Let the Swift-boating of Sanders' civil rights record begin! (DKOS)

[thereismore]

from DailyKos:


The CBC-PAC endorsed Clinton today. As Keith Ellison pointed out, this was the PAC, so they took no vote of the membership. In fact, a bunch of white lobbyists voted on the decision.

I have the utmost respect for John Lewis, and have no problem with him endorsing whoever he wants. But he made some serious bullshit statements that should not go unanswered.

At the press conference, John Lewis said of Sanders’ civil rights work, “I never saw him, I never met him” and that “he met the Clintons.”

This is beyond bizarre. Is Lewis suggesting that if he didn’t meet a member of a million-person movement, they weren’t there? Seems he’s trying to assail Sanders’ character by implying that Sanders is lying about being at the March on Washington. Sounds a lot like what the Swift-boaters did to Kerry. First, Clinton people were saying “so what? you marched with MLK. Lots of people did.” Now, they’re implying he wasn’t even there. Like Bush tried to turn Kerry’s military heroism into a negative, Hillary’s people are trying to turn Sanders’ commendable civil rights record into a negative.

What is even more bizarre is the second part. Lewis didn’t “meet” the Clintons at civil rights marches. Hillary was literally a teenager volunteering for Goldwater, who supported segregation, while Sanders was getting arrested for protesting segregation. What the hell is he talking about?

My own two-cents on this situation is this: first off, not sure this matters much. Lewis endorsed Hillary over Obama and we all know how that turned out. Secondly, if this story does get attention, it will have the Streisand effect: by trying to undermine Sanders’ civil rights record, they are merely drawing more national attention to Sanders’ civil rights record.

Strap in, folks. The real ugliness has begun. It’s only getting worse from here.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/02/11/1483595/-Hillary-gets-John-Lewis-to-Swift-Boat-Sanders-civil-rights-record

[DURHAM D]

1. I encourage everyone to actually watch the video.

He was asked a question. He answered it.

[jillan]

3. I did and I feel like John Lewis is being used as a political pawn, and I find that very disturbing.

He never said anything other than he didn't meet Bernie at the time.

[DURHAM D]

6. Correct. Didn't meet him at the time.

The idea that he can be used is a colossal insult to John's integrity.

[Empowerer]

11. When someone criticizes Hillary, they're just honestly speaking their mind. But John Lewis honestly

answers a question and he's a "political pawn?"

FYI, not only is Bernie NOT being "swift boated" but the Clinton campaign, but his own supporters are doing him serious damage with their condescension toward African Americans - and don't seem to even realize they're doing it.

[jillan]

12. John Lewis did NOT say anything negative about Bernie! Yet certain people sure are trying to

twist it around to make it sound like he did.

Shameful!!

[Armstead]

16. I saw it and my jaw dropped

He did not merely say "No we never met during that period." I wouldn't hacve given it a seconds thought if he had.

But he made it a point to put an ugly twist on it.

I was shocked to hear such political bile coming from him, as it was completely out of character -- at least his public character.

[jillan]

20. Did he really take a swipe at Bernie? I don't know if I take it that way - here are his comments.

When a reporter asked Lewis to comment on Sanders' involvement in the movement—Sanders as a college student at the University of Chicago was active in civil rights work—the congressman brusquely interrupted him. "Well, to be very frank, I'm going to cut you off, but I never saw him, I never met him," Lewis said. "I'm a chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee for three years, from 1963 to 1966. I was involved in the sit-ins, the freedom rides, the March on Washington, the march from Selma to Montgomery, and directed their voter education project for six years. But I met Hillary Clinton. I met President Clinton."

Bernie was in Chicago at the time. It's no surprise that they didn't meet until later in Congress.

[Armstead]

21. Why the need for a litany of how involved he was in response to that question?

It's called innuendo.

"I was everywhere in the civil rights movement and I never met him" therefore by extension, Bernie is a fraud who was not really active in the movement.

If it were merely an innocent matter of differing perception, the remark would have gone unnoticed. I saw it in a later news reports described as a "stinging rebuke" to Sanders.

[AzDar]

27. Exactly. Ugly and not worthy of a man like Rep. Lewis...

[Oilwellian]

74. And also say this:

"Well, to be very frank, I'm going to cut you off.

