Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

riversedge

(70,092 posts)
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 01:19 AM Sep 2015

Why Hillary Clinton Has the Best Track Record on Women's Issues

Last edited Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:45 AM - Edit history (1)

So true. Thank you Hillary
"The best predictor of future performance is past performance, and when it comes to women's issues, the record is clear..."



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrea-dew-steele/why-hillary-clinton-has-t_b_8073982.html
Andrea Dew Steele

Why Hillary Clinton Has the Best Track Record on Women's Issues




Posted: 09/01/2015 7:04 pm EDT Updated: 09/01/2015 7:59 pm EDT



HILLARY CLINTON



"Women's rights are human rights."
This simple sentence declared by then-First Lady Hillary Clinton at the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995 resonated around the world. Millions of women heard this as a declaration that they mattered, that their daughters mattered. The issue of women's rights and equality has persisted as the cornerstone of Hillary's political career. Over and over again, she has reinforced her famous speech with concrete actions -- as First Lady, Senator and Secretary of State -- fighting for women's rights domestically and internationally. Hillary Clinton's record on women's rights speaks for itself. While other candidates may have progressive proposals and ideas, I urge their supporters to cite tangible policy changes that have benefited women in this country and abroad.

If we are to honestly consider the issues that affect women and families, Hillary has consistently and passionately advocated for gender equality and family friendly policies. Throughout her time in the Senate, she championed gender equity legislation and used her status in the world to shine a light on issues of importance to women and girls.

In terms of family planning and reproductive rights, Hillary has unwaveringly supported a woman's right to choose and has fought for access to family planning resources that would empower women to make their own decisions about their bodies. Her historic refrain that abortions should be "safe, legal and rare" should be the mantra for all leaders who want to make sure birth control is easily accessible for all women. She has publicly condemned the Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby ruling limiting birth control access for employees and strongly supports Planned Parenthood's work. Hillary has spoken in no uncertain terms in defense of Roe v. Wade, and sponsored legislation to reduce the number of abortions through access to birth control and sex education.

Globally, no candidate has done more for women's rights than Secretary Clinton. In her time as Secretary of State, she appointed the first-ever Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women's Issues at the State Department; oversaw the creation of the U.S. National Action Plan on Women, Peace, and Security; and introduced the Global Health Initiative (GHI), investing $63 billion to help partner countries provide robust maternal and infant health services. Secretary Clinton has worked tirelessly to elevate women's rights as the key towards economic prosperity and global stability. Her public and private initiatives have appropriated millions of dollars towards providing secondary education to young girls around the world, and tackling the obstacles that face at-risk youths..................

..................

198 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why Hillary Clinton Has the Best Track Record on Women's Issues (Original Post) riversedge Sep 2015 OP
Not if you consider her opposition to same-sex marriage and support of banning late term abortions. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #1
Oh come on!!!!' VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #2
Clinton Seeking Shared Ground Over Abortions beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #3
Clinton votes against late term. Hillary Clinton Scolds US House for Banning Late-Term seabeyond Sep 2015 #52
Her EXACT WORDS: "I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions" beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #54
the only vote she voted nay.... went after repugs ass recently. seabeyond Sep 2015 #55
Because of the exception, she still supported the ban. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #66
the onyly vote... she voted NAY seabeyond Sep 2015 #68
But she said she supported banning late term abortions. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #70
she voted NAY against ban on late term abortions seabeyond Sep 2015 #71
That doesn't contradict what I posted. She still supported banning late term abortions. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #73
2003 she voted NAY on ban on late term abortions. seabeyond Sep 2015 #75
That's good. Now how does that prove I was wrong when I said she supported banning them? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #76
2003 she vote nay on late term abortion seabeyond Sep 2015 #77
How does that prove I was wrong? Answer that and we'll be done. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #78
her bottom line has ALWAYS been saying NAY to a ban on late term abortion. whether you are done or seabeyond Sep 2015 #80
Okay so you admit I was right. Good. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #83
Actions speak louder than words.. VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #100
Why? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #101
Sicks and syones may break my bones VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #104
Bingo. earthside Sep 2015 #107
What's my "identity"? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #108
Are you female? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #115
Where did I tell anyone what to believe? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #116
You did it earlier this week VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #119
Did I? I don't remember telling anyone what to believe. Got a link? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #120
Yes you did VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #123
??? Where's the link where I told someone what to believe? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #124
So did you disagree with it them VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #127
LOL! Disagree with what? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #128
Not your strong suit VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #130
Reading your mind? I don't think it anyone's strong suit. Or anyone's wish. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #133
Yes....in this case it really does... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #109
Who's a white hetero male? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #110
Are you female? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #112
Why would that matter? Would it change the facts I posted? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #114
It matters big time VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #117
Yes. I definitely think women can speak for themselves. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #118
And ACT for themselves VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #121
Oh, definitely. Too "buddy". Whatever that means. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #122
Dont fiegn ignorance VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #125
I have no idea what you're on about. Perhaps you should be more clear. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #126
You know exactly what I am talking about VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #129
My peers are men? Really? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #131
It proves disingenousness VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #98
How is posting facts disingenuous? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #99
Because actions speak louder than words... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #102
You keep using that word... beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #103
No I do nott think you know the difference VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #105
Why? Men can't post facts? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #106
What "facts"? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #111
Here: beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #113
words... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #132
Words "I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions" beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #135
"Can" being the operative word here VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #137
Where do you see "male telling females about thier lady parts.."? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #138
... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #140
Why can't you answer? You mean the men I work with are my peers? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #142
Words VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #143
How does that disprove her own words here: beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #145
Because... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #150
That's exactly what I posted! VERY GOOD! *bmus claps* beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #152
Except you denied she said "can" VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #157
Where did I deny she said "can"? I posted the same quote. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #158
You just did upthread, VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #161
Where? Post# or link. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #162
Where you tried to also creatively VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #165
Where did I edit anything?: beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #166
But didnt.... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #167
What did I say her words meant "when they were made...."? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #169
I have no idea WTF you are trying to say.... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #172
You tell me what I said that was false and what I "edited". beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #173
Perhaps, you tell me why you keep posting her words VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #174
Because you said I was being disingenuous and editing her words. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #175
And perhaps you are reading something into them VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #178
How is posting her own words taking them out of context? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #179
By posting her actions VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #181
Keep digging! beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #183
I am not the one peddling VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #186
Yeah, you kind of are. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #187
No actually I am not VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #188
And that proves that what I posted was false and/or edited? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #189
It proves you are the one peddling feces.... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #190
How? Which post(s) exactly was it peddled in? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #191
All of them in this discussion apparently... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #192
So that proves the quote I posted was false and/or edited how? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #193
Post removed Post removed Sep 2015 #144
BUSTED! beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #146
it was a childish game. seabeyond Sep 2015 #149
She started it. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #151
asking a question? no questions allowed. that is starting something, in your book. done. again. seabeyond Sep 2015 #154
Bye! beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #155
I am not the one tat VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #153
I posted facts, you argued, then you posted the same facts. But I think I know better? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #156
I posted the fact that she said "can"...which VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #159
What post did I deny that in? Link? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #160
Yes she supported banning late term abortions Autumn Sep 2015 #194
Thank you. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #195
Ah BMUS. You are a better woman than I Autumn Sep 2015 #196
"Can" is very different than would VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #134
Can: be able to/be permitted to or iow would beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #136
Definition VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #139
She didn't say "I have said many times that I CAN support a ban on late-term abortions"? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #141
Oh really? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #147
I'm not arguing, I'm posting her own words. You don't seem to like them. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #148
But fox newsified it by "creatively" editting VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #163
I posted the exact quote from ontheissues. What part did I edit? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #164
So then WTF point were you trying to make? VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #168
I posted her own words to prove she supported a ban on late term abortions. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #171
No by your own definition in fact VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #176
Prove it. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #180
She voted no... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #184
That proves she never said she supported a ban? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #185
Hillary on the sanctity of marriage: beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #5
Bernie on "What Women Want." MADem Sep 2015 #7
"old shit"? Hillary didn't support marriage equality until 2013. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #8
Hillary never once suggested any of the stuff Sanders suggested in his little opus. MADem Sep 2015 #10
Unlike Bernie she opposed equal rights for lgbt people and wanted to ban late term abortions. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #12
No--this is sick, sad and hilarious--all at once. MADem Sep 2015 #22
Why are you so obsessed with that essay? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #23
Why are you so obsessed with old positions that HRC does not hold? MADem Sep 2015 #26
And like I said neither 2013 or 2000 is ancient history. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #27
If her position has changed, and it is clear it has changed, your only purpose is to throw shade. MADem Sep 2015 #28
Citing her civil rights record is not "misrepresenting" her position. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #30
Well, then "citing" Sanders views on male-female relationships, and his view of women as "dependent" MADem Sep 2015 #32
Old material - she only started supporting marriage equality 2 years ago: beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #34
Your frantic gish gallop doesn't change the fact that you've misrepresented her current views. MADem Sep 2015 #36
Where did I misrepresent them? Point it out. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #37
You started in post one, and you kept on going from there. MADem Sep 2015 #40
Where? Post the exact words where I misrepresented her "current stance on issues". beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #41
You can read as well as the next person. MADem Sep 2015 #42
Exact quote "I can't trust someone who NEEDED TO EVOLVE on civil rights to support mine." beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #43
No, it's not as clear as you want to pretend it is, now. MADem Sep 2015 #44
Really? Which one of these statements left her current positions unclear: beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #46
You focus on her past positions and fail to articulate her current ones. MADem Sep 2015 #48
"Hillary Has the Best Track Record on Women's Issues" means her PAST RECORD matters. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #50
Keep posting those rape fantasies and ignoring her record. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #59
You are hyper-replying so I'll leave you to it. One answer is sufficient. MADem Sep 2015 #82
Because I said that's what right wing nut jobs do, focus on sex instead of issues? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #86
It's not a gish gallop. BMUS is sticking to one subject. Scootaloo Sep 2015 #95
Nope because he never tried to restrict anyone's rights. She did. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #63
Are you seriously saying we did not use to have laws that made women dependant? ieoeja Sep 2015 #170
Not sure how you made THAT leap, but thanks for playing. MADem Sep 2015 #197
she opposed marriage equality, as did sanders until 2009. staying QUIET on the issue si NOT support seabeyond Sep 2015 #57
Bernie voted against DOMA in 1996. That vote WAS him supporting marriage equality. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #62
as you have been told repeatedly, was not voting to protect marriage equality. sanders stayed quiet seabeyond Sep 2015 #64
WHEN did he stay quiet? What interview? You keep saying that but you never post proof. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #65
thru out his career until 2009 when he first stood up for marriage equality. seabeyond Sep 2015 #67
That's your word, it's not proof. Try again. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #69
ONE time sanders used the words, marriage equality before 2009. silence does not equal support seabeyond Sep 2015 #72
He voted against DOMA, that means he voiced his support of marriage equality. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #74
sanders stayed silent, certainly did not mention marriage equality. those who spoke voted against seabeyond Sep 2015 #79
LOL! That's your proof? An interview that never happened? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #81
yes. i have made the point repeatedly. silence is not support. you got it. seabeyond Sep 2015 #85
So not saying something = saying something? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #89
"So not saying something = saying something?" i would think this would be an obvious answer for you seabeyond Sep 2015 #91
So Hillary does support barbecuing puppies. Wow. That's awful. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #92
Late term abortion only votes count. Marriage equality only words count. ieoeja Sep 2015 #177
Exactly. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #182
They have to go back into the archives to find anything to gripe about.... MADem Sep 2015 #6
Many wanted to know what she did as S of STATE. The op has some of her accomplishments. riversedge Sep 2015 #88
Yes. MADem Sep 2015 #90
Really...You Laugh Off Lesbian Identified Women? billhicks76 Sep 2015 #13
I see u mentioned Bernie. I have an idea Cali_Democrat Sep 2015 #17
Because one has been right all along. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #18
You don't give her any credit at all--you keep repeating her old positions, and then get mad MADem Sep 2015 #29
The title of the op is "Why Hillary Clinton Has the Best Track Record on Women's Issues" beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #31
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't matter. MADem Sep 2015 #33
An old essay doesn't equal not supporting civil rights. But this 40 year old letter matters too: beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #35
An old essay with some sick views on male-female dynamics, that the author has called dumb, stupid MADem Sep 2015 #38
Where did I "mischaracterize Clinton's current views"? beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #39
........... MADem Sep 2015 #45
Exact quote "I can't trust someone who NEEDED TO EVOLVE on civil rights to support mine." beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #47
I can direct you to the post where I slapped down that excuse, too. MADem Sep 2015 #49
Point out where I "misrepresented her current views". beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #51
For the third time, post one, and every post thereafter where MADem Sep 2015 #53
"Let's abolish all laws dealing with abortion, drugs, sexual behavior (adultery, homosexuality, etc) beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #56
So? That's not the point. The point is you misrepresented Secstate Clinton's MADem Sep 2015 #93
I posted evidence of her past record of opposition to civil rights because that IS the point. beam me up scottie Sep 2015 #94
Hillary has been bad on SSM jfern Sep 2015 #4
I think it was a difference in approach more than anything else. MADem Sep 2015 #9
All of the states that got SSM for a while before jfern Sep 2015 #19
I agree--but the impetus came from the states, it wasn't "federal decree" that was MADem Sep 2015 #21
Without the feds, only 15-18 states would have SSM jfern Sep 2015 #24
Of course the feds are relevant, but it's not like the states were handed something without MADem Sep 2015 #25
Yes, Hillary has the Best Record on Women's Issues. Cha Sep 2015 #11
I Guess If You Don't Consider Iraqi Women Actual Women billhicks76 Sep 2015 #14
same with sanders, i guess if you do not consider Kosovo or Palestinian women? seabeyond Sep 2015 #58
LOL @ Kosovo. nt Romulox Sep 2015 #87
Oh DO tell us of Clinton's stellar record of standing up for Palestine, Seabeyond. n/t Scootaloo Sep 2015 #96
MOAB's reddread Sep 2015 #61
"We came. We say. He died." Proud of turning Libya into a chaotic shithole eridani Sep 2015 #15
got a list and she's checking it twice reddread Sep 2015 #84
She would make a great Secretary of Health and Human Services provided Congress is JDPriestly Sep 2015 #16
Or Supreme Court justice. That would totally insulate her from the problem of testing the winds== eridani Sep 2015 #198
with rape used as off-the-clock punishment by Honduran police MisterP Sep 2015 #20
same holds true with anyone who takes on these responsibilities. what? obama a misogynist? seabeyond Sep 2015 #60
is that an algorithm? reddread Sep 2015 #97

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
1. Not if you consider her opposition to same-sex marriage and support of banning late term abortions.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 01:26 AM
Sep 2015

I can't trust someone who needed to evolve on civil rights to support mine.

