2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThis message was self-deleted by its author
This message was self-deleted by its author (WillyT) on Wed Feb 3, 2016, 12:38 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)She's a corporatists.
I'm strongly for Bernie. I could explain my concerns about Hillary but, really, who wants to read that?
Fwiw, I will be glad when the primaries are over. This Family Feud is too much. Nobody likes being told they're wrong to support who they support. NOBODY.
Respect.
Todays_Illusion
(1,209 posts)I am a retiree, not one of your labeled targets and I don't like Hillary because she is too corporate/banker friendly.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)It's always nice to identify another nice, balanced Bernie supporter. He deserves all you guys he can attract.
redwitch
(14,933 posts)I feel the same.
Respect.
Todays_Illusion
(1,209 posts)reported it so far. I say the propaganda has captured our author
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)it's like 10-1. Of course no one polls them. But, the gay people I know freely tell me this since they know I support Bernie.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)JRLeft
(7,010 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)JRLeft
(7,010 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)It's understandable to confuse, her:
https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.M5a3635da2392128fb8f08172f87c6e82H2&w=150&h=206&c=7&rs=1&qlt=90&pid=3.1&rm=2
With, her:
https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.M6106cdff2df477187f7370d8baa45a41o2&w=85&h=105&c=7&rs=1&qlt=90&pid=3.1&rm=2
If the only time you've even thought about either, was while sitting in the smear circle.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Hell, I told my kids who Tupac and Snoop were.
Let's not think one's race is any better than one's gender.
We've both been shat upon, my black sisters the most.
Don't go there. It sucks.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)I can tell the difference between Pakistani's and Indians and I'm a white woman.
My point: us white folks aren't all racists. The OP admitted (s)he was wrong and changed the OP.
Chill.
JI7
(89,172 posts)your example doesn't follow as the first case was about specific people. indian and pakistani are groups separation over religion although india has a huge number of muslims still.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Really.
It's that subtle.
JI7
(89,172 posts)india/pakistan(and bangladesh) is just very diverse. (overall though it's all one people culturally similar to jews and hispanics)
there will be people in parts of pakistan that resemble people in india more than others within their own country.
there can be some differences between bengali and punjabi . there are indians who are more ethnically east asian .
many indians think i'm from the south though i'm from an area closer to pakistan .
brush
(53,467 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)versus
what I REALLY said.
JustAnotherGen
(31,681 posts)No - he didn't.
When one uses a visible black woman to make one's point - one should be on point.
That would be like me screwing up Jennifer Lawrence and Meryl Streep who have both made waves in the past week for their statements on Feminism, Equal Pay, etc. etc.
It was an HONEST mistake from the poster and we black women -
Well we are used to being confused.
This is America. It's our reality.
You don't have to like it.
You can accept it.
It doesn't impact you.
But when we (1Strong, myself, any other black person) points out the obvious -
Please don't chastise us.
For someone (the OP) who chose to wag his finger and speak to us like imbeciles - he kind of had it coming . . . having his 'innocent who me' mistake called out.
Right?
Number23
(24,544 posts)here then absolutely NOTHING WILL. ***NOTHING.***
In a thread where somebody is DEMANDING that black people "explain" their support for any damn issue or any damn body as if we owe him any damn thing, the fucking OP can't even be bothered to get the "focus" of their outrage right. But somehow... WE'RE the fucking problem here.
The Indian/Pakistani exchange will go down as easily one of the most embarrassing things I've ever seen here. Serious props to J17 for her patience.
JustAnotherGen
(31,681 posts)I didn't see it.
And we owe these people nothing.
This acting like the Democratic Partyis doing us a favor by allowing us to vote for ANY of their candidates has got to stop.
It's nonsense!
Number23
(24,544 posts)as being afflicted with Stockholm syndrome.
And there is little doubt that these folks know that, have known that for a while and it PISSES THEM OFF. Lots of people doing lots of wailing over the diminishing power of the straight white male. And it ain't all coming from Repubs.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)SMH
JI7
(89,172 posts)but they get defensive and insist on their very wrong point.
one can't look pakistan as opposed to indian because those have nothing to do with race/ethnicity etc. it was a British creation based on politics/religion and resulted in people from both sides moving to the other based on religion/politics and not ethnicity. at one point maybe less than 10 years ago the leader of india was born in what is today pakistan and the leader of pakistan in what is today india.
and what that has to do with mixing up 2 very different black women i don't know either.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)But sadly true for a large number of people.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)well done
Dem2
(8,166 posts)That's the word I was trying to think of as I read the original post.
Thanks.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)on DU, calling something someone said, racist, is a far greater sin than what was actually said.
brush
(53,467 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)I believe you mean Sister Souljah.
But I would be remiss in not extending my hand in friendship, giving you a big internet , and to say I am looking forward to working with you to elect Hillary Clinton as our 45th president once she secures the nomination.
Joey Joe Joe
(50 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)I couldn't disagree with you more and I would literally rather not see another sunrise than to budge from my conviction.
That being said I wish to extend to you a hand of friendship, giving you the biggest of internet s, and to wish you success in all your future endeavors.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)login issues worked out.
Glad to have you fully back.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)What an odd message I was getting:
"Your account has had too many failed attempts at logging in. Please contact the DU Administrators."
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Please, change all your passwords on any account you access. Especially your financial accounts.
I know I'm overly cautious, but usually you get those messages when someone has tried to "social engineer" you (not hack - the media calls it all a "hack," but it's not. Social engineering is when someone tries to guess you password based on who you are - like Sarah Palin's yahoo account. Dude guessed her password.).
I know we don't see eye to eye on candidates, but, damn, you're a human. I don't want you to have any other issues.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Was corrected mid-day Thursday.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
sheshe2
(83,319 posts)Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)She says I'm a GREAT singer, and that's all I need to know. She would never lie just to make me happy.
Well, on second thought, she's done that before, but on such an important issue as singing ability? Nah....
WillyT
(72,631 posts)And don't get me wrong...
I Like HRC... I Just don't want her as our standard bearer, or President.
Her time has passed.
This is the time for fundamental change.
And that means Bernie...
BTW...
It does not mean a thing how I vote...
I live in NorCal... and ANY Dem will win here,
I make sure I vote down-ticket... but other states hold the keys.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Massive corporations like "I relied on Google."
treestar
(82,383 posts)The oligarchs are responsible for this!
yardwork
(61,408 posts)This thread is comedy gold.
tishaLA
(14,176 posts)Latifah's name?
Because, you know, it's not "Becky"
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Are suffering from Stockholm if they support Hillary speaks volumes.
jfern
(5,204 posts)when Bill made sure to oversee the execution of a mentally retarded black guy, Ricky Ray Rector, and made sure to strongly criticize Sister Souljah?
WillyT
(72,631 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)shenmue
(38,501 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)to keep that man alive. Clinton was wrong wrong wrong. So many ways wrong. Clinton wasn't kicking a puppy. He killed a human being. A human being without the capacity from knowing right from wrong. A human being without the capacity from knowing right from wrong. A human being without the capacity from knowing right from wrong.
Clinton proved his mad chops for killing. Thank goodness he didn't kick a puppy. He just, you know, killed a human being.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)I couldn't believe Clinton would do such a thing. It was pretty callous.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Last edited Fri Oct 16, 2015, 10:45 AM - Edit history (1)
"Why do African-Americans should support HRC over Bernie" and citing the crap HRC's husband did 25 years ago.
That is a Bullsh!t argument ... just as fallacious as recalling that Ray Ray kicked that puppy in 1758.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)took everybody's mind off Jennifer Flowers. So he left a lifelong bad taste in my mouth by his action. Just like Hillary's vote to kill 1,000,000 innocent Iraqis - the wishes and feelings of us common people mean nothing to the likes of them.
Punkingal
(9,522 posts)Ricky didn't even understand he was being executed...he put his dessert from dinner aside to eat later, as he did every night. I felt sooooo sad when I read that.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Now we see how far back the grudge holding is supposed to go. 8 years was too soon for stevenleser to forgive, now we see it goes back 23 years or more.
Oh wait, I forget. We are supposed to be still mad at Hillary for being a teen Goldwater Girl. Nah, it goes back to Hillary's birth.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Remember all the "OMG, why are you going back and digging that up" over a certain absent writer, infamous for that "POS Used Car salesman" statement? The same people going back to BILL CLINTON'S record were aghast that someone would quote the "POS Used Car salesman" former-poster, and rec'd the 8 year old "Steve said HRC was a liar" post.
No hypocrisy there.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)We don't forget.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Because she is not her 25 year ago husband.
bigtree
(85,915 posts)...I notice you're relying on criticizing choices her husband made in office.
I don't regard Sanders as an especially overt supporter of the black community. I do, however recall Hillary's support of the black community in her state of New York and her husband's support of the black community in Arkansas.
Nothing comparable in Vermont.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)bigtree
(85,915 posts)...but good luck translating that history into support from the community today.
I'd think that support for the civil rights era protests would be a prerequisite for anyone asking for support from the black community. It would be more remarkable if he hadn't made the effort.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)bigtree
(85,915 posts)...which implies that the black community should reject Hillary over bernie.
