Porkulus peeves Paula Pennypacker

22 Feb 2009 05:39 pm
Posted by: Donna

And could she possibly BE any more sneering and smug and self-righteous about it?  Sophomoric too. She giving redheads everywhere a bad name.  Here’s what Paula Pennypacker had to say in the Viewpoints section of the Republic today:

Ok, it’s done. President Barack Obama has signed the largest spending bill in U.S. history. But make no mistake about this: This is not the transparent, bipartisan bill we were promised. Democrats continue to oppose tax cuts, and Republicans continue to oppose government spending. A famous historian once said that politics is the art of compromise – the ability to balance liberal aspiration with conservative instinct. On this measure, Obama has failed. Signing this bill will be one of the biggest mistakes of his presidency.

She’s described as a “Scottsdale business owner” in the Plugged In section of the Republic where she’s a commenter so I Googled her and it turns out she’s the proprietor of a business called Just For Redheads, an emporium of beauty products for – you guessed it. It also turns out that Ms. Pennypacker was a big wheel in the GOP in her native Toledo, Ohio. She and her husband Duane Abbajay moved to Scottsdale in 1998 to “start over in a more Republican friendly area”, a factoid that would pretty much eradicate any pretense of political neutrality she may try to maintain. I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that it’s quite likely she already had a chip on her shoulder where Barack Obama and any plans of his are concerned. Therefore, no amount of pointing out to her that Obama, in fact, did engage Republicans in the process and even made some concessions to them in the package but was soundly rebuffed by most of them, when it came time to vote, will be of any use. 

Republicans are so cute with this new-found concern they have with “bi-partisanship” and “transparency”, aren’t they? I’m sure during the last administration Paula lay awake nights worrying about the way Bush and Cheney were ramming their so-called mandate down the country’s throat. Sure she did. Just like I’m sure she vigorously protested the 2001 tax cut to the wealthy that has cost this country $1.3 trillion. That was called a “stimulus” too. Oh yeah, I’ll bet Ms. Pennypacker was heartsick over all the deregulation and removal of oversight on various industries like, you know, the mortgage one, that was going on during Bush’s tenure. I’ll bet. I’m going to hazard a guess that Paula supported the Iraq invasion. I wonder if she ever accused people who objected to the rush to war and the commitment of blood and treasure to something based on…to put it politely…malarkey, of being unpatriotic. Someone should tell her that we’ve spent nearly a trillion on that so far. Billions to build an embassy in Baghdad? Hunky dory. Billions to help unemployed Americans? Hells no.

Paula must not need the stimulus. Yay for her. Good to know that peddling ginger henna mascara and overpriced face gunk is so recession-proof. But I know one auburn tressed Diva who won’t EVER be patronizing her business.  I’ve got better things to do with my money than enrich someone so selfish and greedy and mean-spirited that the very thought of spending some money to give a leg up to her fellow citizens – some of whom are living in their cars right now – is the “one of the biggest mistakes” that could be made.  


  1. Comment by Paula Pennypacker on February 23, 2009 10:09 am

    Donna —

    Your blog came across my desk today and I would like to clear up a few points you made.

    If you do a bit more research into my political activism background you will find that I made a name for myself fighting my own party.
    Although I supported, as you said, the Bush tax cuts, I did not support the $700 B bank bailout, or the bailout of the Big Three. I believe in putting more money in the pockets of people not big government or corrupt unions.

    I did , in fact, support, the freeing of 50 million Iraqis, and the war on terror. I have a few former Muslim women friends who will be forever grateful for the progress the war in Iraq has had in stopping the brutality toward women in that country. Women can now run for office in Iraq. I have always wondered why the woman’s movement — made up of mostly Democrats — has been so silent in terms of how Islamofacists treat their females. A cause now championed by Mrs. Bush and Republicans.

    The cost of freedom — priceless!

  2. Comment by Donna on February 23, 2009 11:04 am

    Paula, if you believe in putting money in the pockets of people, why are you begrudging them this stimulus plan? Billions of it is tax cuts to working people. Who will turn around and spend some of it in the economy. Who knows? Some of them might be in the market for specialized cosmetics for redheads.

    Oh and progressive feminists in the U.S. were NOT silent about the oppression of women in the Middle East and Africa. We have been screaming about it at the top our lungs for decades, to little avail because, you know, female genital mutilation, forced veiling, and not allowing women to be educated is “cultural”. Ever hear of an organization called Feminist Majority? Mavis Leno (wife of Jay) lent her name to it and they worked throughout the 90s to draw attention to the brutal and misogynistic Taliban regime. You conservatives didn’t start caring about that stuff until you needed justification for war.

