never said my word choice wasn't inflammatory.  It just wasn't racist or sexist.

Troll-rate away.  I don't really care about troll ratings.


by JJE on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 06:41:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Assinine (none / 0)

Is that a staement about you, or your comment?

If you really think there's a big difference between making racist/sexist comments and intentionally making inflammatory comments based on race and gender, then you have a lot to learn about prejudice and discrimination. Making comments like that only furthers racial/gender stereotypes, which feed into people's prejudices, which then give them an "excuse" for racist/sexist/whatever-ist attitudes and behavior.

It was an assinine statement designed to fan the sexist/racist flames. You could have just admitted that you were being an ass instead of feigning innocence. You may think you're clever, but you're not fooling me.


by LakersFan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 09:24:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Presumably my comment (none / 0)

though judging by the rest I'm guessing you think I'm asinine personally as well.

So comments about race and gender that are "inflammatory" are bad irrespective of whether they are true, simply because people who are already racist/sexist may use them as a reason to continue to be racist/sexist?  How PC of you.  

I find the notion that prejudiced people need inflammtory blog comments to fuel their prejudices is rather asinine, myself, as is the idea that we should modify our speech so as not to offend people who are already prejudiced.


by JJE on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 01:34:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

awesome (none / 0)

a hide rate from the leader of the lynch mob.


by JJE on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:16:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Welcome to reality. (2.00 / 6)

Gloating and poor attitudes?

They are seeing what they WANT to see?

Did you REALLY see all that much gloating here?

And, what is with this "you and your type try to purge from the party."

WE are PURGING THEM FROM THE PARTY?

Look, they left voluntarily. Or they set up these demands (Hillary is VP or I vote for McCain) that may or may not be accomplished.

You have seen TONS of folks stating "Hillary SHOULD be put in charge of the Health Care bill" or have a leading role in the Obama admin on this website.

Hell, I don't mind her as VP, but after seeing him perform, Wes Clark is now my first choice.

So, this "We purged them from the party" is again this Victimhood they have wrapped themselves in IMHO.

And, what can we REALLY do to reach out to them?

I feel, if Obama did a week long:

"OH MY GOD, IT WAS SO FRICKING SEXIST, I DIDN'T DESERVE TO WIN" world tour, the Harriets, Texas Darlin's and Alegres of the world would STILL say not enough.


My mom believed in Jesus, the Pope and FDR..... Just not necessarily in that order.
by WashStateBlue on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 12:39:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Welcome to reality. (2.00 / 7)

Even if Obama stepped aside and handed Hillary the nomination it wouldn't be enough for them. They would still complain. They are filled with bile and it has soured their whole outlook.


"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson
by MS01 Indie on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 12:46:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hate is the center of their whole movement (2.00 / 1)

And hence, their whole movement rots from the core.


by Angry White Democrat on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:07:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Welcome to reality. (2.00 / 1)

You need to take a deep breath, son.


I'm for a timeline on Iraq, public funding of elections, women's reproductive rights, gun restrictions and universal suffrage. So why should I vote for Obama?
by William Cooper on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:06:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

PUMAs are slanderous bigots (1.33 / 18)

that are profane and crude in their  in gleeful derision of the Democratic Nominee. Most appear to be repugs who after the primary had no intention EVER for voting for Obama.  The filth that exudes from those sites needs to go to GWB's sewage treatment plant.


by Mae Scott on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 12:39:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PUMAs are slanderous bigots (1.75 / 8)

Speaking of slanderous bigots, check your mirror.  Many longtime Democratic Party activists have aligned in the PUMA for good reasons.  Reasons that have as much to do with the party's primary process and arbitrary enforcement of questionable rules as with Obama.  There are profane and crude people all over the internet, even here.  If one uses a broad bush, even you could be painted with that description.


by Tolstoy on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 01:49:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PUMAs are slanderous bigots (1.28 / 7)

Trollrated. PUMAs do not have good reasons.


by Lance Bryce on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:31:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PUMAs are slanderous bigots (2.00 / 1)

TRd for TR abuse.


I'm for a timeline on Iraq, public funding of elections, women's reproductive rights, gun restrictions and universal suffrage. So why should I vote for Obama?
by William Cooper on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:07:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PUMAs are slanderous bigots (none / 0)

how is one to have an impact on our process, on the behavior of our representatives. We have a congress headed by Nancy that refused to consider impeachment, how should we respond. We had only one candidate who pledged to reverse the Bush policies, and get legislation in place to prevent a future president from power grabbing. Hillary was clear about all of her policies and detailed, and she had the largest group of experts and professionals ever amassed backing her candidacy to bring professionalism back to government agencies. Even the military experts supported her, with her clear exit Iraq plan. So, how can we influence our nominee to take over her plans and staffing recommendations, how can we convince him we backed her experience and her clear plans.  She stands on the issues where I stand, a domestic policy that helped all of us reach our dreams, and a foreign policy that takes responsibility for leadership, in nuclear non-proliferation, global warming, ending hunger, helping poor nations develop their economies in a way that is sustainable and helps ordinary people have lives and keeps the leaders from obscene profiteering at the expense of the health and safety of citizens.  

