Sanders brushes aside abortion "Lets have our differences " - what the fuck?

[bettyellen]

Last edited Sun Jun 21, 2015, 01:46 PM - Edit history (1)

I really do not want to hear what he voted or where he marched. This is what he says to a room full of men- he tells them it's not important. That our lives are not important enough to talk about.

He's got a long way to walk back from shit like that.
I'm not having it.

Edited to correct from "agree to disagree" which is what I hear anyway when he says what he says.



http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2015/06/03/matters-bernie-sanders-doesnt-talk-race-gender/

[orpupilofnature57]

1. Hillary saying marriage is a bond between a man and a woman .

And your extensive link doesn't mention abortion, nice try .

[bettyellen]

5. He mentions abortion is something he can "agree to disagree" about.

Read it and learn. If you give a fuck about Bernie's campaign ask why he is excluding us. Because he is.

[merrily]

30. I could not find those words in the article linked in your OP. Neither could the find feature of my

browser.

Would it be possible for you to copy and paste the language? The whole sentence? Maybe a paragraph or two for context?

Thank you.

[brer cat]

133. "I know that there are differences in this room on abortion..."

He continues in the next sentence: "But when it comes to whether or not our kids can go to college, whether or not we’re going to make it easier for workers to join unions, whether or not we’re going to have a trade policy which creates jobs in this country or whether it creates jobs in China, whether or not college is affordable, whether or not all Americans are entitled to health care as a right, let us stand together and not be divided. "

Do you see abortion anywhere in that list of pet items he thinks we should be standing shoulder to shoulder on in support?

[merrily]

134. The OP revised after I posted that.

As far the speech the OP referred to--at least originally-- it was before the firefighters' union, with 47% of its members being Republican. I don't know which percentage of the audience was male. Bernie was trying to find common ground.

Further, the issues in which the audience was interested were federal grants to firefighters via Homeland Security, union rights, etc. AFAIK from media reports, no candidate present, Democratic or Republican, spoke to reproductive rights, including O'Malley.

Meanwhile, Bernie has a 100% rating from NARAL on reproductive rights and a ZERO rating from a pro-life group. And I have heard him speak to reproductive rights. I have not heard all his speeches, but I did catch the one in Colorado live on C-Span. he mentioned reproductive rights in that speech. In fact, he mentioned most of the things he allegedly never mentions.

[brer cat]

135. Thanks.

[merrily]

136. You're very welcome.

[merrily]

41. Where? Where does he mention that?

[orpupilofnature57]

53. Thanks , I didn't know he cosponcered this " Excluding Us " Act

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-113s2578pcs/pdf/BILLS-113s2578pcs.pdf

[merrily]

71. They know his legislative record is great. That's why the OP reads as it does.

She posted that she doesn't want to hear if he "marched," nor how fantastic a legislator he's been for 24 years.

All she seems to cares about is that, as he just begins to introduce himself nationally, he focused a roomful of firefighters, probably mostly Republican, on common ground, instead of on reproductive rights. And, even that info comes from a very slanted article.

I don't know what one is to do with statements like that.

[orpupilofnature57]

85. Are these people Hillary supporters or Koch Brothers ?

[orpupilofnature57]

54. Oh by the way Merrily and Me are still waiting...Crickets

Nice drive - by of bullshit accusations .

[shenmue]

20. Except that since then, her views have changed

She now supports marriage equality.

[merrily]

31. Before or after President Obama came out for it?

[BainsBane]

39. Notice how the attention is diverted from reproductive rights

because we just aren't that important.

[bettyellen]

62. It's weird how The convo veers to attacks on Clinton or Obama

Thats pretty weird.

[BainsBane]

68. Utterly predictable

Women's issues pale in comparison to the political fortunes of a great man.

[okasha]

132. You'll notice lgbt's got tossed under the same bus.

The context didn't help.

[orpupilofnature57]

63. Stop saying that until you can post him saying that .

[BainsBane]

66. I was talking about YOU

[think]

64. Have you looked at his record? Seriously?

http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Bernie_Sanders_Abortion.htm

[BainsBane]

67. Have you read the article?

[think]

69. Yes. I sure did.

[BainsBane]

94. Then you don't need to point out his voting record to me

do you, since that isn't what the critique is based on. Additionally, my comment was about the efforts by some posters to distract from the issue of reproductive rights, which is why I responded to that particular post rather than the OP.

[orpupilofnature57]

82. Delusional !!

[BainsBane]

95. How is it delusional?

Which part?

[gollygee]

2. Ack!

I want to take the parts of Sanders I like and the parts of Clinton I like and make a brand new candidate out of them. I like his economic stuff SO MUCH but fuck.



Ugh.

[bettyellen]

8. Exactly my thoughts. I don't know if he just feels staying on economics only is more effective...

Or if there's some political calculation going on that its not worth it to lose voters over my supporting women's reproductive rights. I became a great deal more curious after someone posted a speech he did in Wisconsin. Silly me thought he'd address reproductive rights there of all places. Nothing.
This laser focus thing is starting to feel exclusionary. These off the cuff remarks to firemen is all we get? disappointing to say the least.