Again, maybe they appreciate the legislative support she's actually offered in her public positions over Bernie's scant experience representing black communities of voters.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)implies that the black community should reject Hillary over Bernie ... because of stuff her husband did, while as you note, ignoring what she has done
It doesn't much shittier than that..
sheshe2
(83,319 posts)They said we are electing a family. As far as I know, we are possibly electing one woman and she sure as hell is not her husbands keeper and he is not hers.
It is a fact that women can actually stand on their own two feet. I know this will surprise some people,here it is, we actually have a functioning brain. We can walk, talk and chew gum at the same time.
We can crouch in a field and literally push a refrigerator out our vaginas to give you birth.
As some one said, the OP hit the trifecta here, racism, sexism and homophobia.
Sigh~ Good to see you 1SBM. I have missed you.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Was that "supporting black people" too?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)A spokesman for Sanders said he voted for the bill "because it included the Violence Against Women Act and the ban on certain assault weapons."
Sanders reiterated his opposition to capital punishment in 2015. "I just dont think the state itself, whether its the state government or federal government, should be in the business of killing people," he said on a radio show.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/sep/02/viral-image/where-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-stand-/
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)veterans waiting on treatment at the VA hospital - then not so much.
okasha
(11,573 posts)Many were beaten. Some were killed.
Getting arrested was a calculated risk.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)He marched with Martin Luther King and was down with SNCC (until he grew "frustrated with them" (his words) because they wanted to focus on racial issues).
What more do you want!!!!!
bigtree
(85,915 posts)...after he said voters shouldn't base their vote on the 'color of their skin.'
What don't I understand?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)and before sending thank you notes that fails to mention it.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Shouldn't people vote based on the policy stances of the candidate?
I'm not voting based on the gender of the candidate even though I think it's about time for a woman to be president. I don't want Hillary to be my president though.
If I were AA I certainly wouldn't want Ben Carson to be president.
bigtree
(85,915 posts)...not on any related issue I may hold as important and primary to my vote?
Sanders didn't say a thing about the 'gender of the candidate.' He said (on NPR) people shouldn't take the color of THEIR skin into consideration when they vote. It was an ignorant statement which was never clarified or reversed.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)I mentioned gender as an example of me not sticking to that, I was not saying Sanders brought it up.
bigtree
(85,915 posts)...Sanders said NOTHING about voting for black candidates.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)... they vote because society defines us by it
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Taking it into consideration is one thing, voting based on it is another. I think there's a difference there and I'm sure Sanders meant the latter since he's well aware of the issues PoC face every day, though I haven't heard the quote in context.
One of the things that made me so happy to vote for Obama and shed a tear when he won was that he was AA, so I get it maybe to 1/1,000,000 of a degree that you do since I'm not a PoC, but I wouldn't have felt that way if it were Ben Carson of course.
And as I mentioned, I wouldn't vote for someone just because they are a woman. If Elizabeth Warren ran I would vote for her in a second and perhaps over Sanders, but I would have to really look at that. I wouldn't do it automatically just because she is a woman.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)... that I shouldn't consider the color of... MY....skin not the color of the candidates skin and I disagree with him on that.
I have to consider whether or not, for instance, someones stance on guns affects my community where most of my family lives... because guns disproportionately negatively affects blacks in so many ways.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Is there a video of him saying it? I'm curious now to hear it in context.
Of course PoC have to take their own skin color into consideration - how can you not - when voting. It's the basis of your life experience in this country in particular because of all the systemic racism.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)On African-American support for Democrats
Well, here's what you got. What you got is an African-American president, and the African-American community is very, very proud that this country has overcome racism and voted for him for president. And that's kind of natural. You've got a situation where the Republican Party has been strongly anti-immigration, and you've got a Hispanic community which is looking to the Democrats for help.
But that's not important. You should not be basing your politics based on your color. What you should be basing your politics on is, how is your family doing? ... In the last election, in state after state, you had an abysmally low vote for the Democrats among white, working-class people. And I think the reason for that is that the Democrats have not made it clear that they are prepared to stand with the working-class people of this country, take on the big money interests. I think the key issue that we have to focus on, and I know people are uncomfortable about talking about it, is the role of the billionaire class in American society.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)and has fought for equal rights for all for the entirety of his career. How much more overt can you get?
Can people please stop participating in the continuous attempts to frame him as weak on civil rights/social justice/whatever you want to call it. It's just not true. There's a decades long record to show it.
Hillary was worse to BLM than Bernie. Hillary said in the debate she "represented Wall Street" as a senator from NY. No one who is fighting for Wall Street has the best interest of the black community at heart. It's not possible to represent Wall Street and be fighting for the people. She is supposed to represent the people, not banks.
bigtree
(85,915 posts)Hillary has vast more experience and record of actual legislative responses to issues which affect to the black community. Also, she has more experience dealing with black constituents and their concerns in her state of New York and as first lady in Arkansas, than Sanders in Vermont.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)we all know he isn't. Insinuating that he is weak on that is "playing dumb" at best. Where was the outrage on DU of Hillary's treatment of BLM? I didn't see any. That tells me that people are politicizing this to try to make Sanders look bad. She also "represented Wall Street" (her words in the debate) while a senator of NY, so I'm not impressed with that. When she stops worrying about Wall Street and really does fight for the people I might take that point.
And I am simply responding to some posts in this thread, how am I supporting it? I didn't rec it. I'm just trying to discuss something.
bigtree
(85,915 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)Any other questions ???
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Everybody under the bus. Bernie will drive.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Glass houses/stones, figure it out.
PatrickforO
(14,514 posts)under the bus.
As to Bernie driving, well consider how he did NOT throw Clinton under the bus when Cooper was bringing up her emails. Bernie said, 'enough with the damned emails, already! Let's talk about the issues,' and then proceeded to.
So he's not driving the bus that people are getting thrown under.
tishaLA
(14,176 posts)as the very ethos of the campaign. I can never seem to get the logic straight here.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)Identity politics always struck me for code that the folks who are being identified just need to be quiet.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)EOM
Cha
(295,899 posts)Because division is kinda their thing.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=687488
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Hateful, divisive group attack.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Oct 16, 2015, 01:08 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I think some of the language throughout the many posts are divisive. There seems to be much emotion being expressed, some of it very negative. This post is not out of the ordinary of what little else I have read. Emotions seem to run high on this issue and many other issues around this primary season. I confess to being frustrated overall, but this post did not stand out to me, so I, personally, would leave it alone.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Yawn.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This alert seems a bit personal to me.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: C'mon, this goes too far. Everyone I know is gonna vote for the Democrat in 2016 no matter who it is.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No, it happens to be a fact. Not "hateful" at all. Oh, the irony of a Bernie supporter complaining about "divisive". Really?
This is what they hide?
Yikes!
brush
(53,467 posts)Trying to remember if even the Pumas back in '08 were as divisive.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)I don't know what to call these "dividers" but I don't think they are really trying to get any democrat elected, not with crap like this being posted. The Pumas were bad, but this group is making them look reasonable if you ask me.
brush
(53,467 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)I like both Bernie and Hillary. I think Bernie would better represent my views and so I will be voting for him. That in no way equates to disliking Hillary.
Behind the Aegis
(53,823 posts)yardwork
(61,408 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)If/when I see others doing so ... I will ask them the same question.
we can do it
(12,116 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)The only thing more tiresome is the: "What me?" response they always give when called on it ... right before they accuse me of being a racist and divisive, when I call them on it.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)she is for marriage equality.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)fixed it for you.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)If you are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. They don't get how offensive insinuating that is.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)kath
(10,565 posts)She had to make absolutely SURE which way the wind was blowing, with that finger ever in the air.
yardwork
(61,408 posts)It's not like either of them would suddenly stop supporting gay rights now, so this whole line of questioning is silly.
Meanwhile, the Republican front runners are not exactly pro-gay.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)But I damn near spit my beer out when Hillary said she has always been a progressive. At the points that she did not support gay marriage, most progressives were on board for quite some time.
wyldwolf
(43,865 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)okasha
(11,573 posts)You're not very good at it.
betsuni
(25,122 posts)okasha
(11,573 posts)betsuni
(25,122 posts)Some people need a lot of attention.
okasha
(11,573 posts)Running around with their hair, and frequently their pants, on fire.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)Aeschylus
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)nc4bo
(17,651 posts)Same old shit going on just a different day.
I bought Hope and Change and actually thought black folks would get some relief from one of our own but guess what?
Nope.
So.....at least Sanders was walking the walk for whatever reasons why he felt it was the right thing to do.
Maybe there's room for a little more Hope and some actual Change.
I know you weren't talking to a Sanders supporter but I am black and I felt the need to put my 2 cents in the pot.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)DADT was an improvement upon the previous shit, a compromised step forward after years of nothing but persecution. The leading issue of the day was not marriage rights but the fight against AIDS which had been criminally neglected by his Republican predecessors who stood by while tens of thousands died and did absolutely nothing. You, dear OP, have often defended those who voted for those genocidal policies enforced by cackling right wing bigots. I can link to your screed 'so now Reagan voters were anti gay?!?!?!' which you posted when you wanted us all to vote for Reagan supporting enemies of minority communities you feel are now 'reformed'. Cross party straight folks need to cut out the fucking lectures.
