Sen. Sanders:"People all over this country understand that civil rights means that we end

[cal04]

"People all over this country understand that civil rights means that we end discrimination against all people."



What Gov. Pence is doing is dead wrong

https://twitter.com/SenSanders

[Thinkingabout]

1. Bernie was a member of the 1993 House which passed this bill unanimously.

[cali]

2. for fuck's sake: How many times must this be said?

NOT THE FUCKING SAME LEGISLATION.

[Thinkingabout]

4. How many times have I said this, once. But it continues.

[justiceischeap]

3. You really need to read up on the 1993 bill

and understand that most of the bills passed prior to this one has some sort of protection for the LGBTQI community. This one also states that businesses are protected from discrimination lawsuits, which none of the others state.

There really is a huge difference between this bill and previous ones but the right would like people to believe there isn't.

[Thinkingabout]

5. Where do you think I found this information?

[Marr]

6. That is a dishonest, right-wing talking point.

I've noticed that the people who go on the most about 'party unity' when it concerns Hillary, will happily parrot any right wing lie that smears liberals.

[Thinkingabout]

7. It is not dishonest, right wing talking point, this is a fact.

Source:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_Act

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-141, 107 Stat. 1488 (November 16, 1993), codified at 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb through 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-4 (also known as RFRA), is a 1993 United States federal law that "ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected."[1] The bill was introduced by Congressman Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on March 11, 1993. A companion bill was introduced in the Senate by Ted Kennedy the same day. A unanimous U.S. House and a near unanimous U.S. Senate with three dissenting votes[2] passed the bill, and President Bill Clinton signed it into law.

Where is your facts this is a right wing talking point.

[Marr]

11. A bill with the same name, but different contents. If you weren't so anxious to smear Sanders,

you would've learned that before posting.

The bill you refer to did not give private businesses the right to discriminate-- it explicitly outlined that they could not, in fact.

[Thinkingabout]

13. This does not deserve an answer, was never my point and now you distort my post.

[Marr]

14. I didn't distort shit. You were so anxious to smear Sanders that you belched out some

right wing smear without Thinkingabout it.

[Thinkingabout]

16. I gave you the information from Wikipedia, where is your link the information I gave

is right wing? Link please.

[Marr]

17. Uh... it's spewing out of every right-wing outlet that's covering for Indiana's moronic GOP?

And I've already explained to you why it's a bullshit equivalency, so why are you continuing to push this phony right-wing smear of a good liberal, again?

[Thinkingabout]

18. You obliviously do not have a link proving this is right wing, end of story.

No link, no truth.

[Marr]

20. Here you go.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/03/30/the_left_repeats_hands_up_don_t_shoot_tactic_on_the_state_of_indiana

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/03/27/19-states-that-have-religious-freedom-laws-like-indianas-that-no-one-is-boycotting/

http://www.wsj.com/articles/mike-pence-ensuring-religious-freedom-in-indiana-1427757799

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/31/arkansas-passes-religious-freedom-bill-similar-to-new-indiana-law-sparking-more/

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/03/26/fox-news-dishonest-defense-of-indianas-anti-lgb/203056

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/03/30/3640374/big-lie-media-tells-indianas-new-religious-freedom-law/

[Thinkingabout]

23. You supplied links about Indiana and Arkansas passing a bill, you did not give one

saying I am using right wing talking points when I posted Bernie voted for the Religious Freedom bill pass in Congress in 1993.

[KingCharlemagne]

25. Just stop. You're embarassing yourself. - nt

[Rex]

28. Then why did you post about another bill of the same name in 1993?

Or did you mean Sanders supports the Indiana bill? Why would you put the two together since they are both different bills from different years?

Did you get confused?

[Marr]

31. It's ok. I didn't expect you to have enough character to own up to your bs. /nt

[Thinkingabout]

34. Are you saying Bernie voted no on the Religious Freedom Act 1993?

[Marr]

35. No, I'm saying it was nothing like the Indiana bill, contrary to your bullshit suggestion.

I'm done with you here, sorry. You're either wasting my time by pretending to be dumb, or you're not pretending. Either way, I'm done posting at the brick wall.

I'm sure you'll have plenty more chances to smear liberals with right-wing bullshit in between your calls for party loyalty to Hillary.

[Thinkingabout]

36. I have never said it was like the Indiana bill, you jumped to conclusions and the bullshit

suggestion was not from me. I am not dumb, I am not the one who jumped and went off on a tangent and you apparently still don't understand I only made a post of Bernie voting for the bill in 1993. I don't appreciate your rw bs, I am not guilty, yes I am done here I have important things to do.

[Marr]

37. YOU JUST DID IT AGAIN.

You said Bernie Sanders voted for the bill in 1993. That was a completely unrelated bill. It did not contain the passages that make the Indiana bill so odious.