[orpupilofnature57]

60. You keep indicting him with not one iota of evidence, you posted an article

that only mentions him supporting Womens Rights and no mention of Abortion, you sound delusional .

[bettyellen]

78. His mention of abortion was to brush it aside as "differences"

And I don't like it. It's not delusional to note how dismissive that is. Sanders needs to make it a priority- up on his site and on his lips I want loud and proud support. You've got your own priorities, and I could characterize some as delusional, but I choose to respect your aims as different.

[orpupilofnature57]

84. Different , honestly not to be insulting, your saying he said something, by not saying it !

that's a little more than scrutiny .

[bettyellen]

88. He brushed off the abortion issue as one that is fine to "have differences" on....

And it's not - not among Dems anyway.
Sorry if it doesn't make me wonder that he's deliberately not talking about it now for the same reason. At best, it's a glaring oversight.
Sorry but control of my body comes before concerns about the oligarchy- they happen to be up in our vaginas scoping away at the moment and forcing us to incubate babies.

[thesquanderer]

104. "not among Dems anyway" -- Exactly! That's the context you missed.

He was not talking to a Democratic group. He was talking to a mixed Dem/Repub group. In that context he was saying, "look, I know there are areas we are going to disagree" and mentioning examples of things where he knew that many non-Dems in the audience might take issue with him, perhaps quite vehemently... but he was trying to point out the areas where there could still be common ground. Re-read the quote, keeping in mind he is talking to a partially Republican audience:

I know that there are differences in this room on abortion, on gay marriage, on guns, whatever it may be. Fine, let’s have our differences. But when it comes to whether or not our kids can go to college, whether or not we’re going to make it easier for workers to join unions, whether or not we’re going to have a trade policy which creates jobs in this country or whether it creates jobs in China, whether or not college is affordable, whether or not all Americans are entitled to health care as a right, let us stand together and not be divided.

His goal here is not change someone's mind on abortion or gay marriage, but rather to say, no matter where you stand on these divisive issues, there may be other things we can agree on.

Though personally, in that context, I think he should have left out the line about the labor unions. Non-dems are unlikely to buy that one, though admittedly, that topic doesn't bring out the right-wing passion that abortion, gay marriage, and guns do.

[bettyellen]

106. Well it's difficult hearing a liberal candidate soft pedal the issue.

Can't say it doesn't piss me off. But some do the same pandering to Dems in more conservative areas too. Not happy when it happens.

[eridani]

112. There are more people than you think who consider themselves both pro-choice

--and "pro-life." I find it perfectly acceptable for people to disagree on whether or not abortion is morally right--just so long as actual reproductive decisions stay firmly in women's hands.

[JustAnotherGen]

12. My candidate is

Pro Choice
Anti TPP
Legalized gay marriage in his state.

*tip toes out of one of my favorite groups

[bettyellen]

14. I really like O Malley these days! No need to tippy toe here. ;-)

[JustAnotherGen]

58. P.S.

He pissed off Beretta.

They moved away from MD - he wants them to move away from the US!

[bettyellen]

75. Aw, good on him for that. I hope he brings gun control to the forefront!

[ismnotwasm]

18. Awww

[Evergreen Emerald]

3. There has been little scrutiny of Bernie

He is held to a lower standard that Hillary. When he speaks, everyone oohs and ahhs and demands no specifics nor delves into history like they do with Hillary.

Everything he says and does is given the best possible interpretation and excuses are made for non-progressive stances. Nuance for Bernie. Black and white for Clinton.

[Wilms]

4. You like sticking words in his mouth?

And you, like the author, go out of your way to describe him as not good enough.

I'm pissed he hasn't said a damn thing about...........

[bettyellen]

6. About nuclear war? Is quoting Sanders unfair to Sanders?

I keep going back to his website to see if he has broadened his message. I keep skimming his speeches for something new. Because you're right- it's not enough.

[Wilms]

21. Quoting is one thing. Editorialized parapharasing another.

And that's what you did.

Lay out the context.

And I wasn't referring to war. I was referring to one being upset when someone doesn't see things and prioritize them and label them in the precise manner they hold dear.

And let's face it. There are plenty of Hillary supporters who really don't have a problem with Sanders except that they want Hillary to win.

[bettyellen]

22. The context is he did brush aside the issue. When he addresses it during his campaign- with loud and proud support

I'll be very grateful. But I think it is not a priority for Sanders, and it sucks.
That's the only message I can glean from this.

[Wilms]

47. To me it looked like he was on their case to vote for him.

While not insisting that they buy into every position he has. As in, we're not going to be in 100% agreement on each of the dozens of issues.

[bettyellen]

48. True- but does this mean he's sacrificed speaking out on abortion now

That is a bit problematic.
I don't know what to think. It reads really tone deaf, although it might have been effective to that audience.

[Wilms]

83. "Speaking out"?

It may read tone deaf to people for whom this is a top two or three issue. But yes, the audience I believe is the issue. He may know it's not their thing and is saying, "vote for me anyway".

[bettyellen]

86. It's a life and death issue for women- tied more closely to their economic success than

Any other factor. And we're more than half the party so yeah- tone deaf.
It helped seeing the clip but yeah, it feels a bit like selling us out. We haven't had enough politicians fighting hard for us on this front. Sucks.