Most LGBT I know support Bernie, but this is exactly the sort of shit that can make that turn on a dime. Don't make the room uncomfortable for minority persons, WillyT. You have a habit of that and it needs to cease. Do you want links to your various bullshit lectures? Cut it the fuck out you straight white creator of division.
You live in the Bay Area, go ask LGBT and African Americans these questions live in the way you do it here, see how it flies. I dare you.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)eom
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)eom
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)He has done this exact same sort of post as a 'Warren Supporter'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026231263
He is the poster who started the whole 'Civil Rights Don't Matter' trope:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026669120
Here is a nearly identical version of that thread posted at a different time;
Can We Have An Open Honest Discussion About Progressives, Civil Rights, And Income Inequality ???
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026430750
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)eom
zappaman
(20,605 posts)It's obvious, isn't it?
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)JI7
(89,172 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)I know, you and Manny are always thinking so monolithic!
JI7
(89,172 posts)This is too funny
And sad at the same time
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)JI7
(89,172 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)We aren't into right wing, sorry. If we were into right wing we would back your candidate.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Trying to pit minorities against each other - not cool.
As Bernie supporters I hope we're better than this.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Let's stick to the issues.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I wish he would have listened.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)Behind the Aegis
(53,823 posts)Thank you!
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I feel the same way about you, my friend.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)Judging by the fact this OP is still up...I guess not.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Congratulations, way to prove you're no better than the op - some of you are just here to stir the shit.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)Fabulous OP, eh?
mcar
(42,206 posts)This OP is the worst of DU.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)geardaddy
(24,924 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Once you realize who this is helping, perhaps you and others like you can collectively take out the trash.
yardwork
(61,408 posts)Never seen so many freepers running around with their togas showing.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)beam me up scottie.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Thanks for not taking a pot shot at me like some others did.
No good deed goes unpunished and all that...
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)I rarely keep track of who is hating on who.
Did you see the new Star Wars trailer. I assume you're a science fiction fan. I watched it during halftime of Monday night football. Looked like it could be pretty good.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I never thought I'd go see another Star Wars film but I have high hopes for this one.
I know what I want for my birthday!
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Cali_Democrat This message was self-deleted by its author.
NonMetro
(631 posts)That's "iffy", IMO, and if she doesn't - well, I don't even want to think about that!
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Bernie's letter to DU makes no mention of bigotry against blacks and LGBT people.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/118729194
Bernie seems to have a singular focus on anti-corporate economic populism.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)I have absolutely no way to speak for other lesbians and say what they think because we are not a homogeneous community. (Sounded funny, didn't it?)
I answer for Aerows, have always answered for Aerows and will continue to answer for Aerows.
I will answer for Aerows until I am put in the grave, but I refuse to answer for crimes committed that I had no part in. That is a subtle, passive aggressive form of bullying.
When you (general statement not you specifically) ascribe the transgressions of someone that didn't commit them to a person simply because they disagree with you, you are engaging in gutter politics.
Take that as you will.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Justify yourselves!!!!
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)As if blacks vote based on welfare benefits.
Standard right wing thinking.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)... skills for introspection and self reflection to notice.
Could be due to the thin air he has to breathe sitting up there on high looking down.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)A new low!
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)I don't support Hillary Clinton for a host of reasons and I'm black & LGBT.
And if you think that the only thing that black most voters are concerned about is "welfare" and Sister Soulja then...let me shut up...
And besides, Bernie voted for the crime bill too, so he has NOT "ALWAYS had your back."
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)I don't presume to speak for other LGBT people and I resent people that presume to speak for me. I also don't appreciate being considered a monolithic hive-mind...
WillyT
(72,631 posts)It blows me away.
moobu2
(4,822 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)Until he was elected. Hillary had it all tied up with a neat little bow. Until she didn't.
Ever heard that phrase about history and being doomed to repeat it? Well have at it!
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)paragon of racial equality Goldwater). Who cares?
Bet you're a member of the 'look forward, not backward' brigade.
Anansi1171
(793 posts)Feel better?
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Why would the AA Community be supporting a family that screwed them ???
Anansi1171
(793 posts)Many AAs fondly remember a very healthy expansion of the black middle class during the Clinton years, and MANY AAs trust HRC in that respect.
Whatever her shortcomings, BS isnt even close to winning my support. When it comes to the cares of AAs right now,I'd go so far as to say Sanders is unauthentic and equivocal in his approach to racial disparities.
How's that?
ancianita
(35,812 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)My first protest as a college student was supporting Harvey Milk...
It was a much more radical time apparently... so sad we wussed out.
JI7
(89,172 posts)Years.
and Welfare itself is not a program based on race. it's a program that is open to all people . it's not a black issue.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)vanished into the mists after a few gestures of support around the Briggs amendment 'wussed out'. The LGBT movement doubled down, got far more radicalized and engaged in the most aggressive activism this country had seen since the 60's. And you, WillyT, in the Bay Area, could have been a supporter and participant is some of the most moving and important actions in the political history of California and the United States. But apparently you did not even notice what was going on around you:
1990:
We were fraught, frustrated, enraged, and with very little hope. But we were also determined, and with all of us together there was a feeling of strength and even festivity.
Journalist Tim Kingston is telling me over the phone what it felt like to be in San Francisco from June 20-24 in 1990, when the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) staged historic protests during the Sixth International Conference on AIDS.
http://www.48hills.org/2015/06/16/the-week-act-up-shut-sf-down/
The link will show you what you missed by 'wussing out' as you did. This is your own home town! Look at the photos of your courageous neighbors, read the stories of men and women in the streets and in the halls of power standing up and acting up!!!!
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)TM99
(8,352 posts)Poverty and incarceration grew in our communities during the Clinton years.
That you believe that Sanders is the unauthentic one when he has been consistent and congruent over decades and Clinton who changes just about every decade she has been in the public arena tells me you do not see reality as it is.
840high
(17,196 posts)asking this. If you ever get a clear answer, let us know.
Response to 840high (Reply #88)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Aerows
(39,961 posts)that said:
tblue37
(64,979 posts)Marriage was largely polygynous through much of human history--including biblical times. It has been polyandrous in a few places, too. Even today polygyny is entirely acceptable in many places (e.g., America's buddy country Saudi Arabia). But one man/one woman marriages have been the norm only for a relatively short time, and even at that, not universally.
Saying that was either being ignorant or--more likely--a result of political calculation. I believe that Obama rejected marriage equality until he "evolved" solely because of political expediency. I don't know about the Clintons, but I suspect political expediency there, too. They knew, as did Obama, that the country as a whole wasn't there yet. Maybe they could have shown more leadership on the issue, but maybe doing so would have allowed a true antigay bigot to get into a position of power, which would have been even worse. It's hard to say.
brush
(53,467 posts)Back in the '90s everybody was working including black folks.
Even in the Obama admin black employment hasn't been nearly as robust.
And don't even mention Cheney/Bush
Really disappointed in how so many Sanders supporters are costing him possible votes with bullshit, racist posts.
And Hillary is not Bill Clinton from the '92 campaign. Give it a rest with this crappola.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)ancianita
(35,812 posts)that she's really done on her own to always have had the back of half the population.
In the primary I am for Bernie, but for those who hold up half the sky, she has the better record.
Any time you care to ask...
WIProgressive88
(314 posts)Other than a couple minor quips with some of his past votes on gun control, I think that Bernie is the best candidate on pretty much all of the issues. But there are clearly members of minority communities who face everyday non-economic based oppression who do not feel that he is speaking enough to their concerns. I do believe that Bernie will be a great president in terms of social and racial justice, but as a straight white dude, it is not my place to tell our African American and LGBTQ brothers and sisters which candidate will best address the issues affecting their communities. They have the life experiences and knowledge to make that judgment; I do not.
No candidate is entitled to anyone's vote. If you read the African American group on this board, there are several posters who are undecided, but I guarantee posts like this push those voters further and further away from Bernie. And I don't blame them. If someone attributed my voting preferences to Stockholm Syndrome rather than a rational thought process based on my life experiences, I would be less inclined to support his or her candidate as well. We should be reaching out to people, listening to their concerns, and respectfully make the case for why we feel Bernie should be the next President of the United States; we should not be chastising people because of which candidate they choose or choose not to support.
tblue37
(64,979 posts)extraordinarily talented black people (not to mention other minorities, including hispanics--Cisneros, Mineta, Richardson, Pena, Alvarez--and even Lebanese--i.e., Donna Shala) in highly visible positions, like Marian Wright Edelman, Ron Brown, Jesse Brown, Togo D. West, etc.
He also included a lot more women, both white and minority, in important positions--Edelman, Shalala, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, and the first female SoS, Attorney General, etc.
Clinton made a real effort to open up high government office to women and minorities, thus "normalizing" the idea by making it so common. I think those efforts really made a difference for minorities and women in terms of opening up opportunities for such positions even beyond his time in office.
