Snopes doesn't say it's not him. They say it's probably not him. Anyway, call Bernie and ask him. Thanks.

Candidates for office typically don't neglect to mention things like this. Being photographed marching in Selma is a big deal.

Sorry for the confusion.

When he gets to Florida maybe I can get it for you.

What have you been waiting on?

Hillary marching with MLK?

Everyone here knows that from experience. But if Bernie said he did, then I would put money on it.

Raised in a politically conservative household,[8] Rodham helped canvass Chicago's South Side at age thirteen following the very close 1960 U.S. presidential election, where she found evidence of electoral fraud against Republican candidate Richard Nixon.[15] She then volunteered to campaign for Republican candidate Barry Goldwater in the U.S. presidential election of 1964. [16] Rodham's early political development was shaped most by her high school history teacher (like her father, a fervent anticommunist), who introduced her to Goldwater's The Conscience of a Conservative, and by her Methodist youth minister (like her mother, concerned with issues of social justice), with whom she saw and met civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. in Chicago in 1962.[17]

Wellesley College years
In 1965, Rodham enrolled at Wellesley College, where she majored in political science.[18] During her freshman year, she served as president of the Wellesley Young Republicans;[19][20] with this Rockefeller Republican-oriented group,[21] she supported the elections of Mayor John Lindsay and of Senator Edward Brooke (first AA elected to US Senate).[22] She later stepped down from this position, as her views changed regarding the American Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War.[19] In a letter to her youth minister at this time, she described herself as "a mind conservative and a heart liberal".[23] In contrast to the 1960s current that advocated radical actions against the political system, she sought to work for change within it.[24][25]

In her junior year, Rodham became a supporter of the antiwar presidential nomination campaign of Democrat Eugene McCarthy.[26] In early 1968, she was elected president of the Wellesley College Government Association and served through early 1969.[24][27] Following the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., Rodham organized a two-day student strike and worked with Wellesley's black students to recruit more black students and faculty.[26] In her student government role, she played a role in keeping Wellesley from being embroiled in the student disruptions common to other colleges.[24][28] A number of her fellow students thought she might some day become the first female President of the United States.[24]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton

lose.

The wiki and other things saying that don't trace back ultimately to anything but her say so.

Her college graduation speech supposedly attacked Senator Brooke for being a Republican. I've read the speech and that claim is as false as her claims about the Bosnia airport. AFAIK, she was President of her college's Young Republican group until she was graduated.

Lol

Implying HRC is not a real democrat because 40 years ago she supported a republican?

It's exactly like saying Sanders can't bra democrat because two years ago he was an independent.

People change their views and affiliations over time. Bernie used to be more pro gun too.

They are both democrats. Look at the ballot.

What the op is really saying is that HRC supporters aren't "really" democrats. As someone who has worked for every dem candidate since McGovern, i say that's insulting and makes me less inclined to support Bernie, not more. If Bernie wins he will need HRC supporters and vice versa or its President Trump time. This petty sniping is dumb.

Repub orientation from day 1.

Any photos of what you had for lunch last Tuesday?

Just asking.

before the edit window closed and began to register edit history. The original claim made was that Sanders himself had made the statement that he had marched with MLK.

A reminder to myself (and to others) to screen-shot all future posts of this individual to insure against such monkeybusiness.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.

Oh yeah, there is even video.


This is the grand argument against Bernie...wow is her campaign in the toilet.

She probably tout that as millary experience

The idea is so funny, though.

And not everyone had a camera in their pocket in those days.

Not in Selma. To his credit, he has not claimed he was in Selma. It's his supporters who are erroneously circulating a photo claiming that he was in Selma.

Thanks again King.

I edited my post for accuracy.

that I know of. And that march took place well after Obama had been born.

Not only does this Snopes piece not say that Obama ever claimed that his parents met at the Selma march, you will not find any other credible source that claims he did.

But since you are so certain that Obama made such a claim in his book, please just provide the direct quote from his book.

when he said it.

And I doubt that you would do that.

So let's quote from the piece itself:

[img][/img]

I haven't heard him say that precisely. Do you have a link (video/article)?