[Wilms]

99. I do hear you.

I get what you mean about how it ties to economic issues for women.

And there's been a disturbing amount of anti-woman legislation on the state level as of late. It's like a sport for repukelicans.

[bettyellen]

100. In glad to read he spoke out about maternity leave too.

It's a huge issue too.
I really do want him to run a more inclusive campaign. I'm not a stealth anything and I'm not committed to any candidate. I'm tired of being accused of both though!

[Wilms]

101. Well, yeah. They have paternity leave in parts of Europe.

Dads get face time too! That whole social democracy thing is what works for me. Danes and Dutch I've known are quite proud of it AND STILL complain about taxes!

[bettyellen]

102. But they wouldn't trade places either. Paternity leave would be awesome too.

I think these days you need to give the parents options. Everyone I know that had babies, the mom was also a much more serious career person. They were back at work the minute they could arrange to, lest they damage their earning power.

[Wilms]

105. And that touches a huge subject for me.

It's for another thread, though.

[yallerdawg]

7. The Clintons have every word and action parsed to pieces.

When the spotlight falls on the new people in the Big Show, let's see how they deal with it.

We know how the Clintons deal with it!

“If [Sanders is] the candidate who’s speaking truth to power, but that’s the truth he chooses to speak, that doesn’t bode well for the outcomes of progressive policy,” Ludovic Blain, a progressive electoral activist, told RH Reality Check.

It’s not just Sanders who won’t take ownership of these issues from the left, Blain said; he doesn’t hear Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) talk about race much, and he doesn’t hear her white progressive base noticing or complaining about the omission.

“Bernie Sanders is not a standalone person for me,” Blain said. “He comes from a long line of mostly, but not exclusively, white male liberals that white liberals are very excited about, and they all never talk about people of color or racial justice. They all make purely class-based appeals.”

[orpupilofnature57]

10. We've looked the other way many times for Hill & Bill .

[yallerdawg]

11. Well, we should give Senator Sanders (I-VT)...

a chance to understand and then articulate Democratic progressive bedrock values. He is new to all this, and new to the Democratic Party.

[merrily]

32. He is rated the most liberal Senator in general and NARAL has given him a rating of 100%.

97% from the NAACP, 100% from the ACLU.

Risked his life to work for the NAACP, CORE and SNCC as a young man.

I think he understands the values.

[DCBob]

9. Good article.

Bernie needs to realize that he's running for POTUS not POVT.

[Fred Sanders]

13. Purely economic class-based appeals are not a problem now, but they will be.

I love Bernie as much as Clinton, and it is just that his appeal is narrow only because Americans are narrow-minded and far too many are single issue obsessed.

I kind of like his answer because, as I said, it is so early in "the race" as to be irrelevant any candidate have rock solid positions parsed to sub-atomic level now...give Bernie time....give Hillary time...there is plenty of it.

[KitSileya]

15. Now, if only the Sanders supporters would actually discuss this without dragging in Clinton

I see that they cannot, and it is vice versa, I know. However, that is completely irrelevant here. This OP is specifically about Sanders and no one else, and what he said, not what anybody else said. How are we to be convinced to support Sanders if his supporters won't engage in a fair and frank manner on his viewpoints on issues? His supporters won't convince me, who has not decided yet, if they keep dodging his quite alarming tendency to dismiss issues important to women.

[bettyellen]

16. We will get the standard response to look up his record- and it misses the point.

We're talking about whether he will stick his neck out for women now. Right now it's like we do not exist. You can't talk economic impact on women's life and ignore that reproductive freedom has a huge impact. It's too important to brush aside.

[KitSileya]

23. Yes. And his response to the 1972 essay was also disappointing.

I mean, I don't expect candidates to be squeaky clean - not everyone knows they'll be running for President one day when they're still in college, or even at 30, but how they deal with issues when they come up says mountains. If Sanders had used the essay in 2015 like his supporters claimed he wanted to use it in 1972, to put a focus on how rape culture is omnipresent, and we need to do something about it, I would have cheered and been much more inclined to support him. But instead he dismissed it as a not important, as a joke, and with the attitude of 'fergawdsakes, can't you feminists find a sense of humor', and that is a huge red flag for me.

[merrily]

33. I think you miss the point. Having a 100% rating from NARAL means he's stuck his neck out on this

issue throughout his entire legislative career.

If you compare Bernie's record on choice with Obama's record on choice when he was in the Illinois legislature, you might see what I mean.

[bettyellen]

40. So why doesn't he speak to it- why go to Wisconson and ignore it?

Why is he waiting to be asked? Or thing in everything to economics? Why is he talking about adding vacation time but not maternity leave?

Seems like he is tailoring his message to others, frankly. I deeply disliked the dismissive tone in his talk to the firefighters.

[merrily]

42. He HAS spoken to it many times. Again, I ask, could you please post the language from your OP in

context? I could not find it in the article you linked.

[bettyellen]

49. I fixed the wording for you.

[ismnotwasm]

17. What the fuck?

Now that I didn't expect. I am a Hillary fan, but I expect nothing but support for civil and human rights for women from Sanders. Loud and proud support.

[bettyellen]

19. At some point I have to assume shying away from women's issues is calculated.

And this article appears to support that Sanders knows it may alienate voters he'd like to attract.
If that's the case - his priorities are likely not mine.

