PUMA PAC Founder: McCain Not Good

Update: My followups at the end of the story.

As a follow-up to my PUMA story from Sunday, I had the privilege of exchanging emails with PUMAPAC founder Darragh Murphy.

For the sake of brevity, I am including the thesis from that story, followed by my exchange with Ms. Murphy. (We're not "cool" enough with each other yet to call each other "TC" and "D")

Before I do that, though, let me say that, after reading a lot of what she has to say, I still disagree heartily with her, but I also really like her. She's got a real way with words, and a refreshing attitude toward discourse.

I wrote a story last week about "Citizens For McCain," a group organized by the McCain campaign to get embittered Hillary Clinton supporters to vote for John McCain, and I intended to do a follow-up on PUMA, the group's sister organization. One of my reader pointed out that PUMA (People United Means Action, or, unofficially, Party Unity My Ass) members are more diverse, encompassing Hillary supporters who will write her in, stay home, or vote third party in November, as well as those who will vote for McCain.

Our first interaction was in the comments section of that story. Here is her first comment, followed by my questions and her responses.

Hi, This is Darragh Murphy, founder of Puma PAC, and the author of the essay quoted in Tommy Christopher's post. The accusation that I am a Republican has been floating around for a few weeks and is completely unfounded.

Here's a link to a detailed take-down of Mr. Christopher's unfounded accusations, written by a bloggger I do not know and have never met, other than to reply to her emails.

http://grlpatriot.mydd.com/

I briefly enrolled as an Independent in Massachusetts in 2000 to support McCain against what I considered to be an inept and corrupt GW Bush in the Republican primary, like hundreds of thousands of my fellow Democrats in MA and NH. This is old news and not very interesting. I've never been a Republican -- never will be.

I voted for Bill Clinton twice, Al Gore, John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton. I gave $650 to her campaign between March and June 2008. I volunteered in Philadelphia during the primary, knocking on thousands of doors in N.E. Philadelphia.

No matter how much the Obamaphiles would like to believe that we are a Republican front, all their wishing won't make it so. We are Democrats. We are protesting the DNC from within our party. And we will win.

Tommy Christopher: Right off the bat, let me say, Ms. Murphy, that you are a truly gifted writer. I didn't attribute the piece, because there was no byline, but I'm glad to be able to credit you now. No kidding, I was sincerely moved by your piece.

Now, there is your word to contradict this documentary evidence, but given the context that you are mobilizing a massive effort to defeat McCain's opponent, you can see where the skepticism comes from, can't you? I mean, wouldn't a McCain plant say just what you're saying, were she caught?

Still, I don't want to waste time on he said, she said. I'm happy to publish whatever documentation you want to provide, and revise my conclusions as such.

Darragh Murphy: I've never denied or tried to hide that I contributed to McCain's primary run against GWB. I have no idea what a McCain plant would say. I imagine he or she would be spending their time on something more productive than 14+hours a day working to reform the DNC.

The reason you find no significant contributions to Dem candidates from me between 2000 and 2008 is, quite frankly, from 2001 -2007 my family was close to flat broke. The tech bubble burst of 2001 meant that the company my husband worked for went bankrupt, we nearly lost our home, and I was focused intently on keeping our family together. I volunteered my time for John Kerry and others, and had a sign the size of a barn door nailed to the tree in my front yard for Deval Patrick when he ran for governor. After 2006 or so, our finances were a lot better and I could start contributing again to candidates and causes I believe in.

Tommy Christopher: Since I have you here, though, I'd love to ask you some questions. We have a great PUMA soldier here named Katherine, you'd be proud of her, but she hasn't been able to give direct answers to many of my questions. I'd like to hear affirmative reasoning, not "Well, it's better than this..."

As a lifelong Democrat and a feminist, how can you aid in the election of a candidate who has promised to appoint judges who will overturn Roe v. Wade, the only nominee who has ever done so?

Darragh Murphy: First off, Puma PAC does not in any way endorse or support John McCain. We raise no money for him, never advocate his positions, and avoid ALL CONTACT with any Republican or pro-McCain groups. I have turned down at least three invitations to either appear on pro-McCain radio shows and/or get involved as a leader with some of the Clinton/McCain groups out there. Puma PAC is PROTESTING the election if the DNC selects Obama as the nominee. We are NOT supporting John McCain. There is a difference.