Bernie has always supported equality for all women.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
3. Clinton Seeking Shared Ground Over Abortions
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 01:39 AM
Sep 2015
Clinton Seeking Shared Ground Over Abortions

She called on abortion rights advocates and anti-abortion campaigners to form a broad alliance to support sexual education -- including abstinence counseling -- family planning, and morning-after emergency contraception for victims of sexual assault as ways to reduce unintended pregnancies.

"We can all recognize that abortion in many ways represents a sad, even tragic choice to many, many women," Mrs. Clinton told the annual conference of the Family Planning Advocates of New York State. "The fact is that the best way to reduce the number of abortions is to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies in the first place."

...

Mrs. Clinton supported a proposed ban on late-term abortions as long as it included an exception to protect the health of the mother; in turn, she has opposed such a ban when it lacked that exception. She has also supported some state parental notification laws under which a teenager must involve at least one parent in the decision -- but only when there is an exception in the laws that allows the judge to bypass the law and let the teenager obtain an abortion on her own -- a process known as "judicial bypass," which Mrs. Clinton has also supported before.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/25/nyregion/clinton-seeking-shared-ground-over-abortions.html?_r=0
 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
52. Clinton votes against late term. Hillary Clinton Scolds US House for Banning Late-Term
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:07 AM
Sep 2015
The same day, Clinton released an official statement through her policy advisor.

This bill is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, which has protected a woman's constitutional right to privacy for over 40 years. The bill … follows a dangerous trend we are witnessing across the country. In just the first three months of 2015, more than 300 bills have been introduced in state legislatures — on top of the nearly 30 measures introduced in Congress — that restrict access to abortion.”

http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/hillary-clinton-scolds-us-house-for-banning-late-term-abortions


http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00051#position

Alphabetical by Senator Name
Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Allen (R-VA), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Nay
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Not Voting
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Breaux (D-LA), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burns (R-MT), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Yea
Campbell (R-CO), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Chafee (R-RI), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Coleman (R-MN), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Nay
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Corzine (D-NJ), Nay
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Daschle (D-SD), Yea
Dayton (D-MN), Nay
DeWine (R-OH), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Edwards (D-NC), Not Voting
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Fitzgerald (R-IL), Yea
Frist (R-TN), Yea
Graham (D-FL), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hollings (D-SC), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Jeffords (I-VT), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Not Voting
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (D-CT), Nay
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Lott (R-MS), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Miller (D-GA), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nickles (R-OK), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Santorum (R-PA), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Nay
Sessions (R-AL), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Nay
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea
Talent (R-MO), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Nay


i knew i was going to have to post this every couple days. you lack facts and it misrepresents.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
54. Her EXACT WORDS: "I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions"
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:13 AM
Sep 2015
Late term abortion only if life or health are at risk

Q: Are there circumstances when the government should limit choice?

LAZIO: I had a pro-choice record in the House, and I believe in a woman’s right to choose. I support a ban on partial-birth abortions. Senator Moynihan called it “infanticide.” Even former mayor Ed Koch agreed that this was too extreme a procedure. This is an area where I disagree with my opponent. My opponent opposes a ban on partial-birth abortions.

CLINTON: My opponent is wrong. I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions, including partial-birth abortions, so long as the health and life of the mother is protected. I’ve met women who faced this heart-wrenching decision toward the end of a pregnancy. Of course it’s a horrible procedure. No one would argue with that. But if your life is at stake, if your health is at stake, if the potential for having any more children is at stake, this must be a woman’s choice.

Source: Senate debate in Manhattan , Oct 8, 2000

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Abortion.htm

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
70. But she said she supported banning late term abortions.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:27 AM
Sep 2015

You said "you lack facts and it misrepresents" and I posted the facts.

 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
80. her bottom line has ALWAYS been saying NAY to a ban on late term abortion. whether you are done or
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:38 AM
Sep 2015

not, i am

only to go thru this dance in another couple days.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
83. Okay so you admit I was right. Good.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:40 AM
Sep 2015

Last edited Thu Sep 3, 2015, 09:22 AM - Edit history (1)


CLINTON: My opponent is wrong. I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions, including partial-birth abortions, so long as the health and life of the mother is protected. I’ve met women who faced this heart-wrenching decision toward the end of a pregnancy. Of course it’s a horrible procedure. No one would argue with that. But if your life is at stake, if your health is at stake, if the potential for having any more children is at stake, this must be a woman’s choice.

Source: Senate debate in Manhattan , Oct 8, 2000

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Abortion.htm

earthside

(6,960 posts)
107. Bingo.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 09:44 AM
Sep 2015

In the end for Hillaryites it always comes down to your identity on any controversial or difficult question.

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
119. You did it earlier this week
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 09:56 AM
Sep 2015

Posting some bullshit opinion piece from some idiot woman.

So dont tell me you dont have a history...

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
109. Yes....in this case it really does...
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 09:48 AM
Sep 2015

Do you tell that to follks on DU that are Black, Hispanic or Gay too?

White Hetero males always seem to want to tell the rest of us what is good for us....or who is better for us...why is that? And it always seems to be particularly easy when its women's issues.

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
117. It matters big time
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 09:55 AM
Sep 2015

Men have no business telling women which candidates are better for them......I think we can think for ourselves dont you?

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
129. You know exactly what I am talking about
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 10:03 AM
Sep 2015

Go back to telling men who to vote for...your peers. I think we women can sort out who has our nacks without your help...thanks..

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
137. "Can" being the operative word here
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 10:09 AM
Sep 2015

Of course.....but didnt being the appropriatve action....

Buh bye male telling females about thier lady parts..

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
150. Because...
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 10:35 AM
Sep 2015

CLINTON: My opponent is wrong. I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions, including partial-birth abortions, so long as the health and life of the mother is protected. I’ve met women who faced this heart-wrenching decision toward the end of a pregnancy. Of course it’s a horrible procedure. No one would argue with that. But if your life is at stake, if your health is at stake, if the potential for having any more children is at stake, this must be a woman’s choice.
Source: Senate debate in Manhattan Oct 8, 2000

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
165. Where you tried to also creatively
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 10:49 AM
Sep 2015

Edit a definition....as if saying you "can" do something means you necessarily would do so....