I've heard him say he heard MLK deliver in 1963 in Washington his "I have a dream speech" from way in the back. I vaguely recall him coming to Washington by bus. I have not seen any pictures of him there. I did search some for them. I've seen that Sanders saw MLK in '63 from stuff written about Bernie decades ago.

His supporters, however, say it all the time - they say it so much, in fact, that "Did you know that Bernie marched with Dr. King" is a running joke among many of my black friends.

that he "marched" with Dr. King in terms of his fight for civil rights or attending King's march on Washington in 1963 - where he bused in.

But literally, I haven't heard him claim that he participated in a protest physically marching with Dr. King.

Sanders NAACP rating has never been below 90% (since 1996)







I think he has a much better record on it that Hillary. When you consider Bernie has hammered away at trying to get people to realize Dr. King's feelings about income equality for example, I would cut Bernie considerable slack on this. His efforts on this have consistently been better than most in Washington on this issue for decades.

That is something that some of his supporters repeat, but I don't remember him ever saying it. He did say that he was at the March on Washington - but that wasn't really a march, it was more of a rally, and Sanders himself says that he was "way, way in the back" and had come in on a bus from Chicago to hear the speech.

The "Bernie marched with Dr. King" may be a myth - and not one that he had anything to do with creating.

His supporters claimed it. I edited the OP.

You never give up.

Snopes literally debunked a DU post.

This shouldn't be an issue about Bernie as a candidate at all.

What matters is that Bernie himself never made any such claim.

That could certainly pass for a younger Bernie. I don't think this is about truth. I think this is about creating a civil rights narrative about Bernie AA folks will buy. Of course Bernie has spent most of his life in lily white Vermont so that's gonna be a really hard near impossible sell.

that just because someone marched with Dr. King 50 years ago, they get a free pass today. We're not stupid or naive and actually look at people's entire record, not just what they were doing in their younger days.

And, as you mentioned, it has been noted that, when he had a choice of where to live and who to surround himself with, he chose to go to one of the whitest states in the country. That doesn't mean he's a racist or doesn't like black people. But it does suggest that at a certain critical time in his live, he opted not to place himself in the difficult situation of having to deal with race and racism on an in-depth and ongoing basis.

However, Bernie's fighting for black folks' rights for 5 decades should give him a free pass.

He has supported civil rights pretty consistently (although not always). But there's a difference between supporting and voting for something and actually putting skin in the game and going to the mat on it when it's a difficult thing to do. I like Bernie Sanders a lot, but I don't see many instances where he actually fought for civil rights in situations in which doing so caused him any problems or in which he chose to fight for civil rights even though it conflicted with another interest he cared about.

I don't say that as a criticism of him or to suggest that I think he doesn't care about civil rights or - as some Sanders supporters accuse those of us who make this point of doing - claiming that Sanders is a racist or doesn't like black people. But it is a reality and it is one of the reasons that many black voters bristle at being told that Sanders is the end-all and be-all on civil rights because "he marched with Dr. King and fought for civil rights all his life."

I ask this sincerely. He has a strong civil rights record and a racial justice platform that BLM seems to approve of. What is stopping him from being a viable candidate to represent the African American community? Or, since he represents Vermont, is there nothing he can possibly do because of the demographics of who lives there?

However, his campaign has treated the black community as if we are supposed to just accept him as our candidate because of what he has done in the past, when he does not seem comfortable addressing many of the issues that we concerned with.

For example, his laser-beam focus on income inequality - while very important - continually ignores the structural racism that is ingrained into our systems and will not be fixed just by balancing out the economic scale. We have a history - and black folk are fully aware of it because we lived it - of seeing the the country try to balance out the economic scale between the wealthy, the middle class and the poor, but finding ourselves left out of the benefits that have accrued to white people in our class. See, for example, the FHA which opened opportunities for whites to buy homes and move into the middle class but kept blacks from obtaining the same benefits. Or even if college is free, it doesn't minorities any good if the schools' admissions policies discriminate against black applicants and affirmative action is decimated. These are not economic inequality issues - they are much deeper, but Sanders rarely addresses it in any depth but keeps telling us that fixing the economic inequities will also fix our other problems. And many of his supporters have been virtually insufferable in this regard, treating us as if we are stupid, insulting us at every turn, and telling us that we just don't get it and are being played for suckers. Hardly a winning outreach strategy.