    By the way, how’s that “freedom” working out for the women of Iraq? Millions are trapped in poverty and misery. Oh, and guess what? Squads of “Islamofascist” religious police harass and assault women as they try and go about their business. Women are being murdered for perceived violations of Islam. Iraq went from being one of the most secular countries in the Middle East to now having Sharia law. Women are more oppressed in Iraq now than ever. Good job, Bush. Mission accomplished.

  3. Comment by Stephen on February 24, 2009 9:50 am

    Whenever I hear Republican faithful talk about the successes of the Iraq war (or the Bush presidency), I can’t help but imagine a homeless person digging aluminum cans out of a dumpster.

    “Look, we found something of value in this huge mess we made!!”

  4. Comment by Krista on February 25, 2009 12:40 am


    I enjoyed reading your comment and wanted to thank you for responding. However, I’m not sure where you got your information about Democratic women being “silent in terms of how Islamofacists treat their females”. I’m with Donna on that one; we’ve been talking (and writing) about it for years.

  5. Comment by Blogger on February 28, 2009 7:54 pm

    Wow, Donna. If anyone is sneering, smug and self righteous it’s you, darling diva. What a typical liberal tactic: don’t have an intelligent response? use the personal attack M.O. You’re good at it, too, Donna. I’ve read Paula’s blogs for months. She’s polite, honest, and fair in her comments about and to others. I’ve never seen her personally attack anyone regardless of their comments about her. You should take a page out of her “how to win friends and influence others.” For now, you simply sound like a wine-drinking, nasty-tempered and insecure diva (pretty typical as far as divas go). OOPS! guess I just resorted to your tactics.

    p.s. Paula doesn’t “require” an email address on her blog. I would guess that’s because she’s pretty secure in her comments and doesn’t worry about finding out who is saying what to her.

  6. Comment by John N. Moore on March 1, 2009 9:23 am

    Donna and Paula- I really enjoy your cat fight. I am familiar with Paula’s politics, having grown up with her sister, and following Paula’ career in Toledo’.Since I live in Phoenix, I also enjoy her Arizona Republic comments. Donna- she is not the far right wing proponent you make her out to be.
    As both an economist, a mortgage broker and an attorney, I know that the democratic stimulus program, based on all that we know about economics, will not work. But, that is not to say that it should not be tried and studied. If it works, it firmly cements trickle down economics, just this time from the government rather than the wealthy. If it fails, then the Democrats may be willing to work with the more moderate people in their party for the good of the people, and not just to increase the members of the democratic party..
    While there are many reasons for the recession, remember that the concept and promotion of sub-prime and adjustible mortgages started during the Clinton administration.
    Why not argue about something relevant like the SEC report on Mark-to- market accounting? The Democrates are not willing to touch this issue, but it would go a long way toward bank stability.
    I am glad that progressive feminists have been screaming their lungs out on Middle East treatment of women. But I suggest to you that another Toledo woman, Gloria Steinem, discovered early on that screaming does not work as well as doing, and the doing has been going on in Iraq.
    Anyway, I hope that the cat fight continues as both of you are intelligent and entertaining.

  7. Comment by Donna on March 1, 2009 10:29 pm

    John N. Moore, describing a disagreement between women as a “catfight” is just so much sexist assbaggery that I don’t know if I should even bother to address the rest of your comment. As for the “concept” of subprime mortgages, as it related to helping low-income minority borrowers buy homes, that started well before Clinton. It started in the late 70s, when the Community Reinvestment Act was passed, which prevented banks from “redlining” certain (poor, minority) communities out of the loans that would help them gain some ownership in their communities. Later on, there were efforts to lend people money, even if they didn’t qualify under normal loan guidelines.

    But let’s not confuse that with what was happening at the height of the housing bubble of 2002 to 2007. Fewer than 15% of the mortgages initiated during that time period were covered under the CRA. The vast majority were initiated by private finance companies like Countrywide. They were qualifying anyone who could fog a mirror and I don’t recall any mortgage agent at that time complaining how “The government is FORCING me to write these mortgages!” On the contrary, they were getting fat commissions for writing those NINJA loans and their managers were breathing down their necks to close, close, close them. You can try to spin whatever kind of revisionist yarn you want but anyone who wasn’t living under a rock here in Arizona knows otherwise.

  8. Comment by Donna on March 1, 2009 10:32 pm

    Blogger, since you’ve resorted to all my tactics, why are you complaining about my lack of decorum?

  9. Comment by John N. Moore on March 2, 2009 10:51 am

    Donna – It is no fun to blog if you cannot get your facts correct. The CRA was enacted during the democratic Carter administration. But the CRA has little to do with subprime mortgages, which started in 1993 under the Clinton administration. The first good attempt to regulate subprimes was with the FHA Mortgagee Letter 98-1 which established subprime underwriting standards. Apparently the Clinton administration was not happy with that regulation as the Clinton administration pushed to ease credit and allow more suspect subprime mortgages to be issued. You may wish to read a New York Times article published September 9 1999, which indicates that if Clinton continued to push for easy credit, that a bailout was likely. Contrary to your assertions that managers were breathing down LO’s necks, our company refused to do any more subprime loans after 2006. Note that if the democratic congress had acted in 2007 to regulate the industry, they would not have blame republicans now.
    Thus your blogs are a catfight, not an intelligent discussion, and I believe that you started the fight.