Right now it's still about personalities, Barack thinks he can make a few statements about equal pay for women, as if all we are about is ourselves.  

IF Barack wants to unify the party he can work with Hillary and adopt her measures, we voted for her on issues, not on personality.  And what do we do if he refuses to listen, even though he campaigned on a bottom up style of leadership.  How does one get the attention of party leaders? So far nothing has worked, what do you suggest?  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 01:02:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PUMAs are slanderous bigots (1.42 / 7)

Uprated. PUMA is a collection of morons, racists, and the mentally ill.


by Lance Bryce on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:27:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PUMAs are slanderous bigots (1.85 / 7)

I see why this is trollrated. I left out lifelong Republicans.


by Lance Bryce on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:44:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I abhor (2.00 / 1)

slanderous generalisations.  They tell us more about the people making them than they do about the ones who are targeted.  


by izarradar on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:06:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PUMAs are slanderous bigots (2.00 / 2)

And the spreaders of filth swarm to troll rate your comment. Hi, Alegre. Is this what you been reduced to - posting on hate sites like no25cents and drive-by troll rating? What a sad outcome for a once proud Hillary supporter.


"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson
by MS01 Indie on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:14:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PUMAs are slanderous bigots (2.00 / 2)

This jealousy of alegre is funny.  She's more of a force in democratic politics than you will ever be.


I'm for a timeline on Iraq, public funding of elections, women's reproductive rights, gun restrictions and universal suffrage. So why should I vote for Obama?
by William Cooper on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:08:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PUMAs are slanderous bigots (2.00 / 1)

Alegre used to be a force in the democratic process. She's decided to marginalize herself. I'm not jealous of her. I do feel kind of sorry for her, though.


"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson
by MS01 Indie on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:35:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PUMAs are slanderous bigots (none / 0)

lol

I feel sorry for you.


I'm for a timeline on Iraq, public funding of elections, women's reproductive rights, gun restrictions and universal suffrage. So why should I vote for Obama?
by William Cooper on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 01:37:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PUMAs are slanderous bigots (none / 0)

You don't think she has marginalized herself? She used to post on dailykos and left there in protest. She came to this site, which has a much smaller audience and then left here to go to sites with a fringe audience. That's a steady pattern of marginalizing herself. It's been her choice. She could have stayed on dailykos or here. All she had to do was moderate her tone a little and not let everything be colored by hate. She was unwilling to do that. I'm willing to bet that she would be welcomed with open arms on this site and even on kos, if she were to come back and start posting without letting anger distort all of her posts. Perhaps she will someday. We'll have to wait and see.


"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson
by MS01 Indie on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 12:03:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Get used to it. (2.00 / 2)

Anyone who tries to tear down the leader of my party is my enemy, and that includes bloviating fat-asses on the radio, history-challenged shrill talk show hosts, 527 smear artists and former Dems acting like 3-year-olds that didn't get their way.


by Poor Yorick on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:16:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Get used to it. (2.00 / 3)

What party is that? The National Socialist Party?

In my party, no leader is beyond criticism, and no candidate deserves blind loyalty. We are Democrats. We do not follow our leaders in lock-step.


by LakersFan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:08:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nice MO. Won't work with me, though. (2.00 / 1)

Who's talking about blind loyalty? Not me. I'm one of the early members of the angry FISA group over at BO's site.

I said tearing down, e.g. smearing, rumor-mongering, lying. Big difference unless of course your purpose is to foment discord.


by Poor Yorick on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:30:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nice MO. Won't work with me, though. (2.00 / 2)

Glad to hear it. Your "Anyone who tries to tear down the leader of my party is my enemy" statement made you sound like so many people around here that cannot tolerate any criticism of their beloved. Sorry if I misinterpreted it. (I should have guessed that a Shakespeare lover wouldn't be so simplistic in their thinking.)


by LakersFan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:09:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nice MO. Won't work with me, though. (2.00 / 1)

I think the main thing to note here is that Obama supporters, or at least people who are still open to the idea of supporting Obama, airing legitimate grievances is welcome here.  Look at some of the diaries on his faith based initiative ideas last night as an example.  There were people discussing the issue coming from all walks of life, some defending the idea and some in vocal opposition to it.  His FISA stance is another example of this.

The reason that people get up in arms is that there are plenty of people here that don't support Obama, aren't open to supporting Obama, and exist here solely to be a pain in the ass and derail legitimate conversation.