All in all, the impression that Sanders leaves - whether accurate or not - is that our issues aren't that important to him. If they converge with issues that he really cares about, perfect. But if they don't, it's not clear that he'll make the tough decision to step up and actually fight for them.

A perfect example of this is his position on reparations. His outright dismissal of them because they are "divisive" and the chances of them passing are "nil" completely contradicts his position on other goals that he believes may be hard to achieve but are worth trying to achieve anyway. He has yet to explain why single payer and Wall Street reform and other measures he cares about are worth fighting for, even if they seem impossible now, but reparations are too much trouble for him to even consider championing.

I don't think that Sanders is a bigot or doesn't care about black people. But I do think he lacks a certain sensitivity and that stems from his detachment from the black community over the years. If he were to acknowledge that - if he were to say, "These are issues that I haven't been directly involved in over the years and I have a lot to learn. But I care about them enough to make the effort to learn and to work with you. Talk to me," that would go a long way. Instead, he seems to resent even being asked the questions and seems to be saying to us, "How dare you question my stand on these issues. I've been fighting for you all my life." And, even worse, his supporters are even more obnoxious, telling us "Bernie marched with Dr. King, so you have no right to question him on anything. Hillary was a Goldwater girl, so why are you supporting HER? You obviously don't know what's best for you."

None of this means he's not a viable candidate. But it does mean that he has a long way to go to get African American support.

I don't want to respond too quickly, because I should really think deeply about it.

I would only mention a critique of the Coates discussion that has been circulating: he sets up most of his platform as radical for the establishment but still enjoying broad consensus among the American people. That's his shtick. I have yet to see anyone claim that reparations is agreed upon by the broad American community. Of course, racism in white America and not living in diverse communities could itself contribute to that.

You certainly have some good points. Much better than David Brock.

It's sort of like the Hastert rule - unless something has broad support among white people, it doesn't count - even if a significant number of minorities support it.

I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts on this.

Take care.

He protested against segregated schools. The income inequality can be considered a civil rights issue that is about the entire low and middle classes, which includes nearly all african americans.

But what has he done recently on civil rights that involved more than giving a speech or casting a vote? What has he done that required him to make a personal or professional sacrifice or to put some real skin in the game or to chose it over another priority of his?

And, while income inequality "can be considered a civil rights issue," it's really about something else unrelated to civil rights. Saying that it benefits everyone, including African Americans, doesn't make it a civil rights issue. And the need to stretch this into a civil rights issue shoes the dearth of civil rights causes that Sanders is willing to fight for.

The real question is, if an issue comes up that primarily benefits African Americans, would Sanders chose to make that a priority and fight for it, even if it doesn't directly benefit a large group of white Americans? He has not offered any real assurance that he would since he has not made such a choice in his time in public office. And, in fact, in one of the few instances in which this has come up - whether he would support reparations - Sanders punted and said he would not fight for them because they're "divisive" (which usually means that too many white people oppose them).

I suggest you watch a few Bernie speeches, to see that he has always been supporting disadvantaged people.

policies will primarily benefit us assumes that we don't know what is in our best interests, but that you do.

It is really unfortunate that so many of Sanders supporters continue to ignore what black voters are telling you and insist on telling US how you think we should view Sanders. That attitude is one of the reasons that he is not gaining more traction in the black community.

Why don't you listen to what we're saying instead of telling us that our concerns about Sanders are the result of ignorance and not the result of his failure to fully embrace the issues we care about?

When I said for you should "watch a few Bernie speeches", I meant YOU the individual, not for all black people to watch. Just YOU alone.

Do you even know my race? Are you assuming I don't have african blood? You are insulting me, slandering me.

Why don't you listen to what we're saying instead of telling us that our concerns about Sanders are the result of ignorance and not the result of his failure to fully embrace the issues we care about?

