HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Proud to be a Goldwater g...

Wed May 4, 2016, 01:07 AM

 

Proud to be a Goldwater girl! 1996 interview!

Segregation was still a thing in 1996?

https://m.

41 replies, 2437 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 41 replies Author Time Post
Reply Proud to be a Goldwater girl! 1996 interview! (Original post)
beedle May 2016 OP
madamesilverspurs May 2016 #1
TM99 May 2016 #2
Betty Karlson May 2016 #8
slipslidingaway May 2016 #6
2banon May 2016 #3
AzDar May 2016 #4
leveymg May 2016 #7
slipslidingaway May 2016 #5
fun n serious May 2016 #9
pinebox May 2016 #16
Kelvin Mace May 2016 #26
uponit7771 May 2016 #10
TheBlackAdder May 2016 #12
uponit7771 May 2016 #13
TheBlackAdder May 2016 #14
Live and Learn May 2016 #17
beedle May 2016 #15
uponit7771 May 2016 #23
beedle May 2016 #24
uponit7771 May 2016 #25
beedle May 2016 #27
uponit7771 May 2016 #28
beedle May 2016 #29
uponit7771 May 2016 #30
beedle May 2016 #31
uponit7771 May 2016 #32
LWolf May 2016 #11
Live and Learn May 2016 #18
Raine May 2016 #20
lancer78 May 2016 #19
RobertEarl May 2016 #22
brooklynite May 2016 #21
Tarc May 2016 #33
beedle May 2016 #34
Tarc May 2016 #36
beedle May 2016 #37
Tarc May 2016 #38
beedle May 2016 #39
Tarc May 2016 #40
beedle May 2016 #41
JoePhilly May 2016 #35

Response to beedle (Original post)

Wed May 4, 2016, 01:13 AM

1. OFFS

This AGAIN???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madamesilverspurs (Reply #1)

Wed May 4, 2016, 01:17 AM

2. Well, once a moderate Republican

 

always a moderate Republican.

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM99 (Reply #2)

Wed May 4, 2016, 04:02 AM

8. Still she is wrong

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madamesilverspurs (Reply #1)

Wed May 4, 2016, 02:12 AM

6. OFFS poor judgement once again. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Original post)

Wed May 4, 2016, 01:33 AM

3. "That's Right, and I feel like my beliefs are rooted in Conservatism"...

 

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Original post)

Wed May 4, 2016, 01:49 AM

4. She may *actually* be telling the truth for once...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AzDar (Reply #4)

Wed May 4, 2016, 02:30 AM

7. this one ^^^

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Original post)

Wed May 4, 2016, 02:11 AM

5. Compare and contrast - 1963 Sanders being arrested during a civil rights protest...

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.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Original post)


Response to fun n serious (Reply #9)

Thu May 5, 2016, 02:05 AM

16. We're not voting Trump

 

but you are voting Bob Dole v2.0

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinebox (Reply #16)

Thu May 5, 2016, 11:44 AM

26. As my friend Obelix says

 



You are ferpectly right!

but more Maggie Thatcher, in my view.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Original post)

Wed May 4, 2016, 04:27 AM

10. "when you talk about ghettos traditionally, what you talk about is African-American communities. "

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #10)

Wed May 4, 2016, 09:11 AM

12. If you took a course on the History of Urban Planning, or even read up on the history of ghettos...

.


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.


.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #12)

Wed May 4, 2016, 10:29 AM

13. Context was poor people not any other way grouped, but nice try....we got cha

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #13)

Wed May 4, 2016, 12:02 PM

14. I know the context too and the polarization of your political affiliation, you fail, I got cha back

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #13)

Thu May 5, 2016, 02:11 AM

17. Ghettos are usually made up of poor people, that wasn't your problem. Try again. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #10)

Thu May 5, 2016, 12:19 AM

15. So, traditionally speaking, when you talk about ghettos in America

 

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'.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Reply #15)

Thu May 5, 2016, 07:00 AM

23. Its a racial stereo type pushed by racist most blacks aren't poor and most poor blacks dont live in

... a ghetto of any type.

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #23)

Thu May 5, 2016, 09:52 AM

24. Then why the F' were

 

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!!.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Reply #24)

Thu May 5, 2016, 11:39 AM

25. Because Sanders said in 2014 racial politics isn't important or something along those lines

... 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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #25)

Thu May 5, 2016, 11:50 AM

27. Wall St. IS "the boggyman of everyone"

 

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Reply #27)

Thu May 5, 2016, 12:00 PM

28. ...and this most likely the response his campaign had after people told him he was wrong..

... 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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #28)

Thu May 5, 2016, 12:06 PM

29. I'm not trying to convince you of what to fear most

 

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?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Reply #29)

Thu May 5, 2016, 03:39 PM

30. We agree, its a common concern that they have little regulation even now...

... 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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #30)

Fri May 6, 2016, 09:54 AM

31. Finally, a Clinton supporter that talks about policy.

 

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'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Reply #31)

Fri May 6, 2016, 11:53 AM

32. GS wasn't a bank holding company till the bail out, that's where Sanders is off... those aren't "big

... 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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Original post)

Wed May 4, 2016, 09:05 AM

11. "My political beliefs are rooted in the conservatism I was raised with." nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #11)

Thu May 5, 2016, 02:11 AM

18. Yeppers. She hasn't changed. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #11)

Thu May 5, 2016, 03:35 AM

20. and that root is still there.. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Original post)

Thu May 5, 2016, 02:13 AM

19. Remember

 

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lancer78 (Reply #19)

Thu May 5, 2016, 04:13 AM

22. She's not running for president

 

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Original post)

Thu May 5, 2016, 03:39 AM

21. You'd have been happy to bote for a Reagan Republican though...right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Original post)

Fri May 6, 2016, 12:08 PM

33. Are we (and by we I mean you) still trying to get mileage out of this?

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #33)

Fri May 6, 2016, 12:29 PM

34. This is not dumb naive schoolkid Hillary, this is 1996 FLOTUS Hillary

 

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Reply #34)

Fri May 6, 2016, 12:39 PM

36. She was differentriating between classic conservatism and the Moral Majority conservatism

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #36)

Fri May 6, 2016, 12:47 PM

37. Please do dig

 

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Reply #37)

Fri May 6, 2016, 12:55 PM

38. Goldwater was a lot of not-so-good things, but a segregationist wasn't one of them

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #38)

Fri May 6, 2016, 01:07 PM

39. I stand corrected

 

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beedle (Reply #39)

Fri May 6, 2016, 01:12 PM

40. Slow down before you hurt yourself there, Bitterman

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #40)

Fri May 6, 2016, 01:14 PM

41. no, her love of war makes her a neocon.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #33)

Fri May 6, 2016, 12:31 PM

35. They're running out of outrges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread