Proud to be a Goldwater girl! 1996 interview!

This AGAIN???

always a moderate Republican.

I grew up in a family of them. They were not the reactionary religious nut jobs of today's GOP.

Yes Hillary, your beliefs are most definitely rooted in Conservatism, and progressives are painfully aware of this about your beliefs.

But most of your followers don't seem to be aware of this, they seem a little confused. The reason they are so confused is because you frequently identify yourself as a progressive in debates and campaign speeches.

Would you be a dear, and remind everyone else of your beliefs rooted in Conservatism during your campaign stops, so that rest of us don't have to correct the record?

Thank you, and you're Welcome.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/20/bernie-sanders-footage-arrest-civil-rights-protest

Your heart is where your heart is, no mincing words, strong beliefs of inequality are ingrained in some people and they do what is right at the TIME, not decades later.

Correct judgement, at the Time, and a belief that is central to one's core, that is who deserves our vote, not someone who apologizes time and again when proven wrong years later.

but you are voting Bob Dole v2.0

You are ferpectly right!

but more Maggie Thatcher, in my view.

.


You'd realize that your post is ignorant. Then again, I seriously doubt it.


I read this this, as thought it's a staple retort and must say something.


.

what exactly comes to the front of mind?

It may not be fair, but in America, ghettos are largely associated with inner city Blacks ... that's not a knock on Blacks, that's a knock on American racism.

And let's not forget the context ... Bernie was sticking to discussing poverty, and some of the prominent middle class Blacks were all up in arms that when Bernie was talking about poverty he never mentioned the racial aspect of poverty and how it affected Blacks more than any other group in America ... then as soon as he appeased these asses, such as Joy Reid, someone who demanded Bernie mention Blacks when he talked about 'the poor', they turned around and called Bernie a racist because he has the gall to bring up Blacks ... and remember, Joy Reid is someone who can talk for hours on 'the poor' without ever mentioning the issues of 'poverty'.

... a ghetto of any type.

It's not progressive to push racist stereotype of any kind for any reason

the same people complaining that Bernie wasn't talking about Blacks when he discussed poverty and the poor?

"Hey Bernie, why aren't you saying <something Racists> ... Bernie, please say <something racist> .... Bernie, you're not being honest unless you say <something racist> ... OMG!!! Bernie said something racist!!.

... and he homogenized the boogyman of Wall Street for everyone.

My boogman, as a parent of color, is to HAVE to explain to my child who goes to a very very diverse grade school that his color DOES matter when it comes to some police forces.

I don't give a shit about Wall Street and neither do the poor or working poor, so Sanders message was tailored towards the ears of those who have more not those who have or trying to get.

The latter have different boogymen

What does Hillary say that is so different about PoC and police that you think addresses this issue but that Sanders doesn't say?

On the issue of 'The Poor', Hillary can go on for hours talking about them without ever mentioning 'poverty' ... to Hillary you;re just a voting block, be you "PoC", "The Poor", or any other 'label' you want to put on people.

... again, its your or the boogymen of people YOU know not me or the people I know.

Trying to convince people to be be concerned about what you're concerned about is futile at best... be concerned about what the people you're trying to reach are concerned about and that's not Wall Street for everyone.

Be scared of my fears is NOT.... NOT the way to reach people

I'm saying Wall St. is a common concern.

Blacks are fully justified in fearing the police more than Wall St. or poverty in general, but they can't claim that neither of those issues are valid concerns, even if it's not the 'top of the list number one" for them.

And again I ask, concerning your major fear, the police, what has Hillary said about it that Bernie failed to address?

... but after being in financial industry I can see Clinton has a better plan at addressing the IB's not Bank Hold Companies that's one thing

and

In regards to the police I think neither has gone far enough to make professionalism of the dept's a floor on which to build but Clinton has gone as far as to call some of the of the police violence terrorizing so maybe it isn't policy per se but the empathy on which I think one has than the other.

I knew it would happen one day.

So, what is this 'better plan'? What you wrote is incomprehensible, but I'm guess you meant that Banks would not be allowed to be both 'traditional' banks and 'investment' banks ... in other words, 'break up the banks' to keep them from gambling (taking high risk that would also affect people how invested their money in low risk vehicles.) Which is part of Bernie's policy.

Bernie just goes further by also saying that even isolated 'traditional' and 'investment' banks that are too big, and thus hold influence over the whole sector, and/or government itself, and that are now considered simply a systemic risk to the country and the worlds financial markers (potential to act in a monopolistic manner, or through fraud, or just poor management) just by the very fact that they "too big to fail/jail"; need to also be broken up. This is nothing 'new' (other than 3rd way and Republican politicians and administrations have simply stopped doing so because of the very influence from too big to fail/jail companies we are discussing.)

