http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6564768Oh my.
For some reason, though, the primitives get off-subject and discuss the Perry Logan once-primitive.
But someone enlighten, please; what is this stupid acronym "PUMA"?
SidneyCarton (683 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:38 AM
Original message
Fear of PUMA's : Siege Mentality on DU
I will likely get flamed for this post, and as I can't blame those who do so, I accept it ahead of time.
DU has a siege mentality. Such a mentality is justified by past experience. 8 years of the Bush Administrations creepily Orwellian policies, coupled with the fanaticism and blind hostility from the right has made us a bit defensive. Couple this with ongoing Freeper infiltrations, and one easily commiserate with a small degree of paranoia and suspicion regarding one's fellow DUers. While most Freepers are easily spotted and neutralized, there have been a few, whose names are occasionally mentioned with unease and disbelief, who manage to fly under the radar for months at a time, becoming regulars, known and even trusted in the community. While the numbers of such infiltrators are small, the legacy of mistrust and unease that they leave behind far outweigh any disruption they may have caused while on the board.
I bring this up because I believe that it bears directly on our current fascination/revulsion with the PUMA movement. As has been brought up over and over again in this forum, numerous former DUers, some of which were long-time members and well respected, have left to join these sites, or been expelled after having been proved to be members of this movement. With their passing we are left once again to wonder, were they really ever one of us? Or still worse, if we couldn't trust so-and-so with umpteen million posts who had been here since God was a boy, can we really trust anyone?
This of course leads to truly reprehensible behavior here on the board, where anyone who dissents in the slightest sense is suspect of disruption. Numerous self-declared "moderators" (with no relation to the actual DU mods, who do yeoman's service in this forum) conduct impromptu inquisitions in which certain members are accused of not being who they appear. Except instead of "unmasking" the accused disruptor as a Freeper, the enemy du jour is a PUMA. This is a discussion board, it is moderated to allow a degree of protection for progressive values. That said, if we all agreed, each thread would be rather dull, and the only reason to post here would be to joke around in the Lounge. Criticize dissent all you like, but do not seek to suppress it, doing so cheapens us all.
Ok, flame away.
The skumbag primitive's first in line:
IanDB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
1. That's absurd... we don't engage in witch hunts, checking the backgrounds of those who dissent.
Just like I didn't just google you and find your blog at http://loadstonerock.blogspot.com just to check and see if you were actually an anti-Obama PUMA disruptor, which (based on your blog that I didn't just look at) it appears you are not.
Based upon this paragraph, which I did NOT read, because I wasn't checking on you:
In summation: an Obama Administration gives us the chance to reclaim our civil liberties, a McCain Administration insures they remain lost to us. Our choice is clear, lay off Senator Obama and let him do what he needs to do in order to win.
http://loadstonerock.blogspot.com/2008/06/once-again-we...
But I could be wrong.
I'm watching you.
But seriously.
While we do not want to go overboard, we should still be aware that there are in fact certain people here who do nothing but cause dissent and disruption here. They live to spread discord and distrust and to denegrate our candidate. And then some of them avail themselves of the comradeship and misplaced good will of our membership by yukking it up over pictures of their cats and whatnot in our lounge, all while working to undermine the best interests of their "friends" and abusing their trust.
It's a reasonably big bonfire, but the primitives get sidetracked discussing a mausoleumed primitive.
YOY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:43 AM
Response to Original message
2. I am in no way afraid of this:
http://perrylogan.org/
SidneyCarton (683 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Ok, in some fairness...
some of these people are just freaks, whose loss was our gain.
IanDB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. D'ja think?
after which the skumbag primitive posts a photograph allegedly of the mausoleumed primitive
YOY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #4
11. Freaks can be nice people...He's to the level of a 1960s Batman inept "supervillian"
As one DUer put it: "Tune in next time same Bat(shit) time! Same Bat(shit) channel!"
SidneyCarton (683 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. Yep.
Kind of a cross between the Riddler and the Joker on Crack.
IWantAnyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #14
19. I view him more as King Tut on acid with a lobotomy.
IanDB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:08 AM
Original message
The Riddler on Ritalin.
YOY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
30. Naw that might actually even him out...
Moochy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #2
13. That guy is an acid flashback on speed
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
5. PUMA is a confirmed GOP front.
what more do you need to know?
SidneyCarton (683 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Were it merely a GOP front, I think it would bother us less.
But those aren't just Freepers in Dem's clothing over there, there are actually a few deluded Dems over there, that's what bothers us, that some of us could be fooled so completely.
IanDB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #8
22. I've seen some of the posts in the Health forum. Not surprised some of us are easily fooled.
SidneyCarton (683 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. Well, medicine is one of those things...that people tend to believe whatever makes them feel good.
I have some relatives who use Cayenne pepper to heal all their ills. While I would suppose that such is crazy at first glance, the gentleman in question is 91, so there's apparently something to be said for clean living.
IanDB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. Hope he doesn't get hemorrhoids. [sic]
bluestateguy (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
10. In the past I have been called "soft on Bush" by fellow DUers for the following reasons:
* Criticizing Al Qaeda for kidnapping and beheading Americans in Iraq
* Saying that 9/11 was not an inside job, but was in fact a terrorist attack by Al Qaeda on the US.
* Saying that Bush won and Kerry lost in 2004.
* Denouncing Hamas for firing rockets into Israel (even as I also criticized Israeli policy).
* Mourning the death of Tim Russert.
Being called "soft on Bush" on DU is like being called soft on Communism in McCarthy era America.
SidneyCarton (683 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. So, we all end up pissing someone off sometimes.
You and I would agree on some of those points, so we would likely be flamed together.
IanDB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #10
23. Is "Soft On Bush" an anti-gay slur?
What?
WHAT??
WHAT???
What'd I say???
IanDB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #10
25. Attacking someone as being a fifth-columnist based on a single post is ridiculous. HOWEVER...
... there are a handful of individuals who have a non-stop track record of doing nothing but ceaselessly attack OUR candidate, every day, even after the Primary was over.
And remember the guildeline [sic] that Skinner set down?
About how those who have a supportive track record are the ones with the credibility to occasionally say something negative.
Those who have done nothing BUT be negative are the ones, IMHO, who need to be shown the door.
ribofunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
15. While There Certainly are PUMAs
there are also a wide range of opinions among Obama supporters here. DUers are indeed very quick to make accusations based on very little evidence.
SidneyCarton (683 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. My point exactly.
There are those who would have supported the nominee, no matter which one it was.
There are those who reluctantly support the nominee because the alternative is unthinkable.
There are those who enthusiastically support the nominee, and have since the beginning.
We will need ALL their votes to win in November.
IanDB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #15
26. I have nothing against the PUMAS so long as they keep their PUMA-shit out of DU.
I believe that was the message the mods have sent regarding that, as well.
Youphemism Donating Member (886 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
20. What republican agency do you work for? Who sent you here?...
You're clearly saying this to conceal your inner loathing for Democrats... I'd dig up old posts of yours, take them out of context and provide a link to a grainy photo of you holding up Karl Rove's jockstrap during Bush's inauguration ceremony, but I don't have time.
But you just made the list. Expect to see black limos in your rearview mirror every time you go to the bathroom from now on.
SidneyCarton (683 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. ONOZ!!!111!
Well, you've obviously unmasked me!
Though the part about the jock strap is totally untrue, well mostly, okay it belonged to Ann Coulter, but anyway...
SidneyCarton (683 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. Ok, lets consider this...
It is eminently clear that the PUMA movement is backed and organized by the GOP. This is their Swift Boat version 2008. They are seeking the disillusioned, vehement and dead-enders, and seeking to whip up their rage and controversy, in order to keep them pissed at least until November.