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
166. Where did I edit anything?:
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 10:50 AM
Sep 2015
CLINTON: My opponent is wrong. I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions, including partial-birth abortions, so long as the health and life of the mother is protected. I’ve met women who faced this heart-wrenching decision toward the end of a pregnancy. Of course it’s a horrible procedure. No one would argue with that. But if your life is at stake, if your health is at stake, if the potential for having any more children is at stake, this must be a woman’s choice.


"Can" is very different than would


Can: be able to/be permitted to or iow would
 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
174. Perhaps, you tell me why you keep posting her words
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 11:10 AM
Sep 2015

And the point you are trying to make with them...




Or are you just playing games as was suggested?

Was I supposed to read your mind?

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
175. Because you said I was being disingenuous and editing her words.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 11:12 AM
Sep 2015

Maybe because you thought I was a guy and we know how they lie about stuff, amirite?

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
178. And perhaps you are reading something into them
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 11:15 AM
Sep 2015

That was never implied....and actions proved otherwise...and remember they speak louder....

Taking things out of context also doesnt suit you....

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
192. All of them in this discussion apparently...
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 11:27 AM
Sep 2015

Because she voted nay...

I can eat a gallon of Rocky Road ice cream....but I won't

And I can "beam you up scottie" and I believe I will!

Nonsensical

Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #132)

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
146. BUSTED!
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 10:28 AM
Sep 2015


Ah, that was fun.

Apparently Vanilla thinks facts are aren't facts if they're posted by men.

Seems kind of sexist to me...


 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
154. asking a question? no questions allowed. that is starting something, in your book. done. again.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 10:37 AM
Sep 2015

until the next game.

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
159. I posted the fact that she said "can"...which
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 10:41 AM
Sep 2015

You denied.....and "the fact" that she didnt......there are your facts...

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
164. I posted the exact quote from ontheissues. What part did I edit?
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 10:47 AM
Sep 2015
CLINTON: My opponent is wrong. I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions, including partial-birth abortions, so long as the health and life of the mother is protected. I’ve met women who faced this heart-wrenching decision toward the end of a pregnancy. Of course it’s a horrible procedure. No one would argue with that. But if your life is at stake, if your health is at stake, if the potential for having any more children is at stake, this must be a woman’s choice.
 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
168. So then WTF point were you trying to make?
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 11:03 AM
Sep 2015

Her words and actions match entirely...

To paraphrase "I can"...but "I didn't"

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
185. That proves she never said she supported a ban?
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 11:18 AM
Sep 2015
"I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions including partial-birth abortions, so long as the health and life of the mother is protected."

Do tell.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
8. "old shit"? Hillary didn't support marriage equality until 2013.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 01:56 AM
Sep 2015

She was for a ban on late term abortions as late as 2000.

A 42 year old essay on gender stereotypes that Bernie regrets writing certainly qualifies as "old shit" though.

Like I said, Bernie Sanders has always supported equal rights for all women.



Perhaps you would like to explain why Hillary didn't do the same?



MADem

(135,425 posts)
10. Hillary never once suggested any of the stuff Sanders suggested in his little opus.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 02:15 AM
Sep 2015

He still doesn't quite get it--he's still speaking in the present tense when he discusses that train wreck of a work of 'fiction.' Obviously, with those attitudes, he didn't always "support equal rights for all women." He spoke of them as being "dependent." That's hardly "equality" in my book.

“Women have the feeling they have to be dependent. It was very poorly written in a way I certainly would not write it now. But if you read it, what you find is that is a bad situation for both people: women shouldn’t be dependent. Men should not be oppressors. We want a society where people are equal. That was what it was about.’’


beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
12. Unlike Bernie she opposed equal rights for lgbt people and wanted to ban late term abortions.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 02:22 AM
Sep 2015

And I agree with what Aerows had to say about the essay that you're so outraged over:

I'm a strong feminist

Which also Which also means I have an education and enough political savvy to know that the "rape fantasy story" was just that - a story in someone's fantasy attempting to discredit him as a politician.

"Nobody honestly believes that Bernie Sanders is a sexual pervert or that he is a misogynist or that he intends to do women any harm. Nobody suspects that he harbors a secret desire to pass intrusive legislation or to cut gang rapists a break. Really, there is only one reason that anyone would make hay of this story, and that is to damage the man politically."

The loony Right Wing National review agrees.

This article states it plainly.

Parroting talking points that have been repeatedly debunked (OMG, Obama is a Muslin! OMG, Obama was born in Kenya!1one1!) helps no one in the political sphere, because it sullies the debate down to character assassination, outright lies and phony stories designed to take swipes at a candidate while keeping a politicians "hands clean".



But you keep clutching those pearls for me, MADem. I sure do appreciate you excusing one candidate's lack of support for my rights while repeatedly trying to paint another who has always supported them as a misogynist.


Keep mansplaining it to me, this is fascinating.


MADem

(135,425 posts)
22. No--this is sick, sad and hilarious--all at once.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 05:14 AM
Sep 2015
But you keep clutching those pearls for me, MADem. I sure do appreciate you excusing one candidate's lack of support for my rights while repeatedly trying to paint another who has always supported them as a misogynist.


Keep mansplaining it to me, this is fascinating.


You are incapable of having a conversation without resorting to bizarre and meaningless personal invective.

You trot out the "pearl clutching" AND the "mansplaining".... all in one post?



The candidate in question, to whom you object, supports your rights--and never wrote any stupid essays about rape or multiple partner fantasies--or worse, thought they were good enough to allow them to be published. That's probably the greatest failure of judgment in this entire scenario!

You keep bringing up old news, you're gonna get old news--sorry if you don't like it, but one lousy, cheap shot turn does deserve another.

Have a nice day, now!

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
23. Why are you so obsessed with that essay?
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 05:29 AM
Sep 2015

Most people who read it are adult enough to understand the intent and get past it.

Honestly the way you keep bringing up "rape fantasies" to women on DU is creepier than the essay itself.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
26. Why are you so obsessed with old positions that HRC does not hold?
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 06:26 AM
Sep 2015
Most people would realize that adult persons do grow and change their views over time.

Honestly the way you keep bringing up her "old views" is creepy and lame.


See how that works?

I only bring it up to point out what you're doing.

As I've said previously.


Not sure why you are suddenly "wondering" about it since I've made it very plain that if you're going to bring up ancient history, I'm going to return the favor. It's not a secret.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
27. And like I said neither 2013 or 2000 is ancient history.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 06:37 AM
Sep 2015

Bringing up her record of wanting to ban late term abortions and not supporting lgbt rights is not "creepy".

The fact that you can't tell the difference between that and repeatedly bringing up rape fantasies to women is even more disturbing.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
28. If her position has changed, and it is clear it has changed, your only purpose is to throw shade.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 06:44 AM
Sep 2015

You keep playing that disturbing little game--it all comes back on YOU. You show us all that you have no interest in facts, you simply want to stir the pot.

And I'll keep bringing up Bernie's big adventuresome essay every time you pull that cheap shot. I only do it because YOU keep misrepresenting. If you don't want to hear about stupid shit that "Bernie didn't really mean," then stop misrepresenting Clinton's positions.

Yeah, talk about "disturbing" ...