[merrily]

34. Please see Reply 32. He has shown nothing but support for civil and human rights and reproductive

choice.

[CrispyQ]

24. Your subject line is false & misleading.

No where in the article did I read the quote "agree to disagree" attributed to Sanders on the issue of abortion.

So the author & some critics disagree with Sanders' campaign strategy. Big deal. To say he brushes aside abortion is just false.

I don't why you don't care how he votes. Isn't that the best way to determine what he stands for? For those who do care, here's Sanders' record on abortion: http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Bernie_Sanders_Abortion.htm

[bettyellen]

25. On abortion: "Fine, lets have our differences". Would Sanders have the gall to say that to a more

Diverse group than the firemans Union?

Guns gays and women- is he afraid to be unabashedly liberal about these issues while campaigning? In a sense he's trying to say the people shouldn't vote GOP over those issues. But it also seems like he thinks they're unimportant right now.

[CrispyQ]

27. Is that all you have?

His record of equality speaks for itself.

[bettyellen]

28. If and when Sanders address these issues while campaigning we will have more.

I hope we do, but am disappointed so far. He should be saying more about the current war on women's reproductive rights. I demand it from all candidates.

[CrispyQ]

36. He should say this, he should say that. Blah, blah, blah.

You are about words, not actions. Okay.

You misrepresent Sanders in your subject line. You should change it.

[bettyellen]

37. His campaign is all words..... Yet they don't matter to you. Fine by me.

[merrily]

46. Whose campaign is NOT all words? The rest of his career has been deeds.

[bettyellen]

50. Yeah, I dunno why that poster would say they don't matter. But point taken

And I corrected the OP.

[merrily]

43. So, HE did NOT say "agee to disagree?" Those were your words, YOUR paraphrase?

Is "Fine, lets have our differences". in the article you linked in the OP? If not where is it? I'd really like to see context.

[bettyellen]

45. Is there a meaningful difference there? I can edit but to me

I'm not seeing one bit of difference if what I expect is vocal support during the campaign.

[merrily]

52. I think there is. Also the hit piece linked in the OP doesn't give a lot of context.

But, fine. Let's look at the small amount given.

I know that there are differences in this room on abortion, on gay marriage, on guns, whatever it may be. Fine, let’s have our differences. But when it comes to whether or not our kids can go to college, whether or not we’re going to make it easier for workers to join unions, whether or not we’re going to have a trade policy which creates jobs in this country or whether it creates jobs in China, whether or not college is affordable, whether or not all Americans are entitled to health care as a right, let us stand together and not be divided.

Most firefighters are Republicans. So you bet there were differences in the room. And it seems this was a speech where he was saying, let's not dwell on the differences right now. Let's look for common ground.

Again, the man is rated the number 1 liberal out of 100 Senators, has a rating of 0% from right to life groups, a rating of 100% from NARAL, a rating of 97% from the NAACP, a ration of 100% from the American Civil Liberties Union and on and on. And you're going to throw him under the bus as falling short on reproductive health because, in talking to a roomful of blue collar Republicans, as he introduces himself to the Nation for the first time, he tried to find common ground? And he gets treated like a misogynist racist? With a lifetime record like that?

Ugly.

[bettyellen]

55. He is not being treated as a misogynist or a racist- THAT is an UGLY LIE.

It's disgusting the desperate things people will say in order to get women and POC to shut up.
Ashamed to see this shit here. No one called him a misogynist. Stop repeating lies.

[merrily]

59. Not a lie at all, midear. He's treated on DU like a bigot on a daily basis.

[bettyellen]

70. Nope. Ignoring race whe stumping is discussed as problematic...

And thankfully-it seems he is learning from the criticism. Which is awesome. I'd like him to get his points across to a wider audience sooner rather than later.

[merrily]

72. "NOT GOOD ENOUGH" BULLSHIT WHAT THE FUCK? NEVER MENTIONED IMMIGRATION. None of that is discussing

diddly as "problematic." It's not name calling per se, but it is not much above it, either. And those have been the OPs. Then comes the replies. Smears, insinuation. Innuendoes.

And no, he's not learning from the criticism, ffs. Good Lord. That you could think that United States Senator Bernie Sanders has something to learn from slanted internet articles and DU's nitpicking when he has possibly the best record in Congress over 24 years and an outstanding record of campaigning for even longer than that is downright hilarious.

[bettyellen]

74. He's finally addressing immigration while campaigning....

After weeks of mentions in the press how it was being overlooked. I'd hope he learns from the criticism, even if you can't.
He also was more vocal than ever about women's reproductive rights just a couple of days ago.
Would be awesome to see more about it on his website now. *fingers crossed*

[merrily]

77. Totally untrue. For just one thing, Bjorn Against posted a video of him giving a 20 minute speech

on immigration in 2013. The weeks of mentions in media were lies. He has a great voting record on immigration, too. And it's on his website. And, please, get real. Don't tell me internet posters of articles know every speech he's made in the last 30 years.

