just a few titles down from this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251457287

Bow down to us! Recognize and respect our ideological purity! Insignificant mortals!

I'm beginning to wonder if BLM has a message at all. They don't seem capable of explaining it. They enjoy criticizing people for not understanding what they say, but I wonder if it's even comprehensible in the first place.

If that is what must be done, then I support it.

Civil rights are a struggle, not a conversation over coffee and scones.

and Bobby Kennedy had been assassinated, while the Viet Nam war raged away. There was wide spread discontent in the country on all those issue, but the riots in my view did one thing, help propel Richard Nixon into the presidency.

This certainly doesn't help Democrats. This people are just itching to cut off their noses to spite their faces. Demagogues are dangerous to all the sane people who are willing to dialog.

beginning of our economic downfall.

of that story.

Nixon comitted an act of treason by sabotaging peace talks with the Vietnamese. Johnson's failure and the peace protestors from the far left hurt any chance for the nominee to win.

The assassination of Bobby Kennedy was another part of that, and probably had far more to do with Nixon winning their either than Nixon's Treason or Progressive rioters. He would have been the nominee, and if he had been there, it is quite likely those portesters would have backed him.

Again, this is civil rights, and civil rights are a constant struggle. If we don't struggle, we loose those rights a piece at a time.

One great expample is the Stonewall riots. There is a direct line from those riots to marriage equaility, and there is a long way to go, a lot of strugle in that quest for equal rights.

was making was the riots at the Democratic convention in Chicago hurt the Democrats. It may not have be the entire factor, but it sure contributed.

I was responding to the view that the riots at the Democratic convention in 1968 helped the civil rights movement, and I voiced my view, which was that it didn't, and actually hurt the Democrats as a contributing factor to nixon winning. It was not the only reason as you pointed out, but it was a factor. People did NOT approve of the way those riots were handled, and pictures of Chicago cops beating the protesters only contributed.

the NetRoots town hall who don't subscribe to that approach. That was evidenced by the applause given by a sizable portion of the audience that was there. My point is that I believe a sizable portion of most Americans believe that the most constructive approach is a two way dialog. Where one person speaks, while the other person listens, and vice versa.

Does she think she'll have better dialog with the Republicans? Wow.

Shutting down the debates would be soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo constructive....

This is Ted "I will filibuster the Debt Limit bill" Cruz level brilliance here.

It's looking like she wants to just completely shut down the debates period.

I got the same message.

...by Bernie Sanders. They have been wiggling and squirming trying to limit the debates as much as possible, so this isn't a big surprise.

They won't, however, shut down any debates. Hillary will eventually have to face Bernie.

because you can bet that this approach will lead to nothing good for her cause.

When they do this same stunt at Republican candidate forums and speeches, my respect for them will go back up.

Dumb-fuck move they did yesterday, playing potential allies like opponents.

Supporters of all candidates should have their cell phone cameras at-the-ready to document any ruckus that might go down. There will be no false claims to gin up sympathy.

What the hell are they thinking??

They shut down the debates and they will lose tons of support. Who in the hell thinks this stuff up and then allows it to get posted?!?!?!?

Their message should be that they will be at every debate and they will be heard. That is all they have the right to say.... this 'shutdown' crap will not work.

Their comments guarantee it. If they do manage to get in, they will be quickly removed if they try this again. It's not going to happen during a nationally televised debate.

according to others on DU, white DUers are "getting their panties in a wad"

I am serious

....this place has become a real joke...

talking bullshit and then asking people not to post comments - niiiiiiiiiice

It's beyond ridiculous at times around here...

Too bad an organization which began with such noble goals has to be undermined by power hungry leadership.

Power just for the sake of power is just a job title.

if you are in any way critical of this tactic, you're accused of being some kind of white sympathizer

gawd

I support BLM. I want to see them protest. I want to see them in dialog with ALL Dem candidates. I want to see them protest at the Democratic AND the Republican debates.

However, there is a difference between protesting and shutting down. One brings critical awareness and gets a message out there that allies (especially in the case of Democrats) can rally around. Shutting down the debates is not going to help them or us as a whole. There are only six damned debates as it is. Without them, we will get the corporate candidate for sure, and that is shooting your foot to spite your face.

The other issue is that I see rage and hurt. What do they want? Seriously what is the end goal? MLK, Ghandi, and other civil rights leaders recognized the need to tap into rage and hurt in order to amass a group large enough and strong enough to enact change. AND they had goals, specific ones, in mind as they did this. I want to know what BLM wants from the Democratic party and each candidate specifically. Can they communicate that if rage alone shuts down dialog and the debates?

I don't have an answer yet, so that is why I have mixed feelings and really mixed thoughts about these current comments.

That's a fact.

And they don't have a farkin clue how stupid it is either.

Oh well, thanks in advance BLM, for all of your genius ideas for getting Repubes elected.

Dumb idea.

After all, I can think of no better way to ensure that BLM's (quite legitimate) complaints will be heard and addressed by the candidates.

I've heard that crapping on the people who are on your side works wonders, too. /sarcasm

"So, let's hear something concrete. We all agree there's a serious problem. I have my ideas for fixing it. What are yours?"

Democrats talking about racism within our society and in particular in the Republican party, and talking about how to combat it?

Or yelling, screaming, infighting, disrupting and shutting down of debates?

And yeah, yeah, I know, I'm a "whitesplainer" like Robert Reich......

Fame and infamy are more alike than different.