Your assumption that the reason a black person doesn't support Sanders is that they just don't know enough about him and if they just watch his speeches, they will understand why he is much better for black Americans than any other candidate - as if every single intelligent informed black person would have no other option but to support him - is one of the reasons that Sanders is having trouble attracting the black vote. Treating potential supporters as if they are stupid as never been an effective outreach strategy.

And speaking of assumptions, I have made no assumption about your race - partly because I try never to make such assumptions, but also because I don't care what race you are since it's irrelevant to this discussion. I am addressing you not as a person of any particular race, but as a Sanders supporter who, like many other of his supporters, assumes that black voters are ignorant - and one doesn't have to be white to have or display such an attitude.

And I think we're a much better judge of the candidate's records on civil rights than you are.

It only changes which ones you refuse to see. The records are not opinion. They are fact.

But our perception of it differs from yours. And continuing to tell us that our perception is wrong and yours is right and that we should adopt your view of it is offensive.

I'm just gonna stay with the guy who has been fighting for rival rights for decades opposed to the corporate manipulating liar.

Hillary Clinton was in HIGH SCHOOL in 1964 when she supported Barry Goldwater. But by the time she was the age that Sanders was in 1963, she was a solid Democrat actively working for civil rights. That was right around the time that Bernie Sanders stopped working in the civil rights movement and exercised his white privilege to move away from New York to a part of the country where he would be surrounded by people who looked like him and where fighting for civil rights was not a major priority.

But I'm sure you already knew this before you posted this totally discredited meme.

Quit staying in denial. Whether she was in high school or not when she supported a Republican who was against the civil rights act and carried on with that work as a REPUBLICAN when she was in Republican is something she should explain. You don't just turn on your brain when you turn 18 years old! To claim that what she thinks and does in high school and in college when today's kids are able to vote for our leaders is NOT STUPID!

Whether she shifted gears as she has done on so many other issues (gay marriage, gun rights, TPP, H-1B(?) ) doesn't discount her earlier stance on those issues as much as it validates our concern that her lack of consistency has us question her firm commitment to stances or if she's just doing what polls tell her to do to get elected.

I don't think there are, but I await being disabused of that notion.

Meanwhile, the issue for this primary is not who in the world, living or dead, has been best for civil rights, but whether Hillary or O'Malley has been so much better overall, including on civil rights, than Sanders-- and not just while running for President or preparing to run for President. I submit the answer is no.

For example: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12778959

And that's before the drug war, privatization of prisons and more subtle issues affecting equal rights for minorities.

But here are just a couple of examples:

"Bernie Sanders' Superb Civil Rights Record the REASON for the Rovian Smears We are Seeing"
"Go Bernie! Best Civil Rights Record of almost anyone, not just in THIS campaign, but in Congress!" http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251799010

"Sen. Sanders was living the #blacklivesmatter movement long before most of the NRN protesters were born. And he has never stopped protesting racial and social injustice throughout his uniquely distinguished political career."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251458723

"Well he's been on {black Americans'} side for 6o years. If people don't care, that's their problem They ought to at least recognize the fact that he's been fighting for civil rights and social and economic justice for decades, when the Clintons were trying to show how tough on crime they were, and verbally beating up on black radicals, The fucking guy got arrested for organizing a protest against segregated housing fer Christ sake, and has never stopped fighting for justice." http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251779319

The problem is that Sanders supporters don't seem to realize how obnoxious it is for them to consistently tell black voters that we are wrong about our assessment of who is better on civil rights and the other issues that African Americans care about.

You are not listening to us but instead are talking AT us (while treating us as if we are clueless about issues we have been living and breathing our entire lives) and then wonder why we are not falling all over ourselves to join your campaign.

ETA:

The problem is that Sanders supporters don't seem to realize how obnoxious it is for them to consistently tell black voters that we are wrong about our assessment of who is better on civil rights and the other issues that African Americans care about.

You are not listening to us but instead are talking AT us (while treating us as if we are clueless about issues we have been living and breathing our entire lives) and then wonder why we are not falling all over ourselves to join your campaign.