Therefore there should be no shock that conservative radio hosts are lining up behind this mess. These are the same people who loudly professed their hatred of Hillary during the last 12 years. They have not suddenly seen the light, all they see is a wedge to split the party.
Nationally, I see this movement as numerically insignificant. The media inflates it into this huge monolithic movement because it makes the race look closer and provides necessary drama. Regionally they are more problematic. As you have noted, in your home state they are causing considerable disruption. As Florida is currently trending red, I'm not sure how much trouble this means for the election. Nevertheless, I think that this is the main avenue for the GOP attacks against Obama, it stinks of Rove to high heaven.
SurfingAtWork (236 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
31. In my opinion there can be an ambiguous line between a witch hunt,
And a reasonable expectation that people here posting "concerns" or "doubts" be doing so in good faith. If the very same moniker (presumably the same poster) posts rabidly anti-Obama tripe on other websites, then comes here to voice "concerns", and gets flamed, then blames people for not being willing to let the primaries go... Well, I'm sorry but IMO that is bullshit and there is nothing wrong with calling them on it.
SidneyCarton (683 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #31
33. You're right, such behavior is bullshit
And I have called such people on it.
I have also seen posters on this board who have done nothing more offensive than having posted at one time or another on other message boards, and have not posted there since the end of the primaries, who have been hounded, persecuted and ostracized as well.
We are afraid, afraid to trust eachother, afraid that the poster we respect and befriend is really a sockpuppet, operative, PUMA or Freeper. This fear, while allowing us to effectively silence disruptors, is a double edged sword, and all too often cuts against those who have done nothing wrong other than express valid concerns. Yet in our zeal to root out the all-too-real concern trolls, we have a bad habit of burning a lot of people whose concerns, or questions are legitimate as well.
I mean good grief, we nearly tarred and feathered MadFloridian during the FISA mess a while back, just because she dared disagree with our nominee. We must be careful, lest be begin to emulate what we despise.
hyphenate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
32. I avoided GD-Primaries for months because of all the animosity there--it seemed even worse this election season for some reason, and it was intolerable for many of us.
In the beginning (late 90s and 2000), it was difficult to find places where liberals could discuss anything without getting attacked most places online. DU was the first, large-scale site to talk with fellow liberals, though there were many small, private boards around--you just had to find them.
To be honest, I don't know much about this PUMA thing, but it's probably just another stumbling block to full disclosure on the part of participants, and if one's convictions are strong, they will ultimately prevail.
I still get angry about some of the people here who waged such horrible war during the primaries, and I often found that many people were unreasonably nasty and unbalanced in discussions to the point where I had to remind myself that we were all supposed to be on the same side.
As someone who supported John Edwards first and foremost, I still have reservations about the other candidates and always will, I think, because my philosophies don't completely click with them. But hey--that's life, that's freedom and that's my choice--otherwise, we would be as predictable and unhinged as everyone on the wrong side of the political arena.
I'm here to put another Democrat into the white house (when I can finally capitalize those two words again!), and to make the GOP as inconsequential as it's possible again, hopefully to the point where we never again put one in the oval office. I would like to see a day in the future where the GOP no longer exists, and the "2-party" system is composed of the Democrats and the Greens.
If we all fell in lock-step with everyone else here at DU, I think we would be as bad as freepers and the religious wrong. The Democratic Party is the party of diversity, and we should never forget that. But I also believe that once we start to accept wrong-wing talking points, we do have a risk to become as nasty as they are. There are many different shades of gray without being polar opposites.
SidneyCarton (683 posts) Thu Jul-31-08 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #32
34. Precisely,
We're gonna disagree, we're gonna fight. Some threads will turn into flame fests. If we all agreed, there would be no point to discuss anything. Argument and discussion is what makes this site interesting. The protections here are not in place to stifle discussion, but to defend against the blind disruptive abuse of the right, which has virtually no interest in discussion, unless its between the corporate right, and the psycho right.
I'll bet the cardboard Sid primitive's a PUMAite, whatever that is. Any takers?