.
I'd hope he learns from the criticism, even if you can't

Oh, no, bettyellen, I am educable. Really I am. And I have learned a lot from the way some DUers post. Yuck. I sure hope he does things his way


On that note, I log off for now. Have a great day. Maybe you can find another hit piece I can read tomorrow

[bettyellen]

80. The criticism is about how he chooses to campaign - get it?

2013 isn't nearly within the goalposts.

[merrily]

109. My comment went to Gutierrez's lie about Sanders and how DU jumped on it as though it were gospel.

That was part of my point about how some at DU treat Sanders.

[kath]

56. +100

Ugly is right.

[merrily]

26. Buried in the hit piece that is linked in the OP.

There’s no question from his record that he’s avidly pro-choice and supports women’s access to comprehensive health care. He is willing to speak out about women’s rights, and it’s likely he’ll have more to say about those issues as the campaign progresses.

Avidly pro-choice

willing to speak out, which means Bernie has spoken out because there is no other way the author would know whether or not Bernie is "willing" to speak out.



100% rating from NARAL, too. Doesn't get any better than that.

[Depaysement]

29. Don't you know?

What he says matters, not what he does.

[merrily]

38. I thought my post also covered the "what he says" issue.

I very much doubt Bernie has been in politics for almost forty years and has not spoken out on every issue, especially the controversial ones. If nothing else, he's probably been asked by voters many times, debated opponents during primaries and elections, spoken on the House and Senate floors, etc.

Remember, about a week ago, we had a bullshit claim that he'd never said anything about immigration. That was a total lie. Among other things, Bjorn Against posted a vvideo of Sanders giving 20 minute speech about immigration from 2013

This morning, we had a bullshit claim he opposed Head Start.

Dirty tricks.

[Depaysement]

51. Dirty tricks indeed

Your post did address what he says. I wasn't attacking you at all. You have done a commendable job refuting the lies. I was just turning a phrase.

The dirty tricks have just started. They will get worse. That's how you know you've got their attention.

Bernie Sanders "voted against Head Start" and a perfect Naral record isn't good enough.

There's a word for this - swift boating.

[bettyellen]

103. It's not buried because it's not a hit piece. Lol.

[merrily]

108. If you believe that, you may not know how to recognize a hit piece.

Read a couple of news stories about the Firefighters event. Not O'Malley or Webb or Sanders or any of the The firefighters showed little interest in Republicans who pushed their party's usual talking points. They were interested in wages, collective bargaining, job safety and Homeland Security funding of fire departments. O'Malley mentioned those points and got a standing ovation. NONE of the candidates talked about reproductive choice. It was not the time nor the place nor the audience for that. Dwelling on it would have been weird.

Does the author of the hit piece you dug up mention ANY of that that though? No, he says Sanders didn't mention it, as though Sanders was alone in that and something about what Sanders did was weird.

I hope Sanders does NOT kow tow to bs like that. For too long, wedge issues have been issued to keep the focus off economic issues while the rich got richer.

Sanders announced all of a a month ago. In the early days of his campaign, he has to brand himself as being different from the same old same old. He has to show he is going to focus on bread and butter issues. His record leaves no doubt what he believes on wedge issues and how he has fought them all his life. The fact that he doesn't hammer that home in every speech does not mean he needs an education on Democratic values, ffs, as one poster here said. Nor does it mean he needs and education on how to campaign. Both those suggestions are totally contrary to reality.

[Violet_Crumble]

118. I also pointed that out to bettyellen in GD before she came and posted this OP...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6875546

I don't get it. If a politician has no track record of strong support for an issue, then I think it's fair enough to question their stance on the issue. But in this case Bernie Sanders is strongly prochoice and has a long history of support of women's issues. So what it comes across like is an attempt to portray him as somehow being an enemy of women's rights and it's like there's a pretence that he'd assist in the attacks on reproductive rights if he became President. Colour me confused but I thought the enemies of women's rights were Republicans

[BainsBane]

35. No. Not okay.

[merrily]

44. Apparently not entirely true, either.

[bettyellen]

57. What is not true is that anyone called Sanders a misogynist- I fixed my OP so you could do us the

Favor of deleting that huge lie.
We all know the racist lie is still be repeated,let's not do that again. Especially not here in HOF.

[merrily]

61. Stop it. I didn't any DUer actually CALLED him a misogynist. Please stop pretending I did.

Y

[bettyellen]

65. The parsing begins! Treated as a misogynist or called a misogynist- all the same.

And all bullshit. Sorry if you think discussing problematic campaign rhetoric is beyond the pale.
But youre not going to shut down the conversation with that little game.
Bigot my ass. No one said Sanders is a bigot. They said he is not saying enough while campaigning. His outreach is narrow.


Spare me the cut and paste of his record.

[ismnotwasm]

73. I don't think Sanders is a misogynist or a racist

What disturbs me more are some of the names I see coming out as strong supporters. Some are great and awesome DUer's of course, but Sweet Jesus some are disturbing. (Given the behaviors in past threads regarding race and gender)

He may have 100% NARAL rating but that statement in full context is an under the bus dismissal. As primaries draw near, I hope to see stronger support.

[bettyellen]

76. Exactly - they are attacking the SJWs they were always dismissive of.....

It's pretty clear that some are a about the money and do not care if we court racists and sexist assholes to get votes. Someone today suggested the Tea Party as natural allies. NO.