There can be no question that if any company is considered 'too big to fail/jail' (and we have explicit examples of being told this in order to bail them out, or not press charges) then the answer is not to add some new rules to tell them to 'cut it out' ... why would they listen to new laws? They are already 'too big' for laws to have any affect on them .. the only law possible that could correct this problem is a law that can be enforced .. a law that breaks the company up so that the next time there is some horrible 'mistake' the poor judgment can be 'punished' in the market place like it should be and the company can fail without catastrophic consequences, or if the problem is criminal, then that too has to be able to be dealt with in a court of law without fear of bringing down the whole economy, or worst .. there are no 'around the edges' laws that will ever address this problem, and if someone thinks there are, they need to explain how that could possibly work.

As for the police issue, I see no difference between Bernie's policies and Hillary's .. Your side like to claim that they both supported the same 'tough on crime' bill -- and now you talk about Hillary having more 'empathy' ... but while it is correct that Bernie voted for the bill, and Hillary didn't, it was Hillary that went around supporting that bill, and had no 'empathy' at the time for it's victims ... whereas Bernie spoke directly about what he foresaw as the likely outcome and clearly said that this part of the bill needed to be addressed or it would lead to exactly what it did lead to.

Now, you can argue that there are no 'heroes' on this issue, but to argue that Hillary has more 'empathy'?? Come one, I think it's pretty obvious that when it comes to 'empathy' that's just another tool in the Clinton toolbox that gets pulled out whenever they think it will be to their advantage ... it's a fake empathy, and as soon as it's no longer 'profitable' Hillary will put in back in the box and lock it away until the next time it's needed ... Bernie on the other hand might indeed find himself in a situation where he has to weight his 'empathy' for one group against his 'empathy' for another group or issue, and have to make a hard decision based on the 'facts on the ground', but he's never going to do it by throwing out one of those groups, he will speak up and admit that what he is doing is bad for one side, and that this error in policy has to be addressed ... he's not going to throw out his 'empathy' and call the side he has to vote against "super predators'.

... banks" they're main drive is investing not holding peoples money.

When he talks about big banks he doesn't delineate between Chase and Fidelity nor does he know how he's going to implement the brake up at all.

I'm not impressed with marketing slogans, when asked about details "I don't know" is a really wrong answer on this.

Also

No Sanders voter is going to convince anyone who's voting for Hillary that some how Sanders sits so much higher than her on so many categories that she deserves the wingerish type hatred or even the impugning of her integrity that comes for Sanders

Few if any primary DEMS bought into the #HillarySoBad meme... her past doesn't count as much as the right thinks it does to democrats.

So, staying on policy and them being even when it comes to the police

So... Sanders said in 2014 that racial politics isn't that important.

Early in his prez campaign instead of embracing people who were sitting on bridges to stop traffic from police killing them and theirs Sanders retracted.

Clinton, for better or worse has always been there, not show up and tell me later that ... oh yeah, racial politics does matter... but only after polls showed PoC cared about the social issues.

So yeah, empathy counted on that subject... even if it was imperfect... it was real

Elizabeth Warren was a Republican as well until the mid 90's and now she is a liberal hero.

The rooted conservative is.

Elizabeth is a hero because she has stood up for us against Wall Street and the banksters, unlike the rooted conservative.

This is a pretty old card in the Sanders Deck, and a Joker at that.

Remember 1996 Hillary, the FLOTUS to the then POTUS Bill Clinton, a Democratic president --- conservative and still proud to have been a Goldwater girl?

Are we (and by we I mean you) Still trying to ignore the reality that Hillary is not progressive and her "super predator" comments were not 'misspoken' words, but rooted in a deep seated bigotry that easily flows to the surface when given the opportunity.

of the 80s and 90s. I don't rally agree with her on this, but it's not exactly high crimes & misdemeanors.

Would you like to start digging into Bernie's youthful associations, like being as member of the youth wing of the Socialist Party USA? Or his activism praising Eugene Debs? I'm more concerned with what the candidates are doing now, not in the flower power baby boomer era.

I never said it was a "high crimes & misdemeanors" it is part of her past, as Bernie's past associations is part of his.

Hillary supporters keep claiming that Bernie's past associations will harm him .. well, Hillary's should be examined under the same light.

Oh, so relatively speaking Hillary is prouder that she was into segregation rather than the Moral Majority ... I can think of a lot of words I could have used to describe foolishly supporting a segregationist than 'proud' .. no matter what I was 'differentiating' it against.

I think a little research is in order; http://www.snopes.com/goldwater-girl/

He opposed the Civil Rights Act more on constitutional grounds, and he was against affirmative action. Obviously I disagree on the affirmative action, IMO that was a necessary course correction for years of racial injustice, but Goldwater was not an out-and-out racist like Strom Thurmond and the Dixiecrats were.

Goldwater was a damn hero and Hillary should openly stand up for him today seeing as that's just about her stance today ... Civil rights are getting in the way of security, and she is doing little to work in the affirmative to restore the rights of people to become Democratic Party members and have their say.

The point was that Goldwater was a conservative with some idiotic views but he wasn't a completely reprehensible one. Like the difference between a semi-decent-at-times John McCain vs. an irredeemable shitheel like Ted Cruz.

You and others...many, many other Sanders supporters...need to learn that there's many gradients of grey between the black and the white. A great example there is just because Hillary and Bernie differ on some issues, it doesn't make her a neocon.