He should have just given kudos to Bernie for his activism during the civil rights movement. It should have been no big deal. They were working toward the same goals for chrissake.

On edit: I also wanted to add, there were millions who participated in that movement, Congressman Lewis was a leader in that movement, Bernie was a college kid several states away, participating in the same movement and was just an activist. Of course he never met him. And what does that have to do with anything?

[LiberalArkie]

32. Clinton did not get out of High School until 1964. Then in college and intern for Bill Fulbright.

How did they meet?
Is he saying he met President Clinton while Clinton was president? Probably so. Is he saying that the whole time he has been in congress he has never seen Bernie or met him?

[Autumn]

73. John Lewis met Bill Clinton in 1991 when an aide asked if he would support Bill's presidency

and introduced them.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1204819

[0rganism]

50. i think it's the part about meeting the Clintons that doesn't sit well

"...I never saw him, I never met him," Lewis said (about Bernie)
"But I met Hillary Clinton. I met President Clinton."

if we restrict consideration of his statement to the time period he mentions explicitly, 1963-66, then it's no surprise he says he didn't meet Bernie Sanders, a civil rights activist in Chicago. what is surprising is his insinuation (and yes, the timing is directly implied) that he met the Clintons at this time. both Hillary and Bill were teenagers, Hillary would have been a Goldwater Girl at the time, and Bill was interning with Sen. Fullbright (a pro-segregationist). if he meant he met them much later, then why not apply that same standard to Sen. Sanders? are we to believe Lewis never met Sanders when they were both serving in congress?

best case, i think one could possibly construe the statement as straight-up inconsistent and unintentionally misleading.

[NowSam]

63. Thanks for the clarity

Doesn't sound like a negative thing at all unless his tonality suggested something else. It's just another tricky day for my my man Bernie and there will be lots of them coming up - I predict a win at the debate tonight for Bernie and more love coming from those wh still haven't heard the whole message.

I predict a very influential endorsement is coming and it will be timely for SC that will help people really take a look at what Bernie is proposing and how it is better than more of what we have been getting for decades.

I don't like labels that divide communities. I want to see us all stand together because when we stand together there is nothing we can't do. Oh yeah, that is what Bernie says.

Better days coming, friends.

[Armstead]

15. He answered it in a nasty way filled with innuendo.

[Jarqui]

61. Absolutely nt

[HooptieWagon]

2. I have to admit the multi-pronged attack was well coordinated.

David Brock is doing his part online. It's expected of he and the Clintons, but I'm disappointed that John Zlewis is participating in such slime.

[jillan]

5. Read my post above, I have a feeling he was used as a political pawn.

That his words were twisted to mean something that he never said.

[brooklynite]

4. Can I suggest you edit the title?

"KOS" is the handle of Markos Moulitas, the Daily Kos site owner (and a Clinton supporter). This was not written by him.

"DKOS" is the standard abbreviation for something cross-posted from their site.

[thereismore]

14. Done. Thanks. nt

[DrewFlorida]

7. Good points! I agree!

While I have much respect for John Lewis, it seems his comments regarding Bernie Sanders are ill conceived and, while factually accurate, not meaningful in a fair look at the subject!

Go Bernie!

[floriduck]

25. I'm not sure they are factually accurate.

How did he meet the Goldwater supporting Hillary Clinton at that time? Even Mother Jones disputes that claim.

[DrewFlorida]

69. good point!

[Oilwellian]

75. Which is the beauty of this story

People will be curious and learn things.

[Nanjeanne]

8. It's so sad that people I truly respect cannot simply endorse their candidate with reasons why

and leave out the negative attacks on her opponent.

John Lewis is a civil rights legend. He could be a great asset for Clinton. Instead this whole thing is being "analyzed" and "investigated" and people who probably get along and support the majority of the same things are being pitted against each other. I think - like Gloria and Madeleine - this will only make Hillary look desparate.

I'm disappointed that Lewis went there - but it is what it is. I do blame the Clinton campaign because I'm quite sure if she wanted her surrogates to step out on the campaign trail and laud her without the demeaning of Sanders - they would easily do it.

Every day in every way - Clinton is a disappointment to me.

[Armstead]

19. I'm wayytyyy beyond disappointment in her.

She crossed that threshold for me in 2008 with her similar attempts to slime Obama.