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
30. Citing her civil rights record is not "misrepresenting" her position.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 06:53 AM
Sep 2015

Her record on civil rights is very important to me and if Bernie had lobbied against same sex marriage or supported the abortion ban HC supporters would have every right to bring it up.

Hillary actively sought to restrict the rights of women and lgbt people and Bernie didn't.

When considering which candidate with "the Best Track Record on Women's Issues" that matters.

Your opinion that it doesn't won't change that fact.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
32. Well, then "citing" Sanders views on male-female relationships, and his view of women as "dependent"
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:02 AM
Sep 2015

along with all that other not-terribly-polite stuff, is fair game, too.

His record on his attitudes towards women (to say nothing of his understanding, or better still LACK OF understanding with regard to them) has plainly undergone an evolution.

If you're going to whine on about views that CLINTON DOES NOT HOLD, then we have a right to know about how Sanders' views on the "dependency" of women (and all those unsavory images he described in his lousy fiction) have evolved over time.

You don't like it? Too bad. You brought up old material that isn't operative, don't think you're the only one who gets to indulge in cheap shots. Because that is what you're doing.

When considering what candidate is best for women, that matters.


beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
34. Old material - she only started supporting marriage equality 2 years ago:
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:15 AM
Sep 2015

From Hillary Clinton's changing views on gay marriage:

1996: “My preference is that we do all we can to strengthen traditional marriages, and that the people engaged in parenting children be committed to one another and to the child. We also have to be realistic and know there are others who can do a good job, as well, of raising children,” Mrs. Clinton told The San Francisco Examiner.


2000: “Marriage has got historic, religious and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time, and I think a marriage is as a marriage has always been, between a man and a woman,” Mrs. Clinton said while running for the Senate in New York.


2003: “Well, marriage means something different. You know, marriage has a meaning that I think should be kept as it historically has been, but I see no reason whatsoever why people in committed relationships can’t have many of the same rights and the same respect for their unions that they are seeking, and I would like to see that be more accepted than it is,” Mrs. Clinton speaking to WNYC on the difference between gay marriage and civil unions.


2003: “I am, you know, for many reasons. I think that the vast majority of Americans find that to be something they can’t agree with. But I think most Americans are fair. And if they believe that people in committed relationships want to share their lives and, not only that, have the same rights that I do in my marriage, to decide who I want to inherit my property or visit me in a hospital, I think that most Americans would think that that’s fair and that should be done,” Mrs. Clinton, in an interview with CBS, on whether she still opposed same-sex marriage.


2006: “My position is consistent. I support states making the decision. I think that Chuck Schumer would say the same thing. And if anyone ever tried to use our words in any way, we’ll review that. Because I think that it should be in the political process and people make a decision and if our governor and our Legislature support marriage in New York, I’m not going to be against that,” Mrs. Clinton telling Gay City News that she would not block legislation supporting gay marriage in New York.


2007: “I am very much in favor of civil unions with full equality of benefits,” Mrs. Clinton told Ellen DeGeneres, explaining that she still believed the decision should be left to states.


2013: “L.G.B.T. Americans are our colleagues, our teachers, our soldiers, our friends, our loved ones, and they are full and equal citizens and deserve the rights of citizenship. That includes marriage,” Mrs. Clinton said in a video released by Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights advocacy group.



Yes, her need to evolve on civil rights matters a great deal.

Bernie always supported lgbt rights.

On LGBT Rights, Bernie Leads and Hillary Follows

Of course, Clinton has since evolved on LGBT rights, as many have. That's wonderful. But the problem is, she only came out in support of marriage equality after it was not politically risky to do so. In fact, by 2013 - the year Clinton announced her full support for marriage equality - Democratic support for same-sex marriage was the norm, not the exception.

On such an important moral issue that affects my life and the lives of thousands of other Americans, making decisions in this manner is rather despicable. Additionally, Clinton's habit of doing what polls deem politically popular is the reason why so many voters find her inauthentic. Now, if Clinton were the only option for the Democratic presidential nomination, I would understand why we should support her despite these flaws.

But she isn't the only option.

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, the longest-serving Independent in the history of Congress, is also running for the nomination. And unlike Clinton, his record on LGBT rights is historically excellent.

Sanders voted against DOMA, one of the few members of Congress to do so, at a time when such a stance was not politically popular. Four years after DOMA passed, Sanders helped champion Vermont's decision in 2000 to become the first state to legalize same-sex civil unions. This set a national precedent for LGBT equality achieved via legislative means. In 2009, when Vermont became the first state to allow marriage equality through legislative action rather than a court ruling, Sanders expressed his support once again. Truly, Sanders has been a real leader on LGBT rights, even if this leadership isn't recognized in the way that Clinton's current support is.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-novak/on-lgbt-rights-bernie-lea_b_7662682.html


Bernie Sanders Was for Full Gay Equality 40 Years Ago

Today’s Supreme Court decision was a monumental moment in American history, as it guaranteed the right for gays and lesbians to get married and established full marriage equality.

Many politicians offered their words of support, including President Obama and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

Yet it is important to remember that Obama and Clinton both opposed marriage equality as late as early 2012. It is a testament to the work of thousands of activists over decades that the political class was pulled towards supporting equality.

There is however one prominent politician who did not wait so long to call for full gay equality: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

In a letter he published in the early 1970’s, when he was a candidate for governor of Vermont from the Liberty Union Party, Sanders invoked freedom to call for the abolition of all laws related to homosexuality:

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/bernie-sanders-was-full-gay-equality-40-years-ago



Sanders: I was ahead of the curve on gay rights

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Saturday he has been waiting for the nation to catch up to his support for same-sex marriage.

Sanders’ remarks come a day after Friday’s landmark 5-4 Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide.

He argued he was well ahead of the historic decision, unlike Hillary Clinton, his main rival for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.

...

Sanders at the time served in the House of Representatives, which voted 342-67 in favor of DOMA. The Senate voted 85-14 in favor, before former President Bill Clinton signed it into law.

“That was an anti-gay marriage piece of legislation,” he added of the law that defined marriage at the federal level as the coupling of one man and one woman.

Sanders on Saturday praised Americans for creating greater opportunities for same-sex couples. Friday’s Supreme Court ruling, he charged, was not possible without national pressure for gay rights.

“No one here should think for one second this starts with the Supreme Court,” Sanders said.

“It starts at the grassroots level in all 50 states,” he said. “The American people want to end discrimination in all its forms.”

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/246370-sanders-i-was-ahead-of-the-curve-on-gay-rights


Bernie Sanders was decades ahead of the country on gay rights and ending the war on drugs

Most Americans now support legally allowing gay and lesbian relationships, same-sex marriage, and personal marijuana use after decades of shifting public opinion. But one Democratic candidate for president, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, was calling for many of these changes decades ago.