I am a Bernie supporter, but I will gladly support HRC if she is nominated. I do dislike her corporate/bankster ties, her involvement with the Family, and her hawkishness, but I rather suspect she figures those things are necessary to position herself so she can get into office in order to promote the more beneficial policies she has been promoting for decades.
I fear that she underestimates how constrained she will be as a result of such compromises and deal-making. You can't lie down with dogs without rising up with fleas. But I think (HOPE) that her intention is to use the office for good, not Ill, and despite her politically expedient actions and votes for policies that I recoil from, her career on the whole has done a lot to promote issues that benefit women and children both in the US and around the world.
Furthermore, like Obama Unchained, the badass president who doesn't have to worry about getting elected any more, a President Hillary would be at the end of her political career, so she wouldn't need to worry about protecting her own future political options, so she might well do a lot of good.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Last edited Fri Oct 16, 2015, 08:19 AM - Edit history (1)
with 15 recs, at that. (make that 23, no surprises there)
What is your deal?
Keep it up...
stevil
(1,537 posts)What a nasty post. You don't deserve an answer.
JI7
(89,172 posts)democrats.
if you are really concerned with gay rights how doyou explain your support for the pope while attacking those who are much more supportive of gay rights ?
Behind the Aegis
(53,823 posts)It is one thing to advocate to minorities in favor of your candidate, it is quite another to chastise those minorities because they don't support your candidate.
JI7
(89,172 posts)i actually learned a lot from reading your posts on these issues.
the question of why certain people support certain candidates would be good and informative in itself. but i question the OP's intentions because of things like the support for the Pope. plus the OP has ignored all the answers many have given . not just in this thread but many others.
and as you say it's just chatising the groups rather than wanting to actually listen.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)Can you cease and desist from explaining to the LGBTQ community what we should feel (according to George II) instead of what we do feel?
I'm sure you are an expert on being a lesbian in your own mind, but since I am sitting here living it, it's not nearly as glamorous as movies of a certain type make it out to be.
My agenda is paying the car insurance, getting to work, looking after elderly parents, and every now and then, I dedicate some time to DU as a volunteer.
Because I love this site.
I love discussing politics with other human beings.
I think some folks forget that there are *human beings* sitting behind the keyboard.
George II
(67,782 posts)"Can you cease and desist from explaining to the LGBTQ community what we should feel (according to George II) instead of what we do feel?"
When did I do that? I never "explained" what the LGBTQ community should feel. What makes you think that?
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)joshcryer
(62,265 posts)Lisa D
(1,532 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, will you assert that it is a cow?
The Faux outrage against folks that don't support Hillary is absurd.
Where are you? It's right there in the name: Democratic
Why are some so terrified of Democracy?
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Regardless of the fact that the new technology of cell phones and mini pads etc all exist through slave labor and the use of expanding the dumping in our oceans.
The Suburbanites I know that are for Hillary really have operated along the same lines of economics that she and Bill do.
First they inherited their parents' businesses in the late 1980's. Then they slashed the workers' hourly wages back in the 1990's. The Grand Finale was when they let their companies go belly up in the mid to late 1990's.
And that way they got a lot of money through Golden Parachuting out of the day to day running of their parents' business.
Who cares if the workers' pensions were destroyed by all that?
Rather similar to how Bill Clinton signed off on the Banking Modernization Act which destroyed Glass Steagal. And eventually destroyed the middle class. But hey, it worked out for the Clintons!! They both do very very well in front of Corporate Podiums, commanding over $ 375,000 per speech.
Number23
(24,544 posts)Not one surprise there. Not a single one.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)I don't even know where to begin on how much is wrong with your OP. So I'll just ask - Do you understand how ridiculous it is that you don't know the difference between Queen Latifah and Sister Soulja?
I'm still on the fence as far as which Dem I'm going to support, but these type posts do nothing to sway people to your candidate. I think Sanders would take a dim view of this type of tactic.
It's quite pathetic.
sheshe2
(83,319 posts)Good post.
I've made myself scarce here. Way to ugly.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)As I said, I'm undecided still - some days leaning toward Hillary, some days toward Sanders. Would be interested if Biden got in, but his games are beginning to bore me.
Posts like this, however, simply make supporters of whichever candidate posts them look very bad. This is the second really awful one I've seen from a Sanders supporter. The other was a vicious photo of Hillary that had no place on DU.
Sensible supporters of both candidates should try and rein in their more unreasonable peers.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)nt
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)you'd think that he could spell "Latifah" correctly...the fact that he doesn't (in spite of the many comments here that point to the correct spelling) sure looks like...somethin'
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Andy823
(11,495 posts)I don't think all of Sanders supporters should be grouped together. There is one "inner" group that seem to have taken over things, the same group that have bashed president Obama from pretty much day one. They hate Obama, hate pretty much the whole democratic party, and of course they hate Hillary. Their agenda is not helping people come over to Bernie, instead I think it makes people less likely to want to vote for Bernie. Sometimes I really wonder if this group is "really" trying to get Bernie elected.
Prism
(5,815 posts)Stockholm Syndrome? C'mon man, seriously? I don't think you realize how condescendingly offensive this post is.
I'll certainly argue with fellow LGBTers a little about primary choices, but people have their reasons.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)tishaLA
(14,176 posts)I doff my imaginary cap to you
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)rbrnmw
(7,160 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)rbrnmw
(7,160 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)I thought he was one of The Pips?
rbrnmw
(7,160 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)My favorite Marvin Gaye song will always be BEAT IT!
rbrnmw
(7,160 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)rbrnmw
(7,160 posts)rbrnmw
(7,160 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)rbrnmw
(7,160 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)I love the stuff he did with Dr. Dray
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-cTpewvi0h3A/UADn6EOystI/AAAAAAAAFiA/nihS5hdJ898/s1600/Cliff+01.jpg
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)jfern
(5,204 posts)RandySF
(57,598 posts)And everyone can support whomever they want. By the way, up until a few months ago, Bernie was not even a member of the party.
MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)to follow your wishes? You feel like they owe it to you?
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Racism is alive and thriving on DU.
stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
betsuni
(25,122 posts)This is an outrage! Have the authorities been alerted? The poor hostages. Bill Clinton's wife is a monster. Thank god for DU. I really get the fair and balanced news here.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)... most people on welfare are not black this post is shit
betsuni
(25,122 posts)No matter how many times the fact is repeated that most people on welfare are not black, it will never sink into some people's brains, never.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)and understanding for Republicans:
"But what I mean is... how did we get to this polarizing enmity in our national politics and discourse?
And I'm talking about both within the same party, but particularly between parties.
My old man, a Marine Bomber (B-25) pilot in WWII, was before and after that (plus Korea) a journalist. He wrote for a Chicago paper as a police reporter, then for the San Diego Union, the Copley News Service, Cox... and eventually was part of the California Highway Commission which built our state's freeway system. He knew, at least in the cosmos of California, all sorts of politicians, lobbyists, and movers and shakers. Hell, he'd hold cocktail parties, and I as a young tyke would spend my time stealing the onions out of the martinis of state senators and assemblymen.
Hell, when Reagan was running for re-election for governor of California, he invited the journalists covering the capitol, and their families, to the mansion for a huge BBQ complete with a cowboy on a horse doing rope tricks and such. Me and Skipper, now known as Ron Reagan, were the terrors of the dunk tank that day. And everybody, young old Republican or Democrat had a great time. My dad would not allow me to wear my Jesse Unruh button to the party, but he did get a kick out of the attempt.
My point is, from what I saw in the late sixties and into the seventies, from my youngish viewpoint, was that these guys, and they were almost always guys, seemed to actually get along no matter their party. They may have vociferously disagreed, defended their positions, their donors and their constituents, but they always seemed to like and respect each other at the end of the day.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/?az=archives&j=1874&page=1
So why then does the OP keep spreading polarizing, bigoted enmity among Democrats? What would Dutch and Skipper say about that?
It skeeves me out that a poster who calls for Democrats to like and respect Republicans would stake out such a viciously divisive stance among Democrats and particularly in this way, crafted as it is as an attack on LGBT and African American voters for having a franchise equal to Skipper's playmate.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
betsuni
(25,122 posts)mcar
(42,206 posts)How this OP didn't get hidden is quite beyond me, even on today's DU.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)gollygee
(22,336 posts)You have a really good memory about what has gone on around here, and you're also good at connecting the dots.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)Hekate
(90,189 posts)Thank you, Bluenorthwest.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)from a former Reagan supporter remind me of former crackheads telling everyone not to smoke a joint or have a drink. Hey, I wasn't the one with the problem - you were!
GusBob
(7,286 posts)Spazito
(49,738 posts)and that's saying something these days.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)barely understands. This bullshit is not helpful to Bernie, not helpful to Hillary, not helpful to any Democrat and this is the exact brand of bullshit this particular poster has been purveying on DU for months and months, long before Bernie announced.
Straight white men like the OP might want to consider that they are not the sages minority communities look to for political guidance.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)What a disgusting OP. Having read about this in another thread, figured I'd take a look around and see what was up. Now I really wish I hadn't.