There is no way to spin your opening post as anything but a suggestion that his vote on the '93 bill is relevant to the Indiana bill. It is not. You were clearly suggesting that he supported the same thing in '93, so his condemnations of the Indiana bill are somehow hollow.

[Thinkingabout]

38. I NEVER claimed it was the same bill, stop spinning something I never said, never claimed.

[Marr]

39. "Bernie was a member of the 1993 House which passed this bill unanimously."

Just how stupid do you think people are? That is an unambiguous statement.

Own up to it, for crying out loud.

[Thinkingabout]

40. It was a statement, nothing more, I did not jump on the RW run.

[Marr]

41. "Bernie was a member of the 1993 House which passed this bill unanimously."

That's what you said. Now you're insisting that was not in any way a suggestion that the '93 bill was related to the Indiana bill. How in the hell can you read that as anything but a suggestion that it was somehow the same?

[Thinkingabout]

42. Hell no, I never suggested the bills are the same, perhaps you should allow me to post without

rewriting what you want me to say.

[Marr]

43. Did you miss the quotation marks?

I don't have to categorize what you said. It's a very simple sentence.

You jumped to criticize a liberal Democrat, using the first cudgel that came to hand. That happened to be a piece of right-wing bullshit. I've often seen you demanding party loyalty when the subject is Hillary Clinton, so I felt compelled to point out your hypocrisy.

[Thinkingabout]

44. See, you continue to try to rewrite my post.

[KingCharlemagne]

24. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it Thinkingabout it. - nt

[Marr]

33. lol-- apparently. /nt

[RandiFan1290]

26. Here's another

The Rude Pundit - History Lesson for Assholes: Bill Clinton Is Not Your Religious "Freedom" Tool
                                                        

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026440622

[Rex]

29. Since that link accurately describes to a T what the poster is doing,

your post will be ignored completely is my prediction. OR the link will be dismissed in hopes nobody goes and reads it!

[Bluenorthwest]

45. It's wrong, so that's a big hint it is also right wing, which it is.

The Federal law is not the same at all, nothing at all in intent nor in content. What you are saying is just incorrect.

[merrily]

10. +1

Amazing how many patterns are discernible. Even the identical terms and phrases sometimes.

Eerily coincidental, no doubt.

[Rex]

27. LOL! So when two bills have the exact same name, they are the same bill?

So the bill passed in 1993 and this one just past in Indiana are the SAME bill!? Reeaaaallly?

Nice try there but fail.

[madokie]

8. The scariest part is pence knows it too

and is going ahead and doing it anyway.

[frazzled]

9. Can we please add women to that list, Bernie?

I mean, really .... please?

Because, honestly, Bernie, the biggest victims of these so-called conscience laws have been women (who may also happen to be black, Hispanic, or Native American). So can we just say it? Are we that invisible and insignificant?

[merrily]

12. He said all people.

[frazzled]

15. He conveniently didn't specify women, however.

Though four other groups were named.

My criticism still stands. I think Bernie would agree with me, and apologize for this massive omission.

Sorry, but it is imperative that we stop ignoring women. If we hadn't ignored them during the past 8-10 years while conscience clauses were being inserted into laws in state after state to discriminate against women, we wouldn't even be dealing with this issue for other groups today.

I'm not backing down. I'm getting mad.

[Rex]

19. He didn't specify either gender in those four groups.

But if you want him to specify women, e-mail him! Never know, you might just be the one to change that.

[frazzled]

21. Okay, feel free to play dumb

Be apprised, however, that I am not stupid. (Even though I am merely a woman.)

[Rex]

22. So you are not going to call his office about change?

Ok.

[liberal_at_heart]

32. If you agree that it was probably a mistake and Bernie would apologize why get so angry?

[frazzled]

46. Angry at posters such as yourself

who seem to want to trivialize discrimination ... when it applies to women.

I take it back. If Sanders, or whoever tweets for him, made this mistake, they just don't get it. And they don't truly care about discrimination. It's just about using buzzwords to fundraise, like most of these politicians.

A truly liberal heart would understand this, and stand up against discrimination.

[liberal_at_heart]

47. I'm sorry, but you know nothing about how I stand up against discrimination.

I am a woman and have raised a strong, independent, bisexual, atheist daughter who is so sure of who she is she refuses to cover up her purple hair just to get a job. I am raising a son who doesn't just look at women as something pretty to look. He treats them with respect and listens to their problems. He has more female friends than guy friends because he is such a caring and sensitive person. I am going to college to be a scientist in a male dominated career field. I fight for all of mine and my children's rights including civil rights, women's rights, and economic rights. You claim to know how much or how little I stand up against discrimination just because I am not as enraged as you are. As a Buddhist I aspire to fight for justice without anger and violence. You can fight discrimination without being enraged.

[liberal_at_heart]

30. Well lookey there. We can fight for both economic justice and social justice all at the same time.

Who knew? Sanders does.