And let me reinforce what you said. BERNIE IS NOT A RACIST. He made a choice. For me, that choice speaks volumes. It's like what a white doctor once told me. I vote like a Democrat but I want to live like a Republican.

of the March on Washington. He is remembering it 50 years later in 2013.

https://www.facebook.com/berniesgotourback/videos/1599918966927586/

I don't know why I bother even responding. You will find something else to attack him about in a few minutes.

You need to expand your horizons.

So look over here, at sixteen threads full of grade-a derp.

And he turned out to be a shitbag.

So typical of these Hillaryists, show proof and poof, they disappear. On to the next nonsense they will come up with. Probably some poll where Hillary is up by 90 points.

the more Hillary slips.

away. I want to see those too. Where are they Cali-D?

He said he was at the March on Washington, and that he was an organizer in SNCC. Neither is in question.

Bernie has never lied about his civil rights commitment.

Snopes had to debunk it.

n/t.

that "Bernie marched with Dr. King" as justification for why African Americans should support him - and some of his supporters have disseminated this photo as "proof" that he did indeed march with Dr. King, which just isn't true.

So it's an issue until his supporters stop talking about it.

and then when he's called on something sneaky, it's all just a big misunderstanding, like the data breach. His hands are squeaky clean, but he's bringing a lawsuit. Okay. . . . . Regarding the DC march: has he ever said in an interview, "Well Rachel / Ed / Thom, as a matter of fact, I didn't march with Dr. King in 1963, and that's a false claim"?


Has the sun ever crashed into the earth?

But Hillary's the one with the baggage.

One was an out and out lie, the other took place when people didn't take selfies on their smart phones.

Dont you understand?

[font size=5]ITS. NOT. HIS. TURRNNN!!!! Aeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" [/font]

Or maybe it's usurpers to the crown.

Will those do?

Bernie's supporter claim Bernie went to the March on Washington because that's been all over media for years, not because we made it up.

Cause if there is no photo it didn't happen? LOL!

Do you know how many people were there, before phones took pictures? Colbert claims to have been there in his mom's uterus. Unless he produces a fetal photo, I'm going to call him a liar?

The odor of desperation is truly unpleasant.

issues!

Know why?



Because obviously, Hillary cannot run on the issues.

Then again, some of the posts here were pretty stinky a year before Bernie even announced.

Is not important. Yet I can't understand why Bernie's is?

that marching with Dr. King and I've never heard Bernie use that turn of phrase.

Unlike Hillary, Bernie is not a confirmed serial liar.

Maybe you should let him know . . .

I saw that yesterday on twitter, let me see if I can find it. Not the easiest task. If I can I'll post it.
Ugh...just saw it posted on the thread here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/128099366

The photo is 100% legit. I'm a professional photographer who sells stock with Corbis actually. Otto Bettmann was one of the greatest photographers of the last century and yes, he shot Selma. You've seen many of his images. http://www.corbisimages.com/content/collections_portfolio/bettmann/default.aspx

tell you that he wasn't there.

He's often talked about being "way way back on the Mall" when Dr. King gave his "I Have a Dream" speech in Washington in 1963 and has frequently discussed the impact it had on him. But he's never once said that he was at the Selma march, just a few feet away from Dr. King even though, having been as close as the person resembling Sanders is to King in the photo, he would undoubtedly have interacted with him. If listening to a speech by Dr. King from a half mile away had such a memorable impression on him that he talks about it to this day, surely being this close to - and probably meeting - Dr. King during the Selma march would have merited an observation or two in the 50 years since. John Lewis was there and has frequently talked about the commitment of the other marchers, but has never mentioned seeing Sanders there and, even more telling, in all of his comments about John Lewis, Sanders has never mentioned marching with him at Selma.

Bottom line: Bernie Sanders wasn't at the Selma march and has never claimed that he was. Only some of his supporters keep trying to perpetuate that lie.

You asked for a link - while it is nearly impossible to prove a negative, here's a link to the Snopes page the comes as close as possible:
http://www.snopes.com/sanders-mlk-selma-march/

I may need to inquire about this because now I am genuinely curious. Thanks for the link