on pumas and the such

if there’s one thing that bothers me more than anything else in this campaign, it’s the so-called pumas (party unity my ass).  i’m not entirely sure if more than five of them actually exist, but they claim to be hilary clinton supporters (ie democrats) for john mccain.  there’s a ton of blogs out there dedicated to them, my favorite to troll being hillbuzz.  but if you actually take the time to read hillbuzz (it’s entertaining in an o’reily factor sort of way) you might come to the same conclusion i have.  

these people aren’t democrats, not by a long-shot.  allow me a minute to explain through the subtle act of analogy.

if were to tell everyone, over and over again, that i was straight, but now i like to fuck dudes, would i still be straight?  if i went around espousing the gay lifestyle, started going to margaret cho concerts, bought a turquoise bracelet, and put a rainbow sticker on my white prius, but continued to tell everyone that i was straight, would i still be straight?  now, of course, i am not in any way positing that homosexuality is a choice.  nor am i equating it to voting for john mccain (i wouldn’t insult my gay friends like that).  what i am saying is that at some point, the pumas will have to come out of the closet, look themselves in the mirror and say “i’m here, i’m republican, no more capital gains tax!”

know they-selves, pumas.  being republican isn’t a sin, especially seeing as republicans tend to think everything else is.

-srd