This should really be self deleted. Editing would just leave a slimy trail.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)If I may I would counsel him to sit back, take a deep breath, and give serious consideration to the possibility that smart folks of good will can see the world very differently from himself.
Rose Siding
(32,623 posts)Your atttitude is far more generous than mine. I find the op to be divisive flame bait, at the least.
Walk away
(9,494 posts)I support your efforts to alienate all POC and anyone else you can think of to patronize! I like it when Bernie and his supporters show their true colors. Although, I feel bad about the folks you guy treat poorly. I think they are starting to become immune to this kind of garbage.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)You should be utterly ashamed of this post. You should be ashamed that a good DUer got a bogus hide because of your disgusting thread.http://www.democraticunderground.com/118729258
You can attempt to bullshit us and say this was out of principal but it was not. This was a fuck you thread for those of us who support Hillary Clinton and you wanted to rub our nose in shit.
Stockholm Syndome? Are you fucking kidding me WillyT?
I have always thought you were thought provoking and that was always a good thing, even though I might disagree.
But this was nothing but a fuck you to African Americans and LGBT members and you should be fucking ashamed.
Whatever appreciation I had for you is gone.
Go ahead and alert and silence me till early December. But the truth must be said.
Shame on you WillyT.
JustAnotherGen
(31,681 posts)Seriously.
Notice I'm responding to you - I won't dignify the OP. I owe him nothing.
Number23
(24,544 posts)type of hateful idiocy for months now. Which is why an endless sea of progressive groups, movements and figures has called these people out more times than anyone can count.
But it's everybody in the entire world's fault that more poc aren't supporting their candidate and their rage that we aren't "doing as we're told" is what's lead to the type of lashing out that we're seeing in this OP, on Twitter, on John Lewis' Facebook page, on Black Lives Matter's Facebook page and everywhere black people dare to tread. The decision to lash out at gays is a bit more recent but we all know that bigotry doesn't live in a bubble. If someone has problems with black folks, they usually have problems with gays, women and other minorities as well.
So I sincerely hope that everyone remembers this the next time some puffed up, out of control Sanders supporter tries to blame the enmity between his campaign and minority communities on the minorities. I've seen so many incredibly stupid people here blame the rift on the AA forum and black people in general, accusing us of "driving a wedge" because we spoke up about this crap first as well as as loudly and often. I've always been damn glad that we did and seeing this kind of crap does nothing but cement that.
And yes, CaliDem's hide was complete and total bullshit. But again, I hope that no one is surprised. This is the nature of this place now and has been for a while.
betsuni
(25,122 posts)Aargh.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)I guess that's all I can say that won't get a hide.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)You should remember to delete this vile crap.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)You are actively making DU suck.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)BooScout
(10,406 posts)....for the sake of all of us.... this has no business anywhere on DU.
randome
(34,845 posts){Shakes head with abundant enuii.}
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)If you're serious about a more nuanced discussion, you know where the Afr'Am forum is...
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Response to WillyT (Original post)
Post removed
Zorra
(27,670 posts)For that matter, why would anyone, particularly the economically disadvantaged and/or working class folk, vote for Republicans?
They do nothing that is good whatsoever.
Makes no logical sense at all to me; but in this pseudo-democracy, I am resigned to the fact that others have different opinions than I have. These opinions somehow make sense to those who, from my POV, apparently vote against their own interests.
There are various reasons why individuals from any group vote the way they do. We're all just people. Like you, I am a reasonably well informed "policy and integrity" oriented voter. Obviously, not everyone is a reasonably well informed "policy and integrity" voter, or there would be no republican party.
We both know that the reasons people vote for who they vote for are myriad. Some people will even vote for a candidate because they have better hair than another candidate. Some because of the candidate's gender. I'm very sure there are more than a few people out there who won't vote for Hillary simply because she is a woman.
I suspect that there are even some women out there who will not vote for Hillary because she is a woman. Maybe they feel that they cannot vote for a woman because it goes against the tenets of their religion.
In general, this may seem illogical and unreasonable to many Democrats and left leaning independents, particularly reasonably informed policy and integrity oriented Dem and left leaning voters.
But it is what it is, and it ain't gonna change any time soon. In the meantime, it feels to me like the best course of action is for we Bernie supporters to spread the message of democratic equality, justice, and compassion, put ourselves in the voting majority, and significantly change our country and our world for the general benefit of everyone.
AJH032
(1,124 posts)Re: DADT - Bill Clinton wanted to allow gays to serve openly in the military (this was part of his 1992 campaign platform) but settled on "DADT" because Congress would not agree to it. With DOMA, I believe this passed with a veto-proof majority, really forcing Clinton's hand, despite his objections to it, even then.
Obviously I do not support either of these policies, but I think it's important to understand them in context. I think it's outright dishonest to say that HRC openly "promoted" either one.
Walk away
(9,494 posts)who supports her, this is the site to come to!
It's like a festival of hate and mis-information!
MisterP
(23,730 posts)descent (or, well, Africans), it's backing coups and turmoil in Honduras and Africa!
JustAnotherGen
(31,681 posts)Most black Americans that descend from slaves have no connections with that Continent.
Well one of my husband's cousins is studying in Egypt right now - but she's an Italian with dual Germsn/Italian citizenship.
DemocraticWing
(1,290 posts)I know this is a dubious claim spread by Hillary supporters, and sometimes believed by Sanders supporters, but I can assure you there is no consensus in the LGBT community about which candidate to support.
If I had to poll every other LGBT person I know, Bernie would win. But this is because I'm 25 and most of my friends are in the Bernie's strongest age group (18-29).
LostOne4Ever
(9,267 posts)[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]If you want someone to vote for them you have to EARN that support, and each person is different with their own priorities and goals.
And it is pretty pathetic to call those who don't agree with your opinion suffering from Stockholm syndrome.[/font]
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I like to pretend people who disagree with me have Stockholm Syndrome too... it lets us dispose of the inconvenience of nuance and degrees of difference.
On the other hand, I try not to do so publicly as it illustrates my own lack of character much more than it illustrates any point I wanted to make. Though no doubt, you somehow still believes doing so illustrates a point though...
JI7
(89,172 posts)About minorities for a long time now. Before sanders was running.
Check out many of the other threads .some which claim to want an honest discussion yet always ignoring what people are saying.
Number23
(24,544 posts)that these same folks have shit on this president since Day 1. Nothing more. Yeah.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)Same bashers doing their best to stir things up by going negative all the time, and now it seems like they they are going to extremes to see who can get the most recs, and views for making such insane posts.
sheshe2
(83,319 posts)It is all about recs
Todays_Illusion
(1,209 posts)make it a fact. And AA's are not the only people who need to "discover"Bernie's ideas.
So WillyT, to me, you seem to be feeding the great dividers.
olddots
(10,237 posts)I could be a valley girl or a Peruvian goat hearder ,my answers would be as useless telling you to delete these questions ....carry on because conflict is better than being repukians .
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)... explained here over and over again that relationships count a lot more than saying I marched with so and so and the sense of entitlement that goes along with that.
Willy T knows thsi
MineralMan
(146,190 posts)I'm astounded.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)It think his mentor is proud of Willy. He can stir things up with the best of them.
Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)LGBT here. I *never* liked her.
I remember her running for the senate here in 2000. LGBT Parade was last week in June, as always.
If memory serves ( no I can't find a link) she agreed to march in the Parade.... but she and her crew ran through side streets to join the march AFTER it passed St Patrick's Cathedral. Because she didn't want to show "disrespect" to the Cardinal by marching w. the sodomites in front of that holy place.
So she hooked up w. the march some place JUST BELOW 49th street and 5th. The parade launch was 59th street.
As I said.... no, I can't find a link. ( Anyone here remember it?)
But ya gotta admit:it sure SOUNDS like her. No?
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)I am also LGBT and never liked her.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)Are overall more conservative than DU. People vote against their interests (IMHO) all the time, so I'm not so surprised anymore, I'm just glad African Americans and GLBT people seem to vote against their interests as a group far less than whites. Voting for the neoconservative Democratic candidate is far more preferable and less head scratching than voting for the fuckers in the GOP.
A lot of people automatically equate minority status with being liberal, but that isn't the case at all.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)MellowDem
(5,018 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)... There's not one statement or claim in the article that says most Black's lean conservative or right of center
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)The article does break down the non-white population at points, but it's a long article. Anyways, what I said is that blacks tend to lean more conservative as a group within the Democratic Party. That's the context.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)... even relative to democrats.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)Just that blacks as a demographic group do. I'd say the makeup of the different typologies and their demographic breakdown clearly show blacks in higher proportions of the more conservative typologies of the Democratic Party.
It's mostly the cultural/religious questions that really drag the demographic more conservative.
Only 39 percent of blacks, to this day, support marriage equality:
http://www.pewforum.org/2015/07/29/graphics-slideshow-changing-attitudes-on-gay-marriage/
That's huge. When most of a demographic holds bigoted ideas (61 percent!) they're not going to be among the most liberal demographics in the Democratic Party.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Who told you that YOU get to define what a "liberal" is?
Only the nice white progressive vote the right way for the right reason...