That being said, here's the thing: Barack Obama CANNOT WIN in November. Look at the polls. Look at the support he loses daily from former die-hard fans. This doesn't even take into account that Independents and Moderate Republicans won't touch the guy with a ten-foot pole. We've known since Pennsylvania that Barack Obama cannot win the general election. That's the main reason we are so outraged at the biased selection process the DNC used to force Obama this far. So, I don't believe that we will be the cause of Obama's loss to McCain. The fault for that will lie at the feet of the inept leadership of the DNC and the party, Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi et al.

Additionally, the Roe v Wade stuff is scare tactics, plain and simple. Forced pregnancy is a nightmare from a past era, and Democrats trying to scare women into supporting a weak candidate by bringing up back-alley boogey men is disgraceful. Roe v Wade has survived nearly six Republican administrations, most of them before the widespread availability of RU486. Reproductive choice is the law of the land and a majority of Americans, from both parties, support it. John McCain is NOT going to overturn Roe v Wade, even if he wants to. Young American women, for whom reproductive choice is a crucial issue of course, were not even born when it was passed. The idea that they would accept forced pregnancy in the 21st Century is absurd – and that goes for young Republican women as well as Democrats. It's as ridiculous as suggesting that McCain will be able to overturn the Internet – not going to happen.

Tommy Christopher: As a loyal Hillary Clinton supporter, how can you vote for McCain's disaster of a healthcare plan, which is a destruction of Hillary's most core issue? What do you like about his plan?

Darragh Murphy: If I choose to pull the lever for McCain in November it will be a Protest vote, not in any way a support of his disastrous health care plan, as you accurately describe it. Here's the thing, the DNC should back a winner – a candidate who can and will deliver a UNIVERSAL health care plan for all Americans. I have absolutely zero confidence that Barack Obama can accomplish ANY kind of comprehensive solution to our health care crisis. So, the choice for us is NOT between a really bad health care plan and a really good health care plan. It's a choice between the status quo that McCain will force us to live through, and the failed chaos of a non-plan that Obama will inflict on us (if by some miracle he WERE elected in November, which he will not be). I like nothing about McCain's plan and I like nothing about Obama's pretend plan.

Tommy Christopher: As a loyal Hillary Clinton supporter, and lifelong Democrat, what is it about John McCain's economic plan that appeals to you?

Darragh Murphy: As a lifelong Democrat who cares deeply about the struggle that poor and working class people face, I like NOTHING about McCain's economic plan. My mother was on welfare when I was young. I've been in the position of not being able to pay my bills on time. Republicans do not speak for me or for people like me. They do not care about the struggle millions of Americans face every day. Neither does Barack Obama. He's a slick politician with a world-class marketing scheme. He is not ready for prime time and he will NOT improve the economy or the living standard of the millions of Americans who suffer and struggle every day. I will not give my support to a Democratic Party leadership that has the audacity to force and prop up such a supremely unready man to lead our country.

Tommy Christopher: As...you know...What parts of John McCain's Iraq policy do you like?

Darragh Murphy: Same as above – NOTHING. Though I do believe that America has serious enemies around the world. I want a Democrat in the White House who can handle these threats. Barack Obama is not that Democrat. He is NOT ready or experienced enough to address the issues we face in the Middle East, Afghanistan, North Korea, Russia, China, Pakistan etcetera ALL AT THE SAME TIME. He will flounder and fail. Our country will be at greater risk than it is today with our Clown of a Cowboy in Chief at the helm.

Tommy Christopher: Is your organization raising money to retire Hillary's campaign debt, and if not, why not?

Darragh Murphy: Yes. Our members, along with the millions of members of the Just Say No Deal coalition have been paying down her debt for the last three weeks. The final numbers are coming in somewhere around $7 million dollars. We urge our members to contribute to paying down the debt every day.

Tommy Christopher: Your mission statement says, "We consider (Hillary) to be the leader of the Democratic party and our members will continue to support her throughout this election cycle." Doesn't that conflict with you ignoring her pleas that you vote for Barack Obama?