[bettyellen]

90. I'm commenting as a long time DUer and the article has him quoted as setting aside abortion as

Something it's okay to .... Set aside.
I get it- it doesn't bother you. I have a uterus so it damned well bothers me. And per the article in the OP, it's just not women noticing they are being ignored by Sanders. One has to wonder if there is some political calculus being done.

K street, Koch brothers? What a load of shit.
You should be ashamed posting like that in HOF.

[orpupilofnature57]

91. Womens Rights shouldn't include Castigation of everything else .

[bettyellen]

92. Women's rights should not be shunted aside for political gain, period.

[HockeyMom]

81. When was Hillary EVER against a Woman's Right to Choose?

She certainly wasn't when I voted for her as my Senator.

[orpupilofnature57]

89. I did Too, she voted to believe shrub, She owes the 1% , And

where does it say anywhere that Bernie Sanders is against a Womans right to choose ?

[F4lconF16]

93. O'Malley's record on policing is pretty awful, though.

A Washington Post article here, ThinkProgress article here, and those a rather limited perspectives, in my opinion. There's other things as well. His policies on police and racial issues are really pretty bad.

Sanders isn't addressing these issues either. He hasn't made them an integral focus of his campaign, equal to and inseparable from the issues of wealth and income inequality. He has not been willing to address the issues in a direct and honest manner. Frankly, there's a lot else that concerns me, and there's a number of reasons why I'm not supporting him.

I think that if you start considering more than just economic inequality, you move past capitalism. Sanders knows that, and I don't think he's willing to go that far.

However, Sander's record is markedly different from most Democrats. Clinton's is downright abysmal--she's a neo-liberal with extremely close ties to a number of major capitalist players. She is a privileged member of the economic elite, the epitome of Democratic Party establishment politics. Her policies would do far more to worsen these problems than the others. O'Malley is a progressive, but he supports establishment policies in the end, and I cannot see him as an active advocate for racial justice and a change in policing. He's one of the major problems with the Democratic Party on that issue, actually. He might be able to be forced through major struggle and the eventual uniting of the working class, like how the civil rights act was passed, but that's about as optimistic as I'd get (with the resistance these days, you need a lot more than that).

Sanders, despite his lack of attention to these issues in his campaign (and that is a major problem), has addressed those issues in policy far more than the other two. His support would not just be reliable, but active, if not extremely vocal. If you're going to vote for a Democrat (I don't care who you vote for), I don't understand why you would throw your support behind one of the others. The Black Lives Matter movement is alive and well still, and will not let him forget the problem of race. Nor will his supporters, who are diverse. Women's issues will be more of a challenge, as there is not a national movement for equality yet, like there is for racial issues. I think Clinton would address it more, but her policies would harm women. In many ways, it is going to become impossible for any of these candidates to avoid those questions.

If you're worried about actual policy, I don't know why you would choose anyone but Sanders. If you're convinced that it doesn't matter which candidate is elected (true to some extent, in my opinion, but also not a good thing), then I could see voting for Clinton--a woman as president would be a huge victory, contrary to the claims of some, much as Obama's victory was a milestone in US politics. It would be a very good thing to have her perspective as a woman, as well as having her focus (to the mild degree that she does) on women's issues.

But O'Malley makes no sense to me whatsoever.

(On edit: yes, I know the OP was about Sanders, and Sanders alone. I'm happy to talk about his shortcomings. Just addressing a number of things I saw in the thread. It's an internet forum, don't jump on me.)

[BainsBane]

97. Did you read his interview with NPR?

I seriously doubt the Black Lives Movement is going to be backing Sanders.

One might choose someone besides Sanders because she's a woman who is not interested in promoting the privilege of the white male bourgeoisie. That is why I am not supporting him. That and his positions on gun control. Then there is the fact that he can say anything he wants about the economy, and it means nothing if he can't work with congress, and he has no record of doing so, except for getting 2 post offices named, despite decades of being there. A lot of people are less interested in how or what he could accomplish than in having their anger validated. That doesn't help me. I need someone who can get things done.

Besides, this is HOF. It's not the place to give politician's a pass for glossing over women's rights.

[eridani]

113. Or a woman who is interested mainly in making sure that half of the 1% are women.

Lunching with banksters = promoting the interests of the bourgeoisie

[BainsBane]

114. Spare me the bumper sticker slogans

Your characterization of Clinton is a fabrication, just as the entire discourse of "corporatism," banksters, and the 99 percent masks real class differences in American society.

I have no patience for people who just figured out they live in a capitalist state, coincidentally when a woman has the nerve to run for President. You can ascribe all the ills of capitalism on to the body of a woman, and it only shows how little you know about the nature of capitalism and the country you live in. That entire bumper sticker discourse belies real class differences. There is a huge difference between someone who lives on welfare and those members of the self-entitled white upper-middle class that habitually insult anyone who doesn't forsake their own interests and rights for the great and noble struggle of the 10 percent vs. the 1 percent. I don't give even the slightest shit abut their anger at their bankers. I have my own interests that don't revolve around electing someone to validate your anger, and I will not be abandoning those interests in order to help the white upper-middle class regain what it sees as it's birthright atop the capitalist world order.