In a 1972 letter to a local newspaper — which was recently resurfaced by Chelsea Summers at the New Republic — Sanders wrote that he supported abolishing "all laws dealing with abortion, drugs, sexual behavior (adultery, homosexuality, etc.)" as part of his campaign for Vermont governor:

These stances were far removed from public opinion at the time, according to Gallup surveys on marijuana and gay and lesbian rights. In 1972, 81 percent of Americans said marijuana should be illegal — which suggests even more would favor the prohibition of more dangerous drugs like cocaine and heroin. In 1977, the earliest year of polling data, 43 percent of Americans said gay and lesbian relations between consenting adults should not be legal, while 43 percent said they should be legal.

...

But it took decades for the American public to come around to majority support on these issues: It wasn't until 2013 that a majority of Americans supported marijuana legalization, the early 2000s that most consistently responded in favor of legal gay and lesbian relations, and 2011 that a majority first reported backing same-sex marriage rights.

Sanders has carried many of these positions to this day. He was one of the few federal lawmakers to vote against the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal ban on same-sex marriages, in the 1990s. And while he told Time's Jay Newton-Small in March that he has no current stance on marijuana legalization (but backs medical marijuana), he characterized the war on drugs as costly and destructive.

http://www.vox.com/2015/7/7/8905905/sanders-drugs-gay-rights


MADem

(135,425 posts)
36. Your frantic gish gallop doesn't change the fact that you've misrepresented her current views.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:34 AM
Sep 2015

And everytime you do that, I will mention Bernie's pervy essay.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
40. You started in post one, and you kept on going from there.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:40 AM
Sep 2015

It's not nice to deliberately misrepresent a candidate's current stance on issues.

When people realize that is what you have been doing, it affects your reputation.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
41. Where? Post the exact words where I misrepresented her "current stance on issues".
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:41 AM
Sep 2015
I can't trust someone who needed to evolve on civil rights to support mine.


Start there.

Point it out.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
42. You can read as well as the next person.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:44 AM
Sep 2015
1. Not if you consider her opposition to same-sex marriage and support of banning late term abortions.


See, you're caught dead to rights, right there.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
43. Exact quote "I can't trust someone who NEEDED TO EVOLVE on civil rights to support mine."
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:46 AM
Sep 2015

Needed to evolve = evolved.

FAIL.

Next.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
44. No, it's not as clear as you want to pretend it is, now.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:51 AM
Sep 2015

You were what is called "deliberately obtuse" and your words were sufficiently ambiguous so as to leave Clinton's actual positions unclear.

Thus "Man - and Woman" as a retort to that. A charming essay about dependency, rape, submission, and some horrible Freudian psychology. Poorly written drivel!

You're right that you failed with that bit of business. Big time.

Next, indeed. Better still: Just don't do it anymore.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
46. Really? Which one of these statements left her current positions unclear:
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:56 AM
Sep 2015

I can't trust someone who needed to evolve on civil rights to support mine.

Hillary didn't support marriage equality until 2013.

She was for a ban on late term abortions as late as 2000.

Unlike Bernie she opposed equal rights for lgbt people and wanted to ban late term abortions.

And like I said neither 2013 or 2000 is ancient history.

Bringing up her record of wanting to ban late term abortions and not supporting lgbt rights is not "creepy".

Citing her civil rights record is not "misrepresenting" her position.

Her record on civil rights is very important to me and if Bernie had lobbied against same sex marriage or supported the abortion ban HC supporters would have every right to bring it up.

Hillary actively sought to restrict the rights of women and lgbt people and Bernie didn't.

Old material - she only started supporting marriage equality 2 years ago:

I'm glad she evolved and I give her credit for that as well as for her support of other women's issues.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
48. You focus on her past positions and fail to articulate her current ones.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:58 AM
Sep 2015

Every time you do that, I'll be there with an essay.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
50. "Hillary Has the Best Track Record on Women's Issues" means her PAST RECORD matters.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:03 AM
Sep 2015

Every time someone tells me Hillary has the best track record on women's rights I'll be there to cite the facts.

But nice back pedaling on the claim that I "misrepresented her current views."

I'll take that as an admission that you were wrong.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
59. Keep posting those rape fantasies and ignoring her record.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:19 AM
Sep 2015

Like I said it's creepy that you need to keep doing that every time facts about Hillary's lack of support for civil rights are posted.

It's exactly what the right wing nut jobs do, they focus on sex instead of discussing the actual issues.

Hillary's track record on women's rights is inferior to Bernie's.

Period.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
82. You are hyper-replying so I'll leave you to it. One answer is sufficient.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:40 AM
Sep 2015

Oh, and calling ME a "right wing nut job?" Because I happen to think being accurate about a person's record matters?

There you go, getting PERSONAL yet again.

You are incapable of discussing the issues without tossing in some personal garbage. You should work on that. You should also work on accurately reflecting a candidate's POV if you want to be taken seriously. I've pretty much concluded that you don't really prioritize that, though.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
86. Because I said that's what right wing nut jobs do, focus on sex instead of issues?
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:42 AM
Sep 2015

If you don't like the comparison don't keep focusing on "rape fantasies" in a thread about Hillary's track record on women's rights.


 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
95. It's not a gish gallop. BMUS is sticking to one subject.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:55 AM
Sep 2015

To be a gish gallop he'd need to throw out a basically random assortment of topics and demand you answer all of them.

 

ieoeja

(9,748 posts)
170. Are you seriously saying we did not use to have laws that made women dependant?
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 11:04 AM
Sep 2015

Or are you saying that once those laws were removed, most women immediately stop feeling like they were still dependant? Do you also disbelieve PTSD?


You definitely do not want to read this book: http://www.amazon.com/My-Secret-Garden-Womens-Fantasies/dp/0704332949


MADem

(135,425 posts)
197. Not sure how you made THAT leap, but thanks for playing.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 01:33 PM
Sep 2015

You need to read the essay--he wasn't talking about "laws." He wasn't talking about PTSD.

And ya know what? He didn't write 'that' book, either.

smh. You're working overtime to defend something he thinks sucks.

It's Silly Putty season up in here! Stretch it to the max!

 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
64. as you have been told repeatedly, was not voting to protect marriage equality. sanders stayed quiet
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:22 AM
Sep 2015

didnt say a peep as others spoke

easy to choose a position when ones choice is silence.

he never uttered the word marriage equality until 2009.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
65. WHEN did he stay quiet? What interview? You keep saying that but you never post proof.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:24 AM
Sep 2015

He did choose a position: he voted against same sex marriage bans, that is his voicing his support of marriage equality.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
74. He voted against DOMA, that means he voiced his support of marriage equality.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:29 AM
Sep 2015
Bernie Sanders' Views On Gay Marriage Show He's Been A Supporter For A Long Time

Now that he's officially announced he will seek the Democratic nomination for president and challenge Hillary Clinton, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders will be talking about his positions on major issues on the campaign trail, and one very big issue he has championed for years is gay marriage. Sanders, unlike some of his potential Republican opponents, seems like he would not turn down an invitation to a gay wedding (and he might actually get invited to one).