[CanonRay]

9. I admire Lewis, but that was a shitty thing to say/imply

[Empowerer]

13. Based on recent history on this board, anything short of "Hillary SUCKS and I'm feeling the BERN!"

is a "sh*tty thing to say."

[thereismore]

17. No. Thoughtful discussion is not being poo pooed on DU. Emotional outbursts like yours do not

elicit respect, however.

[AtomicKitten]

10. k/r

[restorefreedom]

18. hold on tight,

it gets bumpy from here...

[beam me up scottie]

23. Aye, laddie.

[restorefreedom]

24. aye, indeed :) nt

[cascadiance]

22. I think that CBC-*PAC* endorsed her and NOT the CBC speaks to the power of money on endorsements!

When this PAC endorses Clinton, without even the advice of the CBC itself before making the endorsement, it speaks to the power of how money is influencing endorsements this election in the era of Citizen's United and McCutcheon.

When the CORPORATE media participates in helping the CBC-PAC "accidentally" MASQUERADING as the CBC itself to imply that the CBC itself endorsed Clinton, I think it speaks a lot for the way the media is manipulating messaging towards money influence, and that this sort of endorsement is a way that money is in fact *pressuring* the CBC itself in to falling in line with its own actions.

To me this should show that endorsements should be disregarded that much more in this election as just a symptom of the corruption that is so rampant in our government as opposed to real honest recommendations on who should best be the leader representing people's interests in our country.

[Oilwellian]

77. Here's another example of money shaking down Congress

This is the reason why the peoples business can't get done.
This was reported a year ago:

Wall Street’s political shakedown: We’ll stop funding Dems if Elizabeth Warren won’t sit down and shut up

If ever you doubted that our obscene campaign finance regime constitutes a form of legalized bribery, consider this: Reuters reports today that officials at top Wall Street banks recently convened to discuss how they could convince Democrats “to soften their party’s tone” toward the financial industry, and among the options now under consideration is halting campaign donations to Senate Democrats unless they rein in progressive populists like Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH).

The banks represented at the Washington meeting included Citigroup, JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs and Bank of America, according to the report, and though the idea of withholding campaign contributions did not arise at that gathering, it has since been floated in conversations among representatives from the banks.

While the action would only be taken against Senate Democrats, the report states that Democrats are fretting about larger repercussions:

The amount of money at stake, a maximum of $15,000 per bank, means the gesture is symbolic rather than material

Moreover, banks’ hostility toward Warren, who is not a presidential candidate, will not have a direct impact on the presumed Democratic front runner in the White House race, Hillary Clinton. That’s because their fund-raising groups focus on congressional races rather than the presidential election

Still, political strategists say Clinton could struggle to raise money among Wall Street financiers who worry that Democrats are becoming less business friendly.

Salon

[AzDar]

26. The Clintons are SLIMY... many who may innocently associate with them come away covered in ooze.

[oasis]

46. I've met both, separately, on several occasions. No ooze, only glow

followed the encounters. Maybe you should give it a try.

[elmac]

59. BJ Bill sure is

I wouldn't buy a used car from that guy.

[SammyWinstonJack]

66. Very slimy.

[bravenak]

28. Really? Is this the hill?

ASk yoursef how this looks from outside your peergroup to those viters you want to attract.
Sometimes, it is best to just say nothing if saying something will ruin your chances. He said nothing wrong. He does not have to be impressed. He did MORE. He did not meet Bernie.
He never said he met 'The Clintons' way back when. What he was indicating is that he and Bernie do not have a relationship. They were in Congress together. Why no relationship? That is what needs to be asked. Why.

[thereismore]

41. Oh bravenak, maybe they don't like each other's personality.

After all, John Lewis did endorse Hillary in 2008. He only switched to Obama after Georgia overwhelmingly voted for him.
He was wrong then, regardless of his previous political history.

[bravenak]

45. I immediately assumed they rub each other the wrong way

Not friends. Look, people are going to say thing that are unflattering about Bernie. If every unflattering thing gets a big disproportionate respinse, the respinse will be the story, not the nit picked details. Please. Do yourselves a big solid and learn to pick your battles.

If I got all up in arms everytime I felt somebody was trashing Obama my arms would fall off.

[saidsimplesimon]

29. Not worse, same old sticicht

We can refuse to accept the political cry "divide and conquer". It's a losing strategy.