And so, may evil beware and may good dress warmly and eat lots of fresh vegetables.
by thatpurplestuff on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:18:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nice MO. Won't work with me, though. (2.00 / 1)

I actually think the legitimate convesation is derailed much more by the people who obsess over every thing little said by a few "pain in the ass" people. It's like picking a scab. Just leave it alone if you ever want it to go away!


by LakersFan on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:29:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nice MO. Won't work with me, though. (2.00 / 1)

On that I agree with you 100%.  While bitching about the people that are only here to gripe about the nominee, it's probably a self defeating exercise.  It's like scratching a mosquito bite... feels great at the time but if you keep doing it you've got a bigger problem than when you started.

They are here to derail conversation, and look at the rec list right now.  Two of the featured diaries are bitching about these people instead of talking about McCain's positions, legitimate concerns about our nominee, or other issues that we as progressives should be interested in.

Anyway, good point.


And so, may evil beware and may good dress warmly and eat lots of fresh vegetables.
by thatpurplestuff on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:44:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry for the terse reply (none / 0)

but I've had so many experiences where I've been referred to as a cultist, blind, etc., that I lash out right away. I'm holding Obama to a high standard, and I'll be there screaming as loud as I can when I think he's stepped in it. But I'm not going to abide some deadenders' angst to the detriment of a Democratic presidency. I've had enough conservatism for my fucking lifetime, and anyone who tries to derail the train can get run over for all I care.

Also, while I do love Hamlet, it's not my favorite, and the 'orick is as much a reference to my favorite opus of the last decade. 8)


by Poor Yorick on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 04:37:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Calling Out All PUMAs and Their Sympathizers (1.94 / 18)

Thank you! I'm glad someone finally said it. The secretly Republican-led PUMA's aren't going to give up their insanity even if we do bend over and kiss their asses from here until doomsday. So we might as well tell them to get on the bus or get thrown under it heh heh.

Frankly, I'm not all that worried about them. They are full of sound and fury, but signify very little. The Media ADORES them though, because it gives them something to continue the "ongoing narrative" for their ratings.


by Rictor Rockets on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 09:19:09 AM EST

Re: Calling Out All PUMAs and Their Sympathizers (2.00 / 7)

The Media ADORES them though, because it gives them something to continue the "ongoing narrative" for their ratings.

Ding! Ding! Ding!
We have a winner!!!


by Kysen on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 12:39:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't call them out! If you do, that implies (2.00 / 10)

that they're welcome to come here and respond.


by Geekesque on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 09:20:14 AM EST

Re: Don't call them out! If you do, that implies (2.00 / 3)

keep on trying to put locks on the doors and bars on the windows of that "Big Tent". Do a good job and the dems will be identical to the repukes...


by zerosumgame on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 12:20:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

John McCain's lap doesn't (2.00 / 6)

fall under the big tent.  The PUMA kitties can't sit under the big tent and on big John's lap at the same time.


by Geekesque on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 01:46:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: John McCain's lap doesn't (none / 0)

enjoying your ratings abilities these days geek?


by zerosumgame on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 07:17:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: John McCain's lap doesn't (none / 0)

and a lot of them would not BE even close to his lap if jerks were not being, well, jerks and pushing that way. funny how that happened in Cuba, and Nam, and Korea, and Iraq but you cannot quite seem to grasp that...


by zerosumgame on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 07:19:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Don't call them out! If you do, that implies (2.00 / 2)

They are already here. No need to name names, everyone knows who they are. They even post on the hate sites bragging about how they come here and beat up on the foolish obamabots.


"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson
by MS01 Indie on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 12:48:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Don't call them out! If you do, that implies (2.00 / 2)

Funny how they would think they actually do anything here, they just post little whiny sarcastic and meaningless posts.  Yeah some serious smackdown, these flipping tools (republican tools I should say).   I have yet to hear one substantive argument against the fact that they are helping to suffocate Hillary's career...all in the name of Hillary?


by KLRinLA on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:14:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Don't call them out! If you do, that implies (none / 0)

kind of like your whine i am replying to now?


by zerosumgame on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 07:20:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Don't call them out! If you do, that implies (none / 0)

Ok, explain how voting for McCain won't hurt HIllary?  Do tell genius


by KLRinLA on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 07:40:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Don't call them out! If you do, that implies (none / 0)

Crickets...I thought so


by KLRinLA on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 07:42:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ignore them. (2.00 / 18)

Can we please just ignore these people. They are truly a waste of time and energy.

Every time we post a diary about them we are just giving them attention. Attention they do not deserve by their numbers or their positions.

Sometimes when a child starts throwing a tantrum it's better just walk out of the room. This is one of those times.


Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.
by jsfox on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 09:26:38 AM EST

Seriously - were PUMAs in the news? (2.00 / 1)

NY Writer has a diary on the rec list addressed to PUMAs.

Why the renewed interest?


by catfish2 on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 11:37:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Beats the hell out of me. (2.00 / 1)


Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.
by jsfox on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 12:23:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Seriously - were PUMAs in the news? (2.00 / 4)

It's a carnival sideshow. People can't help but gawk at the oddities on display.


Know Your Rights!
by BobzCat on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 12:37:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Calling Out All PUMAs and Their Sympathizers (2.00 / 9)

With all the crap we have going on right now, why are we spending 90% of our time on this blog crticizing a few whackos?
It's like some people cannot get past the negativity that abounded throughout the blogosphere during the primaries.
Can we please talk about more relevant issues?
As jsfox said above- it's time to walk away from these people and don't look back.
"Who are you for? That is the wrong question. It should be who is for you?" HRC
by skohayes on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 09:41:47 AM EST

Re: Calling Out All PUMAs and Their Sympathizers (2.00 / 13)

Seriously, PUMA has no existence outside of a handful of wannabe latter-day Bastille stormers who are instead "storming the blogs" while sitting uselessly around the house in their PUMA sportswear logo-infringing t-shirts. Which they are actually buying.

Basically, PUMA is a Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game for less than a hundred people, and the "world" they're playacting in are the blogs. But we don't have to play.


by Addison on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 09:46:14 AM EST

Re: Calling Out All PUMAs and Their Sympathizers (1.75 / 4)

People it's about democracy!  If we don't hold our politicians (right or left) feet to the fire and demand that they act only in a democratic manner then what's the good of all of this anyway?  And whether we like it or not dissent is part of a democracy.  Do you realize that you're sounding just like the administration we are trying to get rid of?  It's my way or the highway.  Do you see my point?  


by ayankeegal on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 10:19:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Calling Out All PUMAs and Their Sympathizers (1.83 / 12)

Yea but you work to elect John McCain.

Therefore you are our adversary.

Read the title of the site.

There are plenty of other sites that will take in your support for John McCain with open arms.


by DemsLandslide2008 on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 10:31:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Calling Out All PUMAs and Their Sympathizers (1.00 / 1)

TRd for slander


I'm for a timeline on Iraq, public funding of elections, women's reproductive rights, gun restrictions and universal suffrage. So why should I vote for Obama?
by William Cooper on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 05:11:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Calling Out All PUMAs and Their Sympathizers (2.00 / 3)

I see your point but it's flawed. You don't cut off your nose to spite your face. Get Obama elected, then work to fix what you perceive as being flawed within the Democratic party. Worse comes to worst, you work to have Obama lose the primary in 2012. But you don't sacrifice all those you profess to care about with your policies to "teach a lesson" or "hold someone's feet to the fire".

People who work against Obama seem to view his loss simply as a punishment for him. I think they tend to forget that they're also punishing millions who have to suffer through four more years of similar policies. YOU DON'T ALLOW MILLIONS TO SUFFER TO PUNISH A FEW. I'm disappointed that I have to even say that to fellow progressives.
by ThinkerT on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 01:35:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Calling Out All PUMAs and Their Sympathizers (none / 0)

Disappointed Thinker, Yep, it's your way or the highway.  Been there for the last 7+ years. I know where that got us.  Politicians should be kept, by us/citizens, on the straight and narrow.  Please remember we are hiring/electing a politician to run our country, not crowning a king.   Why do you think demanding honesty and accountability is going to help elect McCain and make Obama lose anyway?  Is Obama so fragile and weak that any little dissent will break him?  I doubt it. And shouting is rude.


by ayankeegal on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 02:48:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Calling Out All PUMAs and Their Sympathizers (2.00 / 2)

Apparently someone needs to shout at you, because you didn't hear me. Dissent all you want, but the diary isn't about that - it's about PUMAs actively working against Obama. If you're against that, please say so. But if not, don't try to claim you're working for some higher purpose or equate people trying to tell you the consequences of your actions with the straw-man Bush "my way or the highway" argument.

The facts are, regardless of the past, we will have one of two presidents - Obama or McCain. One will obviously be far better for causes progressives care about. So Democrats and progressives have two choices - vote for Obama, or risk having McCain become president. That's not a "with us or against us" or "my way or the highway" argument, it's just simple fact - those are the only two possible results. I don't know how many times people have to say it to make it sink in.
by ThinkerT on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 03:09:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

ROTFLMAO! (2.00 / 11)

PUMA is a Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game for less than a hundred people

That.  Is.  Perfect.


by spunkmeyer on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 11:40:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: ROTFLMAO! (2.00 / 7)

LOL!!!!!

That is the best description I've read of these tools EVER!

Hahahahaha!

I could fit all the PUMA's in the trunk of my Prius!