In 1996, then-Representative Sanders voted against the Defense of Marriage Act, which barred recognition of gay marriage at the federal level (DOMA was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2013). Sanders' and his home state of Vermont were the first to legalize same-sex unions in 2000, at first recognizing them as civil unions. Gay marriage has been legal in Vermont since 2009, and as The New York Times reported, Vermont was the first state to pass legislation in support of same-sex marriage, rather than in reaction to a court ruling.

http://www.bustle.com/articles/79951-bernie-sanders-views-on-gay-marriage-show-hes-been-a-supporter-for-a-long-time
 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
79. sanders stayed silent, certainly did not mention marriage equality. those who spoke voted against
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:37 AM
Sep 2015

voted against because it singled out gays.

because sanders stayed quiet does not give him credit for advocating for marriage equality. he did not speak those words until 2009.

The two Democrats running for Jeffords’ senate seat disagree with him on this. No problemo, they say. Ed Flanagan and Jan Backus both support gay marriage. Like Associate Justice Denise Johnson, they say it’s time for Vermont town clerks to provide marriage licenses to all couples who pay the fee.

snip

Obtaining Congressman Bernie Sanders’ position on the gay marriage issue was like pulling teeth...from a rhinoceros. Last month, shortly after the decision of the Amestoy Court was issued, Mr. Sanders publicly tried walking the tightrope — applauding the court’s decision and the cause of equal rights without supporting civil marriage for same-sex couples.

This week we were no more successful getting a straight answer. All we did get was a carefully crafted non-statement statement via e-mail from Washington D.C. And Bernie’s statement wins him the Vermont congressional delegation’s Wishy-Washy Award hands down.

Once more he “applauds” the court decision but won’t go anywhere near choosing between same-sex “marriage” and domestic partnership. “By all accounts the legislature is approaching this issue in a considered and appropriate manner and I support the current process.”

http://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/fuggedaboudit/Content?oid=2291039


2000 when asked he refused to answer and this was only on civil marriage. not even the step to marriage equality.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
81. LOL! That's your proof? An interview that never happened?
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:40 AM
Sep 2015

In fact the reporter was pissed because Bernie wouldn't talk to him so he posted that hit piece.

Bernie didn't talk to him, sea.

I'll make this simple for you:

Not saying something is not the same thing as saying something.


Try again.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
89. So not saying something = saying something?
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:44 AM
Sep 2015

Does that mean Hillary supports barbecuing puppies because she never said she didn't?

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
92. So Hillary does support barbecuing puppies. Wow. That's awful.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:49 AM
Sep 2015

I sent her an email asking if she would voice her opposition and she never replied.

Using your logic until she actually speaks out about bbq pups she supports it.

 

ieoeja

(9,748 posts)
177. Late term abortion only votes count. Marriage equality only words count.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 11:13 AM
Sep 2015

And that would be why I can not take certain posters seriously.

Well, no, not really. The fact that Hillary was the standard bearer of triangulation on civil rights for decades is the elephant in this particular room. If there is a worse Democrat on civil rights issues, I can not think of who it could be. Some have certainly voted worse than her. But as president of the DLC she actively encouraged Democrats to soft peddle civil rights issues.


MADem

(135,425 posts)
6. They have to go back into the archives to find anything to gripe about....
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 01:50 AM
Sep 2015

Of course, when we "go back in the archives" to talk about some of Sanders' views on things like "what women want" the howling and screeching is unrelenting. UNFAIR UNFAIR!!!!

riversedge

(70,092 posts)
88. Many wanted to know what she did as S of STATE. The op has some of her accomplishments.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:43 AM
Sep 2015

But many will never be satisfied.

 

Cali_Democrat

(30,439 posts)
17. I see u mentioned Bernie. I have an idea
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 02:44 AM
Sep 2015

Instead of trying to tear down Hillary....

Why not just say both are great when it comes to women's issues? Because that's the truth.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
18. Because one has been right all along.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 02:45 AM
Sep 2015

I'm glad she evolved and I give her credit for that as well as for her support of other women's issues.

And citing Hillary's record is not "tearing" her down.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
29. You don't give her any credit at all--you keep repeating her old positions, and then get mad
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 06:45 AM
Sep 2015

when I mention that Sanders said some dumbass shit in his past, too.

Please. You fool no one. If you were so GLAD you'd stop highlighting the old, and only mentioning the new when you get shoved into a corner.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
31. The title of the op is "Why Hillary Clinton Has the Best Track Record on Women's Issues"
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 06:58 AM
Sep 2015

The op also says

"The best predictor of future performance is past performance, and when it comes to women's issues, the record is clear..."


And her record on civil rights for women and lgbt people IS part of that past performance.

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't matter.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
35. An old essay doesn't equal not supporting civil rights. But this 40 year old letter matters too:
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:20 AM
Sep 2015

Bernie never lobbied to restrict anyone's rights, instead he was speaking out about full equality 40 years ago:

Bernie Sanders Was for Full Gay Equality 40 Years Ago

Today’s Supreme Court decision was a monumental moment in American history, as it guaranteed the right for gays and lesbians to get married and established full marriage equality.

Many politicians offered their words of support, including President Obama and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

Yet it is important to remember that Obama and Clinton both opposed marriage equality as late as early 2012. It is a testament to the work of thousands of activists over decades that the political class was pulled towards supporting equality.

There is however one prominent politician who did not wait so long to call for full gay equality: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

In a letter he published in the early 1970’s, when he was a candidate for governor of Vermont from the Liberty Union Party, Sanders invoked freedom to call for the abolition of all laws related to homosexuality:



Notice that not only did Sanders call for gay equality and an end to the drug war, he also talked about the need to tax corporations, end unjust overseas wars, heal the environment, and empower working people. If nothing else, Sanders has been extremely consistent.

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/bernie-sanders-was-full-gay-equality-40-years-ago



Let us abolish all laws which attempt to impose a particular brand of morality or "right" on people.

Let's abolish all laws dealing with abortion, drugs, sexual behavior (adultery, homosexuality, etc).



What he said 40 years ago about equality matters more than an essay about gender stereotypes.


MADem

(135,425 posts)
38. An old essay with some sick views on male-female dynamics, that the author has called dumb, stupid
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:37 AM
Sep 2015

and he has disavowed.

Saying that women are "dependent" and they like to be raped is not a good civil rights look. YMMV but that's how I view it.

Now certainly, his views have changed over time, and that is a good thing.

The only reason I bring it up, and will continue to bring it up, is if you continue to mischaracterize Clinton's current views on issues. You can't be the only one who uses outdated material in an effort to "characterize."

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
47. Exact quote "I can't trust someone who NEEDED TO EVOLVE on civil rights to support mine."
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 07:57 AM
Sep 2015

Needed to evolve = evolved.

Next.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
49. I can direct you to the post where I slapped down that excuse, too.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:01 AM
Sep 2015

Or I can mention that essay.

Next?

Just don't misrepresent candidates' positions, and you won't have any trouble.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
51. Point out where I "misrepresented her current views".
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:04 AM
Sep 2015

And we'll be done.

I'll help, pick out which one misrepresented her current views:

I can't trust someone who needed to evolve on civil rights to support mine.

Hillary didn't support marriage equality until 2013.

She was for a ban on late term abortions as late as 2000.

Unlike Bernie she opposed equal rights for lgbt people and wanted to ban late term abortions.

And like I said neither 2013 or 2000 is ancient history.