So by all means, you cover up for the fact you are in a feminist room making excuses for why abortion rights don't matter, why you are choosing to support someone who insists black people "vote based on race," when they should be doing what their betters tell them, just as you and your friends insist the rest of us should do. I don't exist to serve you or your interests. I will be voting based on my own. Deal with it.

[eridani]

115. Given that my next door neightbor bled to death because a Catholic hospital

--would not treat her when she had a miscarriage, and that I had three miscarriages AFTER Roe v Wade, I take reproductive rights very seriously. But I don't actually care if people disagree on the question of whether abortion is morally right or wrong. The only bottom line is that, whatever one's personal beliefs, actual reproductive decisions must remain in women's hands. And I've been anti-capitalist since being active in the anti-Vietnam war movement, but mostly because family health care expenses when I was growing up kept my family below the poverty line.

You are living in an imaginary world. In the real world, the bankster financial crash devastated the bottom 80%. The top 20% didn't have to worry about being underwater or foreclosed on--at worst they might have had to cash in a couple of IRAs.

[BainsBane]

123. In that case, I would think you would not make excuses for politicians who fail to stand up for

reproductive rights and insist the more important issue is the economic standing of men.

I certainly don't have a problem with personal moral opposition to abortion. That is my own position, if you must know. I have a very big problem with politicians who fail to address that it is in fact a woman's right to chose whether or not she has a need for an abortion or to exercise judgment that it is not right for them, for whatever reason, moral or otherwise.

If Clinton could stand up to GOP Senators with power to refuse to confirm her for SOS and emphasize her unyielding commitment to reproductive rights, Sanders could stand up to fire fighters. The problem is precisely what he said in the quotes provided in the article. "The more important issue is. . .. " something else.

This entire internet meme about bankers and the 1 percent is promoted by some of that 1 percent and a good number of those in the 10-20 percent. The fact is, many of the people engaged in that discourse earn far more than the median income and insist funding foodstamps is an adequate response to poverty. I do not allow them or the GOP to define how I see politics. If you insist on that simplistic view of capitalism, that is your business. But don't for a second think someone educated in Marxist theory and Marxist history buys that bougie crap for a second. That crowd isn't in my class and they do not now, nor ever, care about my class concerns. That point has been communicated to me many times over the my membership here. I was told my experience growing up in poverty and being preyed on by Johns as a child was imaginary. Those people have time and time insisted that their right to consume any and everything they want trumps the rights of women to be free from exploitation and enslavement. Now you want to come in here and parrot their empty rhetoric about banksters. Not going to work. I do no care who you or anyone else votes for, but I will not have you lecturing me because I fail to set aside my concerns about equality, women's rights, and social justice to promote the class interests of the white upper-middle class.

And I suspect you don't actually know what the upper 20 percent is. That is anyone with a combined household income of $100k. There are people here who thinks that makes them poor. That shows how completely detached their entire worldview is from the reality of most Americans. And some of those upper-middle class folks make a point of regularly insulting people who have far less that them and who have suffered discrimination their entire lives. That combined with responses to this and BigTree's thread, calling HIM a racist for having the nerve to care about the interests of African Americans like himself, shows how little they care about anyone but themselves.\
Why should I consider any of them any better than bankers, when they show absolutely no concern for anyone else, and actively work to silence those who speak about their own experiences and concerns? No, they are not on my side, and I am not on theirs.

[eridani]

129. I damned well do know what the upper 20% is.

I've never been in it in my entire life, and am now living on Social Security. It is the bottom 80% who know about what the 1% meme means. None of them cheered for the bank deregulation that Clinton championed.

What is this bullshit about politicians needing to recite their entire platform at every single 20 minute speaking event? Sanders gets 100% from NARAL, and spoke in favor of LGBT rights way back when Clinton was supporting DOMA. There is no issue on which he has had to "evolve."

[boston bean]

130. Who's to know he isn't evolving.. some of his statements

leave me smh. tone deaf, simplistic, void of reality who suffer from discrimination...

What are we actually witnessing here?

[Violet_Crumble]

117. Where did Bernie Sanders say black people have to do what their betters tell them?

I've never seen him say anything of the sort. Someone who'd say anything remotely like that would be a racist...

[boston bean]

119. She didn't say he said that, and you know it.

I'm not going to allow this group to be used as a battering ram for those who have specific problems with persons in this group.

you cannot stand this group, you have stated many times how much you don't like some of the posters in here.

Why are you posting in here? never mind... I don't want to know...

I do take into consideration the hostility one has for this group out in general discussion and elsewhere. We just don't need it here.

[elleng]

98. No. O'Malley’s record in Baltimore:

GovernorOMalley did something a lot of these mayors don’t do: He walked w/ the small people…He walked the streets”

From 2000-2010, the incidents of crime in Baltimore dropped 43 percent, outpacing by a stretch the 11 percent drop that the nation saw during that period. The crime rate dropped by 40 percent. Graduation rates rose. Median home prices doubled. A new biotech park was built on the city’s east side. A new performing arts center was built on the west side. O’Malley was obsessed with numbers and metrics, and set up a 311 call center to track citizen complaints. A program called Project 5000 enlisted volunteer attorneys to help deal with the city’s massive vacant home problem as titles to those homes was eventually transferred to individuals and non-profits for redevelopment. The school system was pulled back from the fiscal brink. CitiStat, designed to track crime, helped bring the crime rate down and created a budget surplus of $54 million that was then reinvested in schools and programs for children. At last, the population stabilized. It was no longer necessary to flee, if you could. The number of college educated 25-to-34-year-olds living within three miles of downtown Baltimore increased 92 percent in the ten years after O’Malley became mayor, fourth among the nation’s 51st largest metro areas.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128164

[BainsBane]

96. Shit. I didn't realize this was in HOF all this time

Woah. Cheeky, aren't they?