HOW DARE YOU CHASTIZE LGBT'S AND AFRICAN AMERICANS WHEN IT'S STRAIGHT WHITES THAT ARE FAR MORE LIKELY TO VOTE REPUBLICAN...HOW DARE YOU11111
Behind the Aegis
(53,823 posts)That has to be one of the more bizarre posts I think I have seen at DU in awhile. I'd love to see where those "facts" came from...I think. Conservative as compared to what/who? Stalin? Strange days at DU.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)As the post clearly said... Not surprising that an online community that draws self-identified liberals will be more liberal than just about any demographic group as a whole.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)But this poll did it by policy issues, and these were the results: http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/26/the-political-typology-beyond-red-vs-blue/
I'm not chastising anyone, if you read my post, just stating my opinion that most people don't vote their interests, and whites as a group are the worst offenders IMHO.
A lot of DUers wrongly think minorities will be just as progressive as DU just because of their minority status, but that's wrong.
DU is an online community for people who self identify generally as progressive, it's going to be much more liberal than the general population of oat any demographic group.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)what people's interests are according to your standards and your own interests.
There is a spectrum of beliefs under the so-called Democratic umbrella or even the "liberal" umbrella. You (and I don't mean "you," personally) don't get to define those term for me.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)I don't vote out of pure self-interest, but for who I think would be best for everyone. That's how many people vote.
When I say that Republicans are voting against their interest, I am defining those interests by my values, but any judgment requires that. Then it's just a matter of convincing others that it is in their interest, or them convincing you otherwise.
I think most people vote against their interests because it's not their priority in who they choose, or they are manipulated. The fact that most voters don't know or care about policy positions of candidates says a lot about how effectively they are looking out for their interests.
It is just an opinion, but that's what a democracy is, you will be imposing your interests and values to some extent on others through your vote. People can define themselves however they want, it doesn't mean I have to accept those labels as accurate. Clinton has identified as liberal. I don't agree with that.
Number23
(24,544 posts)You nailed it. And with "allies" like this, who needs enemies???
lib87
(535 posts)And you have fellow DU cheerleaders agreeing with you and excusing your post!
Fuck you and your crew.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)applies more to straight white male non-millionaires voting for republicans.
Maybe you can provide some 'insight' on that.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)this disgraceful thread and moved on as if it weren't even here.
Honestly, you should have to look at this every day when you sign on.
betsuni
(25,122 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,681 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)but..."Stockholm syndrome"?
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)majority members are of similar financial positions and reject those who support us just for having more money or less money?
You know who is in the 1%? Elizabeth Warren. You were very fond of her. Reagan voting 1%er.
So why is it that you straight white folks are entitled to drool all over 1%ers openly? I don't dig those Double Standard Politics.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And I'm not a Warren supporter, I back Bernie. I had mixed feelings about Warren at best, and she was wrong to ever have supported Reagan or aligned with anyone who is antigay. The only reason I even considered her was that, if Bernie hadn't run, at that point there would have been no candidate in the race challenging corporate control of life. Would you really have preferred HRC to be nominated without opposition, when you know that would have meant she'd be running on Bill's 1992 platform again?
You're lashing out at me here for no reason. I attacked the OP. I alerted the mods on it too. We're not on opposite sides here.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Like the Pope, Liz has some things she says that I like but also has a big, giant list of negatives that need to be transformed, explained and for which amends need to be made.
So my goal has been Bernie. Not Elizabeth, they are not the same at all. I opposed Liz as a candidate because Liz was unable to stand up and answer valid questions about her own past without spewing bullshit and deflections.
Some of you wanted Liz I opposed that. I favored Bernie Sanders. I still do. Try to get that through your head. I not only support Bernie Sanders, was doing so when you and the great Willy were touting Warren. I wanted that spot for Bernie who is honest, direct and was never on the side of genocidal bigots.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)I strongly support Bernie. The only reason I even considered Warren is that, at that time, it didn't look like Bernie was going to run. Once he got into the picture, I was on his side.
We aren't in disagreement here, ok?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)social justice as best they can. The Clintons are a good example. Why do some people, especially those completely focuses on social justice think the establishment will help them? It would be like OWS voting for HRC.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)in spite of what you may think are their reasons for doing so.
I could point out so many examples; the vote in the Republican-led NY Senate for marriage equality, forcing Jan Brewer's hand on vetoing an odious religious freedom bill are two of them.
many liberals would have preferred that LGBT's just sat down and shut up.
onpatrol98
(1,989 posts)It has been evident for quite awhile that the AA community can't explain a thing to you. I mean, first of all, who are you to demand an explanation? And as for being upset about the loss of welfare programs. Following your logic, you're sticking with Bernie because he'll let you keep your welfare benefits and he's been kind to Queen Latifah. In fact, following your logic...after Bernie tried his hand at writing Science Fiction...as a woman, I should never give him the time of day EVER AGAIN. EVER...EVER...EVER...AGAIN. Did I mention, NEVER, EVER.
But, I'd have better luck explaining to my dog why he shouldn't chase the cat. My results would be better. And, my dog likes me. He never wastes my time.
Speaking of time, who has that kind of time and where would we start, if we gave a care. And, well, I can only speak for me. I don't give a care. This post I've typed in reply to you, took about 3 minutes. That was really about 2 minutes and 59 seconds more than your post was worth. The only reason I replied was because of that awful reflex of watching a car wreck. You want to turn away, but you just can't. And, the last time I checked, I thought we put to rest this notion of Bernie being a savior to PoC. Bernie's a democratic politician. Just because he's St. Bernie to you doesn't mean that's what he represents to me. To me, these are just two politicians with SLIGHTLY different political agendas running against the clown car convention that is the current republican party.
COMPLETE freedom implies, "Naw sah...I's ain't got to tell ya, nothing, Mista. Willy".
Vattel
(9,289 posts)Stockholm syndrome. But your post is condescending and tone-deaf and should be self-deleted.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)I do believe he carries the burden of latent paternalism, that certain groups are incapable of thinking for themselves, and could benefit by his instruction. I don't believe it is deliberate but he is incapable of suppressing it and it inevitably comes to the fore.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)sometimes also known as white privilege.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)This OP was beyond stupid and beyond racist. And I say that as a person who absolutely does NOT want HRC nominated.
For the love of goddess, please self-delete it before it does any more damage.
greatauntoftriplets
(175,694 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)kick.
Sid
Person 2713
(3,263 posts)people who all look and vote alike .you can't even tell one women of color from another and all AAs are concerned about Welfare benefits as the number one voting issue because what? All AAs are on welfare ?
Fuck that shit
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)eom
Person 2713
(3,263 posts)The smug generalization and negative racial stereotyping
It's insulting even way beyond the "free stuff" insinuation
The real mental issue is with someone who thinks talking to people like this OP will make people rethink their reasons for endorsing a candidate
Now that's crazy!!
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)posts I've ever seen here at DU. Do you even read the replies to this thread, or respond to them?
LBGT and African-Americans have traditionally voted far more liberal than straight white people. Frankly, if they were in the majority of voters we'd not only have a much fairer and more equitable country, we'd also have achieved many of the things you proclaim to favor, many years ago.
Asking them whether they have Stockholm Syndrome is both homophobic and racist, in my opinion. The real question is why straight white people vote so conservative. In case you haven't noticed, they are the republican base.
I'm amazed your post made it by a jury here. And if you bother reading replies here, I think you should be ashamed of yourself for making this post, and should apologize.
If you cannot understand why some liberals might favor Clinton and some might favor O'Malley and some might favor Sanders, then you are not only not doing your proclaimed candidate any favors, but you need to educate yourself on African American and LBGT history.
JustAnotherGen
(31,681 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)I would agree with you.
It isn't...
Besides, he could have deleted this in all this time. He chose not to bother.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)JI7
(89,172 posts)noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)i actually that reality has caused more problems for america than anything else.
cstanleytech
(26,080 posts)voted for a republican in an election because most of them are assholes.
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)I actually don't take to much to shaming people but the OP, those who recced this piece of shit post, and some of the commenters here need to be shamed...although, I doubt that they have any true sense of shame.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)I'll do it first thing in the morning too.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)just because
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Kick
Fearless
(18,421 posts)But that's not entirely why. I also agree with his other social and economic policies.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)"Apparently, If One Voted For Reagan, They Were Anti-Gay...
Really ???
REALLY ???
So it had nothing to do with money/taxes/RW Philosophy ???
I got some info for ya... They we're called Reagan Democrats..."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026231263
Reagan Democrats using LGBT as a wedge. It's not even original.
betsuni
(25,122 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)and for treating them kindly and that his lack of reason toward other Democratic voters was not reflecting his usual 'let's all be nice to the other Party' posts. I thought maybe he'd remember his better angels and cut the baiting and hating.....
betsuni
(25,122 posts)Whatever could be the difference? What is it that so enrages some people? Hmmmmm. I think I could hear a lot of good observations about this over at the tavern.
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)I bet he was sticking up for Elizabeth Warren and her republican past!
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)'Don't question my chosen one!'