Bringing up her record of wanting to ban late term abortions and not supporting lgbt rights is not "creepy".

Citing her civil rights record is not "misrepresenting" her position.

Her record on civil rights is very important to me and if Bernie had lobbied against same sex marriage or supported the abortion ban HC supporters would have every right to bring it up.

Hillary actively sought to restrict the rights of women and lgbt people and Bernie didn't.

Old material - she only started supporting marriage equality 2 years ago:

I'm glad she evolved and I give her credit for that as well as for her support of other women's issues.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
53. For the third time, post one, and every post thereafter where
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:09 AM
Sep 2015

you brought up old information (e.g. the YT clip) without any caveats.

You can gish gallop all day--anyone reading this can see what you are trying to do.

I can play that game, too:



Dependency, subservience and masochism--that's a real "hear me roar" characterization....

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
56. "Let's abolish all laws dealing with abortion, drugs, sexual behavior (adultery, homosexuality, etc)
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:15 AM
Sep 2015

Bernie Sanders 40 years ago:

Let us abolish all laws which attempt to impose a particular brand of morality or "right" on people.

Let's abolish all laws dealing with abortion, drugs, sexual behavior (adultery, homosexuality, etc).


Bernie Sanders Was for Full Gay Equality 40 Years Ago

Today’s Supreme Court decision was a monumental moment in American history, as it guaranteed the right for gays and lesbians to get married and established full marriage equality.

Many politicians offered their words of support, including President Obama and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

Yet it is important to remember that Obama and Clinton both opposed marriage equality as late as early 2012. It is a testament to the work of thousands of activists over decades that the political class was pulled towards supporting equality.

There is however one prominent politician who did not wait so long to call for full gay equality: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

In a letter he published in the early 1970’s, when he was a candidate for governor of Vermont from the Liberty Union Party, Sanders invoked freedom to call for the abolition of all laws related to homosexuality:



Notice that not only did Sanders call for gay equality and an end to the drug war, he also talked about the need to tax corporations, end unjust overseas wars, heal the environment, and empower working people. If nothing else, Sanders has been extremely consistent.

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/bernie-sanders-was-full-gay-equality-40-years-ago


MADem

(135,425 posts)
93. So? That's not the point. The point is you misrepresented Secstate Clinton's
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:49 AM
Sep 2015

present views with your old text and video.

One bad turn merits another.

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
94. I posted evidence of her past record of opposition to civil rights because that IS the point.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 08:50 AM
Sep 2015

You didn't like it so you brought up rape fantasies.

jfern

(5,204 posts)
4. Hillary has been bad on SSM
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 01:42 AM
Sep 2015

She fully supports it today, but in early 2013, when a majority of Americans were in favor, she was an opponent. And just a year ago, she thought it should be left up to the states. Most of the states got SSM because of federal courts, so being left up to the states would mean that most states, including even California, wouldn't have it now.

Sanders, O'Malley, Chafee, and Biden all supported SSM before her.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
9. I think it was a difference in approach more than anything else.
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 02:07 AM
Sep 2015

The state-by-state approach is what made the Supreme Court decision possible. Some state legislations passed SSM law, and other times, it came via court order, but in each and every case, the battle ground was at the STATE level. As each state fell and bans were lifted, it became more and more difficult for the Supreme Court to even be able to pretend that a preponderance of citizens weren't on the SSM side of things, and, more to the point, that they could mount an argument that the states had somehow made an error in granting marriage rights to all their citizens.

State-by-state is slower, but it usually sticks. Many leaders favored this approach because it's a Strength In Numbers strategy, and it's harder to undo. There is a graphic at this link that illustrates the concept very nicely:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/advancements-in-same-sex-marriage/

jfern

(5,204 posts)
19. All of the states that got SSM for a while before
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 02:46 AM
Sep 2015

the ruling this year were because of federal courts because of the 2013 Hollingworth v. Perry Supreme Court case. So the Supreme Court was already involved.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
21. I agree--but the impetus came from the states, it wasn't "federal decree" that was
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 05:05 AM
Sep 2015

imposing this upon those states; the states were active actors in the process. It was only when the tipping point was reached that the Supremes lowered the final boom on the fundies (and we see that at least one is having a fit of pique over it).

I think that helps a case, when the states have activists pushing to either enact or protect existing law.

jfern

(5,204 posts)
24. Without the feds, only 15-18 states would have SSM
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 05:39 AM
Sep 2015

At the time of the 2013 Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry rulings, these 13 states plus DC had SSM. And I'm counting ones that hadn't taken effect yet.

The 6 New England states
NY
PA
MD
DE
IA
MN
WA

These 2 states legalized legislatively after the 2013 rulings.
IL
HI

The 3 states had their Supreme Court legalize SSM, but cited the SCOTUS 2013 rulings, so the federal court rulings are still relevant.
NM
CO
NJ

The remaining 32 states, including California, got it directly because of federal court rulings.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
25. Of course the feds are relevant, but it's not like the states were handed something without
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 05:45 AM
Sep 2015

any action or impetus on their part. The SC iced the cake, as well.

 

billhicks76

(5,082 posts)
14. I Guess If You Don't Consider Iraqi Women Actual Women
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 02:33 AM
Sep 2015

Or Iranian women, or Honduran women or Saudi women etc etc. Try seeing outside the bubble.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
15. "We came. We say. He died." Proud of turning Libya into a chaotic shithole
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 02:39 AM
Sep 2015

Neither women's rights nor human rights seem to apply when people are sitting on top of resources that imperialists want to manage for themselves. See also ISIS.

Guess what? Women never, ever win in the war of each against all.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
16. She would make a great Secretary of Health and Human Services provided Congress is
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 02:39 AM
Sep 2015

majority Democratic.

The rights of women and children are her strength.

The catch is that Republicans unfairly accuse her of all kinds of crazy things, and if the Republicans have the majority in Congress, they will not work with her or get things done if she is negotiating with them.

She speaks really well on women's and children's issues.

I think Bernie is more likely to be able to work with Republicans. He was an independent for years and worked well with Republicans when he was the mayor of Burlington, Vermont apparently.

He wins elections by appealing to both Republican and Democratic voters.

It's great that Hillary feels so deeply about the issues that are important to us women and to our children, but, and I realize this is a matter of opinion, I just don't think that a Republican Congress that does not like women's and children's issues anyway, would support her proposals for women and children.

If we elect Hillary, we will look back on Obama's eight years as a time of relative harmony between the parties.

If we elect Bernie, he will get the American people on his side on issue after issue and the Republicans will be voted out of Congress. I know that sounds impossible, but that is the way it will work.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
198. Or Supreme Court justice. That would totally insulate her from the problem of testing the winds==
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 11:54 PM
Sep 2015

--on issues.

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
20. with rape used as off-the-clock punishment by Honduran police
Thu Sep 3, 2015, 03:10 AM
Sep 2015

and with some hundreds of widows, mothers, sisters, and daughters left after the Facusses' macheteros are done with the menfolk, with the rule of law shoved into the dirt and increasingly buried, her policies have propelled women's activism to new heights! brava!

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Why Hillary Clinton Has t...