  10. Comment by Donna on March 2, 2009 11:43 am

    John, whether or not your own company did things differently does not change the fact that many mortgage lenders were acting in exactly the way I described. BTW, the Wall Street Journal reported in 2006 that 61% of subprime loan borrowers had credit scores high enough for prime loans. So I guess “liar loan” is an apt term, but it wasn’t necessarily always the borrower who was doing the lying, was it?

    And it was during the BUSH administration that the subprime housing bubble grew while he and the GOP-controlled Congress did nothing to rein it in. They did nothing to regulate Wall Street either. Honestly, the continued insistence of right wingers to blame Bill Clinton for everything the Connecticut Cowboy they voted for screwed up has gone beyond tiresome. Haven’t y’all been ordered by your leader, Rush, to blame everything on Obama now?

    Since you are still using the offensive and belittling term “catfight”, this is your last comment on this blog.

  11. Comment by Blogger on March 5, 2009 5:08 pm


    I learned long ago to fight fire with fire, my dear. And I suppose I need to be careful since the “democratic way” is to take away the right to free speech when the liberal doesn’t like what their hearing. I’m talking about your last comment to John N. Moore where you write: “Since you are still using the offensive and belittling term ‘catfight’, this is your last comment on this blog.” Wow, Donna. You actually censor comments that are offensive to you? Perhaps you should use some self-censor before you post as well?

  12. Comment by Donna on March 5, 2009 5:14 pm

    Blogger, there’s no such thing as free speech on a private website. Wanna say what you want? Get your own blog. That was your last comment too.

    On edit: Feeling magnanimous, I’m no longer going to call “Blogger” names. I’m still going to delete his posts.

  13. Comment by Paula M. Pennypacker on March 25, 2009 2:48 pm

    Hey Paula I always enjoy reading what another Paula Pennypacker has to say. You do sound as if you where me and I was you. Interesting to say the least!

  14. Comment by ernst on March 26, 2009 4:34 pm

    Dear Ms. Pennypacker,
    Your comments in the AZ. Republic under “Plugged in” on March 22 are dangerous for the well being of our society and our families. Any more relaxing of US or Mexican drug laws will harm families and overload government services for centuries and could possibly destroy our society. I know many families who have had to deal with drug addictions by their children who were able to hide them until too late and it resulted in educational restriction, mental impairment, or death. Legalization will not prevent this but will only lead to wider availabiity, cheaper cost, and the view of the young that it is “accepted” by the government so it’s OK. Please change your position on this issue!

  15. Comment by Donna on March 26, 2009 4:51 pm

    I think it’s time for Paula to get her own blog because my comments section isn’t really a good venue.

  16. Comment by mike mcmahon on December 6, 2009 3:42 pm

    You sound like a girl that needs to get laid so as to release this pent up frustration you exhibit.

  17. Comment by Donna on December 6, 2009 7:08 pm

    You might be right, Mike! Do you know any attractive guys?

    Nah, probably not.

  18. Comment by Ron Fraser on December 7, 2009 11:54 am

    Wow, this string about Paula is hilarious! After seeing her neo-con right wing garbage week after week in the AZ Republic, I’m wondering “who the hell is she and why am i being subjected to this week after week?” After stumbling upon this blog, I now have a better idea. It is amazing how the Republicans have created this incredible mess our country is in, but these right-wing nuts like Paula love to “blame it all on Obama”. I won’t rehash the crimes of the Bush administration or even bring up the mess AZ is in from our Republican controlled legislature, but here is a favorite…………John McCain with support from mini-me (John Kyl) liles to call any attempt to spend tax dollars on US citizens (stimulus/health care reform) as “generational theft”. But when it comes to spending a trillion dollars to destroy and re-build other countries, not to mention killing thousands of innnocent civilians and our own troops, that is all good! The Republican endless war machine will never change, and god forbid that we ever want to spend any tax dollars for the benefit of our citizens! And by the way, don’t you even think about messing with the insurance company campaign contributions – those are off limits. Same as the government healthcare we so graciously provide those Republican criminals – it’s good enough for them, but not good for you, the taxpayer!

  19. Comment by Paula on April 9, 2010 2:26 pm

    Yep and now I’m running for 8th district representative so that I can push for more counter-productive right-wing edicts on you.

    Vote for me.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a comment

Democratic Diva is proudly powered by WordPress and WPDesigner.