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)letting the sunshine in
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)hopefully this gets off better than Michigan punter's kick on Saturday.
markpkessinger
(8,381 posts)But my support for Bernie over Hillary has less to do with Bill's signing of DOMA than with Hillary's own long-standing ties to Wall Street and her recent dishonesty regarding her past support of the TPP,
That said, it is important to remember what really happened surrounding DOMA. At the time, Republicans were threatening to introduce a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between one man and one woman. And there was some concern at the time that such an amendment might actually pass. By agreeing to sign DOMA, the Clinton administration got Republicans to back away from their threat of introducing a constitutional amendment. Had such an amendment been introduced and passed, we would not have attained marriage equality when we did, because at that point, it would have required passing another amendment to repeal the one defining marriage -- a far bigger hurdle than winning at the Supreme Court! Even though everybody hated it at the time, it was the best among a set of bad options and, in the long run, enabled us to achieve marriage equality more quickly than we otherwise would have been able to achieve it.
There are many issues on which the Clinton administration is fully deserving of our scorn, but DOMA isn't really one of them.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)the author of this very thread has the unmitigated gall to accuse someone of expressing disdain.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)before I retire for the evening.
betsuni
(25,122 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)WillyT
And BTW... Could The African American Community, And The LGBTQ Folk Clue Me In ???
Why in the hell would you vote/support a candidate who supported her husband who went after Queen Latifa, and fucked the program formerly known as "Welfare".
And...
Promoted DOMA, and Don't Ask Don't Tell.
Did EVERYONE have a mass evolution ???
Is it political expediency...
Is it Stockholm Syndrome ???
Bernie has ALWAYS had your back.
HRC... not so much.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Gross.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
firebrand80
(2,760 posts)For one, the Presidential election is an election where 100-150 million people are voting for 2 candidates. Demanding ideological purity in that situation is unrealistic and politically immature.
Also, what the wide, wide world of sports does something Bill said in 1992, or a law that was passed in 1996 has to do with Hillary?
What, was Monica Lewisky her fault too?
zappaman
(20,605 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)it's that time.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)Just to make sure it's seen...
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)since the OP wants to be at the top of the charts
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)'cause this damn fool doesn't get it.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Hope you had a good night's sleep!
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
betsuni
(25,122 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)and in this case, a dog-whistle...shit, this ain't a dog whistle, this is an air-raid siren.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)i can't tell...I have Stockholm Syndrome.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)<iframe width="420" height="315" src="
" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>kickChitown Kev
(2,197 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Let's try and stay current, please.
betsuni
(25,122 posts)I can't stop thinking about a nice big smorgasbord, and that fabulous cod roe, Kallas Kaviar, and all the other delicious Scandahoovian things in tubes like shrimp or smoked salmon mayonnaise, with or without dill. This thread is making me hungry.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)mission accomplished...
zappaman
(20,605 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)I'm not gonna kick it.
yardwork
(61,408 posts)What would gay folk do without kind straight folk like you taking the time to tell us how to vote.
randome
(34,845 posts)...on the way out. And don't forget to register for the free "Stockholm Syndrome Reprogramming" raffle being held right now!!!!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
yardwork
(61,408 posts)yardwork
(61,408 posts)Bill Clinton didn't "promote" DOMA or DADT. That makes it sound like they were his ideas. Both were compromises that he supported because it was clear that the Republican dominated Congress had the votes to pass far worse legislation.
In fact, Clinton tried to allow gays to serve openly in the military. I remember a lot of Democrats mocking him for this and calling him naive and arrogant. He had zero support for this in the DoD. DADT was an improvement on the previous situation.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)Bucky
(53,795 posts)this is such a sad OP
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)As is the wad of cash image posted recently. Rediculous and over the top is the new norm.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Thanks for a record setting thread, though!
betsuni
(25,122 posts)(Passive-aggressive emoji and MLK quote goes here.)
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)Most black people never even heard of Bernie Sanders until recently so "always had your back" doesn't ring a whole lot of bells. Clinton made a similar decision about Sistah Soulja that Obama made about Rev. Wright. While a lot of blacks didn't like these decisions most understood what needed to be done to get into office.
Clinton never was able to keep his promise on re-visiting his welfare actions thanks to the impeachment move. His support of or at least his failure to attack "three strikes" is the most unforgivable move to me.
That being said, Bill Clinton is not the candidate and I do believe Hillary is her own person and will be even more so if she ever gets to the WH.
When Bernie takes his swipes at Hillary and he will and he does, I won't hold it against him...he is running in a campaign. Just realize that Hillary is running too.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Nov 16, 2015-
Posted an OP claiming that the terrorist attacks in Paris were an effort to distract the public from the crimes of Jewish bankers. Posted link to disgusting antisemitic website to support this theory.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=292436&sub=trans
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)betsuni
(25,122 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)portlander23
(2,078 posts)I think it's fine if not essential to talk about race but it's a bit distasteful to challenge all members of some group to defend their positions because you think you have a better handle on how policy affects them than they do.
I think we're better served by listening to people's views than telling them what they should be.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)I like Saturday.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)Sunday kick.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)'cause someone asked "what does WillyT have to do with this?"
yardwork
(61,408 posts)I see a pattern....
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)yardwork
(61,408 posts)Response to WillyT (Original post)
BigDemVoter This message was self-deleted by its author.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Last edited Mon Oct 26, 2015, 03:53 AM - Edit history (1)
the gall of WillyT to throw out a Dr. King quote in light of this OP of his is stunningly unmitigated.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Don't let them silence you.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Mild profanity is more insulting than this piece of crap OP?...in DU-land, I guess so.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)I'd edit it, you have three don't give them the opportunity to give you a fourth. It's not worth it.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)RandySF
(57,598 posts)I know that many of his supporters are not a reflection of the man, himself.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)26 years to look at. We had to look at Barack Obama like sane adults. I had input from my cousin who knew him from Illinois and her insights into his potential and his methods were as always very accurate and helpful to me in selecting Obama in 08, but if I had gone by his supporters on DU or in other internet places I'd never have voted for him.
This is not something I'd bring up save for the fact of the current times.
I'm not going to play 'forget the past' to serve people who were unfriendly in 08. This cycle, same as the last.
I say I was right to ignore nasty comments made 'for Obama' and to instead look at Obama himself. Others are of course free to be patsies and allow themselves to be played by random pixels on the internet.
yardwork
(61,408 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)good night, everyone.
betsuni
(25,122 posts)RandySF
(57,598 posts)Just to show everyone teh stupid.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)A new kick!
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)DU has disappointed me greatly with this.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)FWIW, initially prompted by the OP, but implemented in solidarity of Bravenak's signature line.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)greatauntoftriplets
(175,694 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)It's Sister Soulja(h)!!!
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)Queen Latifa(h)
With all due respect, perhaps you should eschew the comfortable, reach out, and learn more about the cultures you wish to opine on.
betsuni
(25,122 posts)PragmaticLiberal
(904 posts)Still hoping....
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)because water is wet.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)to give this OP a swift kick
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)good night, everyone.
betsuni
(25,122 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)betsuni
(25,122 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)as strong as my cup of java
zappaman
(20,605 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)We are really, really close now.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)betsuni
(25,122 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,917 posts)That's pretty funny.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)betsuni
(25,122 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
zappaman
(20,605 posts)betsuni
(25,122 posts)Yet he stayed in hall with Arthur till All Saints' Day,
When Aurthur provided plentifully, especially for Gawain,
A rich feast and high revelry at the Round Table.
The gallant lords and gay ladies grieved for Gawain,
Anxious on his account; but all the same
...
He rode far from his friends, a forsaken man,
Scaling many cliffs in country unknown.
He found a foe in front of him, except by a freak of chance,
And so foul and fierce a one that he was forced to fight.
So many marvels did he meet in the mountains,
It would be too tedious to tell a tenth of them.
He had death-struggles with dragons, did battle with wolves,
Warred with bulls and bears and boars at other times,
And ogres that panted after him on the high fells.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)Why hasn't the seminal poster corrected the spelling of these two women's names when it has been repeatedly pointed out to him he spelled them incorrectly.
Thank you in advance.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)Maybe the poster finds all these black names too crazy to spell properly?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)EOM
zappaman
(20,605 posts)so you may be right.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=sister+souljah
zappaman
(20,605 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)EOM
zappaman
(20,605 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
bravenak
(34,648 posts)If they keep it up I'll be a republican by spring who crosses over for Hillary. They are stupid. I hate it.
and I mean that
I couldn't believe this thread popped to the surface again, and then I saw how many were giving it an ass-kicking.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Beacool
(30,244 posts)Stockholm Syndrome ???
You have gone off the rails, buddy.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)Stockholm Syndrome?!
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)She's a follower, not a leader. If she had come out in support of LGBT equality absent any polls, I would trust her. But she didn't. Clinton never took a position before at least three focus groups told her it was safe to take it.
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)betsuni
(25,122 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)since this racist homophobic jibber jabber still stands here with no apology.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Metric System
(6,048 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)EOM
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)I should've known that!
Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)She didn't speak for most black people.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)OnEdit: Sister Souljah, Not Queen Latifah.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)as a matter of fact.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)GMTA!
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Still up? Tsk tsk!