[Gman]

30. This imaginary civil rights record

Is just that. Aside from some guy in a pcture behind Martin that's supposed to be Sanders, what civil rights record?

The thing is, I haven't heard Sanders himself say one iota about his civil rights record. I think the whole thing has been conjured up by his supporters largely in response to the embarrassing BLM debacle. His staff and supporters are good at making their candidate look real bad, if nothing else.

[thereismore]

33. What record? Lookie here. There is a newspaper record of his arrest and more.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2016/02/bernie-sanders-core-university-chicago

[Gman]

38. Mmmmkay.... From hundreds of miles away

Not exactly what I would call an outstanding record. He obviously stayed away from the South.

[thereismore]

43. Stayed away from the South?? As did Obama, as did a lot of good people. You are being blind. nt

[Gman]

48. Terribly unimpressed

Not blind. No hero worship here.

[SoapBox]

36. Soooo....what exactly is the CBC (or at least those that were in the photo op

today) doing about the disproportionate amount of African Americans being incarcerated in those For Profit Prisons?

Not much I guess, since the CBC PAC even took a donation from the industry.

[Gman]

40. Yeah well, you overlook the fact that

The CBC controls the CBC pac. They are not independent.

[SoapBox]

53. Link please.

The Congressional Black Caucus, is in control of the PAC...do you have a page for info?

The move to endorse was certainly not 100% of the caucus.

[backscatter712]

57. Karl Rove, is that you? n/t

[Gman]

60. Sanders has no significant civil rights record to speak of

And that's all you've got to say?

[ericson00]

31. who is Keith Ellison, honestly? He's achieved nada

so I don't give an F what he says.

[SoapBox]

34. Throwing another under the bus...because he doesn't say what the Clintons want.

Yesterday it was...Reverend Sharpton doesn't speak for the community, because he met with Bernie in Harlem.

A very tiresome pattern...African Americans side with Hill, yay...Andrican Americans side (or just talk to) Bernie...boo!

Tiresome.

[Arazi]

37. And if its a white DUer who posts about an AA Sanders endorsement?

watch out - that's "condescending"

When a white DUer posts an AA Clinton endorsement?

Crickets

And for the record, Keith Ellison rocks!!!

[SoapBox]

56. Agree...Ellison rocks!

[Arazi]

35. Kicked and Recced eom

[SoapBox]

39. K & R!

Fully agree, Mr. Lewis can endorse whoever he wants but then...it goes down hill with some of his claims.

He then just becomes another Entrenched Elite Establishment type that are most fearful of having their boat rocked.

He had a great record but this just soils it.

Zaid Jilani has posted some interesting comments out of Mr. Lewis' 1994 book about Bill Clinton and the death penalty...so he supports Hillary, who supports capital punishment?

https://mobile.twitter.com/ZaidJilani/status/697905209385709568

https://mobile.twitter.com/ZaidJilani/status/697905209385709568/photo/1


https://mobile.twitter.com/ZaidJilani/status/697905511509815296

https://mobile.twitter.com/ZaidJilani/status/697905511509815296/photo/1

[dorkzilla]

42. Honestly I’m more shocked that he went along with the “fake” endorsement

It was a pac and not the CBC that endorsed her, and he didn’t think this was going to come out?

The whole affair just makes him look bad.

[George II]

44. The endorsement was based on a near unanimous vote (would have been unanimous if....

.....there were not 2 abstentions) of the CBCPAC Board, ALL of whom are black members of the CBC.

The vote was 19 for Clinton, 0 for Sanders, and 2 abstentions.

The "bunch of white lobbyists voted on the decision" stuff is totally false.

You can find the CBCPAC Press Release here:

http://www.cbcpac.org/press-releases/congressional-black-caucus%C2%A0pac-endorses-hillary-clinton-president-united-states

You can find the list of Board members with their photographs here:

http://www.cbcpac.org/leadership

It most certainly is NOT a "bunch of white lobbyists".

[Vattel]

47. yep, swift-boating is exactly what is happening.

[mikehiggins]

58. ATTEMPTED swift boating is what is happening

those damn kids with their intertubes are screwing up the program.

[Vattel]

67. lol, I hope you are right

[Tarc]

49. "Lewis endorsed Hillary over Obama" ?

Initially, yes, but you're leaving out the fact that he switched on Feb 14th, 2008.