Darragh Murphy: That's a good one! When Hillary calls me on the phone and tells me to shut up, I MIGHT consider it. In reality she is the de facto leader of the Party, because the inept current leadership has done everything it can to destroy her, short of calling for her imprisonment for daring to run for president. That being said, Puma PAC members are not blind followers. We believe the party belongs to us. She is the most competent and inspiring leader to come along in a VERY long time. We believe she can beat John McCain in November and lead the country back to greatness as president. We act on those assumptions and work to make it happen.

Tommy Christopher: Finally, what do you think the consequences to Hillary would be if your group were instrumental in getting McCain elected?

Darragh Murphy: If Obama loses to McCain, as he will, we will find it much easier to achieve our goal of wishing Howard Dean, Donna Brazile, and Nancy Pelosi a happy retirement. We will also be closer to making the irrelevancy of Hate-filled Propaganda Machines like the Daily Kos permanent.

Tommy Christopher: You can post your reply in the comments, or email me at TommyXtopher@AIM.com. I really hope you do, and I want you to know that I'm less interested in you proving you're a Democrat, and more in what you have to say about the issues.

Incidentally, you said you volunteered in Philly for the primary. Were you at the victory party? I wonder if we might have met.

Darragh Murphy: Yes! I was at the Victory Party at the Hyatt in Philadelphia on April 22nd, but I do not believe I met you – however maybe I did – if so, pardon me for not recalling. I was with my 16 year old daughter and was wearing an orange dress.

Please feel free to publish all or none of this, and to edit it as you see fit. Thank you for contacting me and for giving me the opportunity to respond.

Sincerely,

Darragh Murphy
Executive Director
Puma PAC
The Voice of the Voters
http://blog.pumapac.org


I am trying to arrange a meeting with Darragh, so I won't go that far into detailed rebuttal here. This is one of the weaknesses of email, the lack of interplay. I will point out that, although it is her stated goal to see John McCain elected in November, she strongly repudiates every one of his policy positions.

I would also point out that Freedom of Uterus may seem "settled" to her up there in Massachusetts, but a young woman in a state like Alabama might not have the same sense of safety. Roe is not a scare tactic. Supreme Court justices sit for lifetime appointments, and McCain has specifically promised judges who will overturn Roe v Wade. To pretend that isn't a real threat to women is wrong.

Other than the fact that McCain's policies suck, she and I agree on nothing here, but it is a hell of a conversation, one I look forward to continuing. I'm really curious to learn more about their donations to Hillary.

If I don't get to meet with her, I'll ask some follow-ups via email.

In the meantime, here is a clip of Darragh from Fox News.



Update: Here are the follow-up questions I posed to Darragh Murphy several days ago. She has not responded, even to say, "No comment."


On your responses, it seems you disagree completely with McCain, yet you are willing to hand the country to him to prove a point. Granted, it is arguably an important point. Assuming everything you say is correct, you are trading the war in Iraq, lifetime SCOTUS appointments, the economy, and heath care, for a shot at reforming the Democratic primary system. Does that seem like a fair trade?

You have said before that you wouldn't vote for Hillary as VP, even though she could influence policy, particularly health care. In fact, she already has. The Obama campaign credited her for its recently-announced tax credit for small businesses. How do you explain that?

If your main issue is the DNC, is there really no other way to effect reform than to elect John McCain president?

I was checking out your blog today, and I noticed several of your posters defending Obama from smears, which surprised me. There are self-proclaimed PUMAs on my site who spew every crazy smear they can think of. One calls him "boy." Another claims he is friends with terrorists, etc. What do you think about that kind of hysteria?

Why do you believe that Barack Obama is a sexist?

Do you believe that John McCain is not a sexist?

On Roe v Wade, I have to say, your attitude frightens me. The court is an iffy 5-4 now. One appointment could swing the court. Your argument seems to be that even without Roe, the states would not enact abortion restrictions. That may be true where you live, but what about states like Alabama, or South Dakota?

I must say, it is the Roe thing that raises flags for me with the PUMAs. Whenever I bring it up, they say it's "scare tactics" and that congress will prevent extreme appointments. Does that sound realistic to you?

I don't want to re-litigate the primary, but I am curious if you recognize the legitimacy of the arguments against you, disagree though you may? For example, that the "popular vote" argument underestimates the numbers in caucus states, etc.?

If you want to add anything on your own, feel free.