MineralMan
(146,190 posts)Please self-delete it and end the misery.
Hekate
(90,189 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)<iframe width="420" height="315" src="
" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>SidDithers
(44,228 posts)in light of Chitown Kev's MLK thread.
Sid
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Not a single poster I've read on this thread who disagrees with your OP has responded in any way except with emotion. This tells me you hit a nerve.
If I was a Hillary supporter who was also AA and/or LGBT, I'd pay attention.
Wow. Talk about a wake-up call.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)unintentionally.
Too funny.
brooklynite
(93,840 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)since the seminal poster has now become an MLK expert.
Sid
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
WillyT
(72,631 posts)You continuously Prove The Point...
Happy Thanksgiving !!!
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)they only have to see this thread to know how wrong they are.
Sid
zappaman
(20,605 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Response to WillyT (Original post)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
betsuni
(25,122 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Nailed it.
Sid
zappaman
(20,605 posts)Poster knows EXACTLY what they're doing...
betsuni
(25,122 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)betsuni
(25,122 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Not that shocking when you think about it...
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)know no shame.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)Nothing like the soft glow of nostalgic bigotry. Makes it more appealing and progressive.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)I can read between the bullshit and pull out actual facts for perusal.
But I have to say...as relentlessly negative and mean-spirited as some of these supporters are, I start to fervently hope that their candidate loses because if he wins, we will witness something even worse than relentless negativity and mean-spiritedness. Something like having Steve Martin's The Jerk appointed as your new boss.
And I don't want that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]
zappaman
(20,605 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
zappaman
(20,605 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Kick! And my daughters! Kick!!
greatauntoftriplets
(175,694 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)greatauntoftriplets
(175,694 posts)Doesn't look like it's going to happen, though.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)greatauntoftriplets
(175,694 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)I also strongly dislike all who pump him up by reccing his continuation threads.
The double tripple dipple downs are almost worse than the original. He does it as a swipe against the black community and they just keep him going. Like high school.
greatauntoftriplets
(175,694 posts)I roll my eyes every time. Of course, high school was a very looooong time ago for me.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)I remember when he told sheshe he did stuff like this for recs.
greatauntoftriplets
(175,694 posts)That was, shall I say, enlightening?
bravenak
(34,648 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)betsuni
(25,122 posts)brooklynite
(93,840 posts)If you want to find out what real voters in either group think, don't ask here.
zappaman
(20,605 posts)That might help as well...
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)DADT was a WONDERFUL thing when it happened. I joined the US Navy in 1989 (several years before DOMA). I remember my first trip to MEPS in New Orleans to see what kind of job in the Navy I'd qualify for. I will never forget the grilling, and repeatedly being asked if I was gay? Did I fantasize about having sex with men? Have I ever had sex or sexual contact with anyone of the same sex?
Then, that first week in Orlando boot camp.. all those same grilling questions. Then some weeks into boot camp there was this thing they called "the moment of Truth" where they threatened the shit out of you before asking all of those questions again. It was horrible. Too many forget that DADT didn't start the discrimination against us, it was the first step ever taken to stop that discrimination. The US, and the military was not ready to have us serve openly. Almost overnight, I wasn't accepted with open arms, but I was no longer being hunted like an animal. I was also saved from the horrible "other than honorable" or "Bad conduct" discharge that was pretty automatic prior to DADT. After DADT, if you did come out, you could at least depart with an honorable discharge (depending on your service record) You say I should not want to vote for Clinton because of this? This is a fairly big part of why I'm voting for her.
DOMA was a different creature. It most definitely did NOT benefit us. Do you really not remember the atmosphere in the 90's? Everyone was still scared shitless of us. I remember people in power, openly in interviews blaming us for everything from AIDS to the moral decline of America. It was disgusting. There was a major push going on by the far right of the time to, not just get legislation passed, but a full Constitutional Amendment passed. When DOMA was enacted it was still fairly premature to say that the Constitutional Amendment would have passed, but it was a very fair assessment to believe that it was a very real possibility.
If DOMA was a constitutional amendment instead of a law, then today I would still not be married to my Husband as the SCOTUS would have had no authority to override the amendment. So, while a full "thank you" to the Clintons would be overstating it (IMO at least), placing too much blame on them for it isn't exactly the correct thing to do either.
On your second part, you are right about Bernie always having our backs, but Bernie's never been in the position where having our backs could have written discrimination into the constitution either. His vote on DOMA was safe, it was going to pass with or without him.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Last edited Thu Dec 3, 2015, 06:01 PM - Edit history (1)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251736536http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251744034
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251727397
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251748761
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=820881
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act#Enactment_and_role_of_Bill_Clinton
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)and Baton Rouge Louisiana would have had access to those links back in the 90's. It would have so put our minds at ease that we had nothing to worry about!
You'll have to pardon me if your cute little links don't mean shit to me compared to my experiences living through it. That the amendment would have passed was not a guarantee, but that it did have a chance of passing was absolutely possible with the political atmosphere and the way people expressed themselves towards us back in the 90's.
However, since you DID take the time to dig up links to argue my direct experience and point of view.. from your own link:
However, after Congress had passed the bill with enough votes to override a presidential veto,[29] Clinton signed DOMA. Many years later, he claimed that he did so reluctantly in view of the veto-proof majority, both to avoid associating himself politically with the then-unpopular cause of same-sex marriage, and to defuse momentum for a proposed Federal Amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning same-sex marriage
merrily
(45,251 posts)"Cute" liinks?
Hekate
(90,189 posts)Thanks for your post.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)I had family (still trying to determine orientation) that was trying to enlist out of highschool...and were non too gently dissuaded and practically escorted out of the recruiting offices. DADT wasn't a fix...the nations population wasn't overwhelmingly ready. But I've been around the block often enough to realize it starts with a wedge being placed in the doorway. Prying that doorway all the way open has always been incremental. Politicians reacting to their constituency, needed to have that constituency mature and evolve. And eventually they did...in huge, huge numbers.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)greatauntoftriplets
(175,694 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Hekate
(90,189 posts)betsuni
(25,122 posts)Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)since I've been back...may as well do it now.
Digital Puppy
(496 posts)Along with all of the racist ignorant fools who agree with the 'beloved' OP...f'ing sad..
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)For posterity.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)HassleCat
(6,409 posts)She may not be, when it comes to policy and executive decisions, but many "minority" voters, particularly black voters, get a good vibe from her. They believe they can trust her to do the right thing when it's time to throw down. I hope they're right.
emulatorloo
(43,979 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Merry Christmas.
Response to WillyT (Original post)
NCTraveler This message was self-deleted by its author.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)LexVegas
(6,005 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts).
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Tanuki
(14,893 posts)LexVegas
(6,005 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)LexVegas
(6,005 posts)SoapBox
(18,791 posts)I just don't understand support for her.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)But once the swarm came, and they laughed because I Mention my AA nephew, a 2nd Grader, I was done.
There was no longer a "Discussion" to be had.
I was approached by a friend who thought the attacks were unfair, and that maybe I should take the post down.
I gave him my reasons why that would not do any good...
Copy and paste
Screen-Shot
And others...
And I suggested to that friend, that I would let it stand because it might be used as a DU barometer.
And it has...
When I strike a certain nerve, with a certain post... it comes back up.
I also suggested that it would say more about the posters than it says about me.
(Check out today's posts, starting with "wow"... after that poster has hung onto this thread for months.)
In short... there was rapidly, very little discussion to be had.
Yet it still informs the shit out of me to this day.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Please self-delete your OP. Not only is it offensive, you are hurting Bernie by posting things like this.
Stop. Please. Just STOP.
You're better than this.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)LexVegas
(6,005 posts)LexVegas
(6,005 posts)Eric Holder is doing it because he is a Wall Street sellout.
Aditi Hardikar is doing it because they are paying her a bunch of money.
At least that's what Bernie's diverse supporters have to say.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Metric System
(6,048 posts)LoveIsNow
(356 posts)I imagine her LGBT supporters being the happy, Lexus-driving, HRC-donating, has-enough-money-to-adopt-a-child type of queer people that you see on TV. I live in the real world. I have real-world, working class problems, and I can't afford eight more years of politics as usual.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,704 posts)Thank you in advance.
Respectfully,
DSB
LexVegas
(6,005 posts)Skidmore
(37,364 posts)Last edited Fri Jan 29, 2016, 12:34 PM - Edit history (1)
To remind everyone of the Third Way Progressivism of it all.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/schisms-carve-iowa-contests-leaving-murky-political-calculus/story?id=36656482
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)WillyT (70,805 posts)
And BTW... Could The African American Community, And The LGBTQ Folk Clue Me In ??? [View all]
Last edited Thu Oct 15, 2015, 09:16 PM - Edit history (1)
Why in the hell would you vote/support a candidate who supported her husband who went after Sister Souljah, and fucked the program formerly known as "Welfare".
And...
Promoted DOMA, and Don't Ask Don't Tell.
Did EVERYONE have a mass evolution ???
Is it political expediency...
Is it Stockholm Syndrome ???
Bernie has ALWAYS had your back.
HRC... not so much.