Black Leader Changes Endorsement to Obama

[thereismore]

51. Yes of course. He did it after his own State voted overwhelmingly for Obama in the primary.

He relented to public opinion.

[PatrynXX]

52. rest of the media including politico

didn't notice they said the CBC. still saying it even after people correct them but hey Politico used to be the Republican site and it still is. so naturally Hillary is a Conservadem they are printing the spew she puts out

[xloadiex]

54. Holy Cow!

I'm just watching CBS national news touting Hillary's lead when it comes to civil rights. They said Clintons campaign is saying Sanders is a "Johhny Come Lately" when it comes to civil rights. I am speechless that they would sink this low.

[backscatter712]

65. I wouldn't be talking "Johnny Come Lately" on civil rights issues if I were Hillary.

Hillary took until 2013 to "evolve" on LGBT rights.

Until then, it was

[liberal_at_heart]

55. I'm not usually the fighting type but they just insist don't they? Bring it on.

This is going to be fun.

Go Bernie!

[Odin2005]

62. Hillary is a Democratic equivalent of Richard Nixon.

She has no principles, she just wants power and is willing to do any shenanigans and rat-fucking necessary.

[Purveyor]

68. Courtesy Report: Results of your Jury Service

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Thu Feb 11, 2016, 03:54 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Hillary is a Democratic equivalent of Richard Nixon.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1204647

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is the second example of this poster running around equating HRC with Nixon. And now Rat-FN. Jury, please try to bring back some decorum to DU. As Dems we should be able to disagree, agreeably.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Feb 11, 2016, 04:13 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Almost started to leave it to highlight hatred, decided to hide for lack of class.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is an OPINION - not hideworthy
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Isn't the definition of rat-fucking explained as political sabotage? Would it be considered more decorous to declare that potential political nominees often engage in "kitchen-sinking" during their campaigns? Using the term "decorum" in relation to any stumping during the primaries, especially here at DU, rings hollow to me, considering some things that have already been done by supporters of certain Democratic candidates.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: The terminology involving rats does seems quite unnecessary.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I'd probably get banned from DU if I said what I wanted to say here.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Odin2005]

71. Oh for fucks sake.

[SammyWinstonJack]

64. The sink has been thrown

[moondust]

70. Interesting post from the link.

For the record, this is what John Lewis said — John Lewis questions Sanders on civil rights involvement

“To be very frank, I never saw him, I never met him,” Lewis said during the CBC PAC's endorsement.
“I chaired the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee for three years, from 1963-1966. I was involved in sit-ins, Freedom Rides, the March on Washington, the March from Selma to Montgomery ... but I met Hillary Clinton, I met President Clinton.”

Also for the record, Neither of the Clintons was involved in Civil Rights.

During the years in question, Hillary was a Republican, Campaigning for Barry Goldwater. Not a Civil Rights fan. She did not change her political orientation until 1968.

As regards Bill Clinton, from 1964 to 1967, he was an intern, and then a clerk in Senator Fulbright’s office. Not another fan of Civil Rights either. Senator Fulbright is well known for filibustering the Civil Rights Bill

Fulbright was certainly no “ally” of black Americans. Bitterly racist, he fought to protect the Jim Crow laws that denied black citizens their constitutional rights. In 1956 Fulbright was one of ninety-nine congressional Democrats to sign the Southern Manifesto, which declared that the Southern states had a right to keep their populations segregated by race. (It should be mentioned in passing that only two Republicans signed the document.)

In 1964 Fulbright was one of a group of tenacious Democrats who filibustered for fifty-seven days in an attempt to block the Civil Rights Act that outlawed segregation in public accommodations.

So I think John Lewis is definitely guilty of a faulty memory at best, and outright lying at worst

clonal antibody

[GreatGazoo]

72. Yes unfortunately it will get worse

Team Clinton seems prepared to pursue this failed strategy to its self defeating conclusion. If all their negativity and lies push Sanders numbers even higher then they will simply try putting out their fire with even more gasoline.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

76. SNCC: Was SBS a member of this revolutionary

organization, headed for 3 years by now-Congressperson John Lewis? If so, why doesn't SBS claim credit? Did he shirk the almost-suicidal Freedom Rides? If I were claiming to be a 21st century revolutionary, I'd certainly tout my SNCC past to claim street cred now.