[ismnotwasm]

110. I know right?

Like, damn

[ms liberty]

107. Nice little Bernie hit piece you've found there...

The language of the article makes clear it's intent. Having followed Bernie's career in the House and Senate for more than 15 years, I am quite aware that he is solid in his support for my rights as a woman, and as a progressive, liberal democrat. I am also fully aware the he is solid in his support for the rights of my African American brothers and sisters, as well as all minority groups here in America. I support Bernie in the Democratic primaries.

[leftofcool]

126. Do you speak for PoC?

Do you speak for Latinos? Do you speak for the LGBT community? How about convincing your candidate to address these issues strongly like Hillary and Martin O"Malley are.

[ms liberty]

131. No, I speak for myself as a woman,

And as a person who has taken the time over a number of years to learn Bernie's positions and his actions in support of those positions. I was a supporter of Bernie's long before he ever thought about running for the Democratic party nomination for President, and it was something I had never expected, until he showed interest in it this year. I know that he has addressed all of these issues over a long period of time and recently as well; and as a progressive, liberal democrat I also know that he will address these issues even more fully as his campaign continues. I have seen you post in an agressive and uncivil manner about Bernie, and to his supporters here repeatedly for what you claim is his lack of support for these issues; your perception is erroneous. I do not remember having engaged in conversation with you prior to now, and I make no assumptions on your motivations for your hostility. You are free to support whomever you choose, as am I. However you too can only speak for yourself and your own beliefs.

[A Little Weird]

111. Brushing it aside?

From what I gather, this is the paragraph you take issue with:

I know that there are differences in this room on abortion, on gay marriage, on guns, whatever it may be. Fine, let’s have our differences. But when it comes to whether or not our kids can go to college, whether or not we’re going to make it easier for workers to join unions, whether or not we’re going to have a trade policy which creates jobs in this country or whether it creates jobs in China, whether or not college is affordable, whether or not all Americans are entitled to health care as a right, let us stand together and not be divided.

I don't see how the above quote is "brushing aside" anything, rather it is focusing on issues where there is common ground. Bernie has an excellent record as an advocate of a woman's right to choose. How can you say his record doesn't matter? So many politicians say whatever they think we want to hear. And then they'll conveniently ignore whatever was said on the campaign trail once they get elected (we've seen it many times).

Here's an article that discusses Sanders' stance on abortion - http://www.bustle.com/articles/80644-bernie-sanders-stance-on-abortion-is-exactly-what-youd-expect-from-the-progressive-candidate

[Scuba]

116. I miss the unrec button.

[BainsBane]

120. You can always use the trash group function

to spare yourself the indignity of women talking about their reproductive rights.

[Scuba]

121. That part doesn't bother me at all, it's the false narrative that Bernie doesn't care which irks me.

[BainsBane]

124. You could at least bother to read the article

The author notes his voting record and discusses the fact that he, like all politicians, speaks to the issues he cares most about. He explicitly told a group of firefighters their economic position was the more important issue. That is how he sees the world.

Now, I really have no patience for the inane politics of personality. I consider my rights more important than the career of your favorite politician. You refuse to honestly engage with the article and instead resort to the strawman-type arguments. I've also seen enough posts from you where you addressed issues like action to promote voting rights, extending civil rights protection to rape victims, the Lilly Ledbetter Act, and other achievements that go to support the rights of the subaltern as peanuts or crumbs. You clearly are at one with Sanders on your sense of priorities, though I would hope he would not be so dismissive of key advances in equal rights. You have the right to advance any political view you choose, but this is a feminist group and it is not the place to complain because women are not sufficiently reverential to someone you consider a great man. Placing a politician above the people he seeks to represent is a profoundly conservative worldview. It shows hostility to civic engagement, is anti-democratic and anti-egalitarian.

[Scuba]

125. Please see post # 111.

[BainsBane]

128. directing me to a post that confirms my argument

rather than actually deals with my concerns is far from persuasive. You go ahead and focus on your common interests with white male, Republican voters. I will be voting for my own interests, not yours. You have made clear you see my rights and my concerns as "crumbs." Don't expect me to then spend my life is servitude of yours. Those days are long over, and that more than anything is what resentment toward the the Democratic party is about.

[William769]

122. Kick and highly recommended!

[Tarheel_Dem]

127. He's still trying to win back those "disaffected white voters", ya know? Quite frankly, I think this

is why BS hasn't been a "Democrat" until now. I think he's one of those liberals who think that issues of race, abortion, immigration, etc. are all secondary or even tertiary for people like him. He does not represent me, and he does not represent the Democratic party well.