I thought his response was amazing timely and extremely savvy.

it may be that since O'Malley only has about 9 supporters he was able to tightly control their message. Sanders supporters on social media however were uncontrollable and in my opinion have done lasting damage..... not just with people of color but with party regulars. you know the type of people who show up to the meetings coordinate the voting drives coordinate election day do voter protection canvassing and the actual political work that gets candidates elected.

Bernie Sanders cannot win without the party stalwarts and centrists. I'm not talking about the people whose policies may be more centrist I'm talking about the people who show up and do the infrastructure. once you turn them off you don't get them back.

minorities.

Let's Bern this shit down!

What you and other Hillary supporters are doing is despicable and if you think this is going to win you votes I think you are going to be in for a rude awakening. If you think hijacking an event and refusing to let the speaker take the microphone and accusing the entire audience of being white supremecists is going to be something the public finds acceptable you are sorely mistaken. It is not only white people who are upset either, there are lots of black people who have spoken out against what happened in Seattle.

The Black Lives Matter movement is extremely important and up until now it was a movement that was made up of numerous people some of who are now supporting Bernie and others who are supporting Hillary. The attempts of people like you to drive a wedge into the movement is going to harm the movement, people are less likely to participate if they feel the movement is hostile towards them and driving a wedge into the movement like you are doing creates hostility.

What you are doing is disgusting, it is extremely harmful and divisive and you should be ashamed of yourself for smearing Bernie and his supporters in this way, it is extremely dirty.

Yeah, nothing shameful about that. Or the people who insist that BLM is just a Hillary plot.

The loss of respect thing is mutual. I get that many progressives see Bernie as the only hope to save the country, but what I don't get is why that causes them to completely lose their sense of reason and judgement.

I would never say those things and I would agree that it would be wrong to make those claims.

I have marched with Black Lives Matter on several occassions and the reason we took to the streets was to stand up fror the people who were being gunned down in the street, it was never about primary election battles.

Nor are you responsible for what every Hillary supporter says, when you have a large group of people a few people in those groups are going to make dumb comments.

We are responsible for our own words however and I am calling you out on your own words rather than someone else's words.

with this kind of thing, and that Sanders, if he wants to be a leader, should have taken some action here. He should be out in front rather than silent at the back while white progressives and BLM get increasingly angry with each other.

Now, you did accuse me of "exploit(ing) racism to smear (my) opponents" which both wildly inaccurate and also offensive. Challenging Bernie's leadership on this issue is not "exploiting racism". Neither is pointing out that the white left is going off the deep end with their attacks on BLM. I didn't remotely suggest that Sanders himself was racist, and you know that full well.

It's also a little peculiar that you decide to call me out, rather than people who dismiss BLM as the work of black lesbians (which is so wrong in many ways) or a George Soros funded Hillary conspiracy. I guess you missed those threads. And the rest of the BLM bashing threads. I don't see how that's possible, though, since it's basically been the theme of DU for the last week or so, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

My account of what happened is accurate. Bernie sat by and was basically silent while this whole thing escalated.

I don't comment on the vast majority of threads that appear on this site, my lack of comment on a particular thread does not mean I agree with what was said on that thread. I don't have time to address every comment that I disagree with, but I have alerted on posts by Bernie supporters that I have found offensive. I don't want anyone on my side harming Bernie with stupid comments.

You absolutely are exploiting racism as a way of smearing your political opponents however. Black Lives Matter is about black lives, it is not about Hillary vs. Bernie. Your suggestion that Bernie has been silent on this are false, he has been speaking out on these issues for years and he was one of the very first elected officials to speak out on Ferguson. In recent weeks he has been even more outspoken, he has certainly not been silent. The only time he is silent is when someone silences him by taking away his microphone.

or lack thereof.

Sure, you can disagree, and think he's handled this well. I totally disagree: if he had handled it effectively as a leader, then the white left and BLM wouldn't be at odds with each other right now. It's not enough just to check the right boxes.

But regardless, the "exploiting racism" charge is totally off-base. This is an election, and questions of leadership are totally fair game. You're right, BLM is about black lives, and the people who need to be reminded of that are the Bernie supporters who insist that it's really about George Soros or black lesbians, or whatever else. And the person who should be reminding them of this is Bernie.

Symone Sanders (not related) led off the LA rally.

Maybe you haven't heard but that's shows pretty rapid mobilization by the Sanders campaign. He may not have handled the Net Roots protest smoothly but this hire shows responsive leadership as it takes a while to find a person with the credentials for nat'l press secretary.

What is it, 2-3 weeks after Net Roots.

There is no white left or black left. Your stereotype and prejudice that only white people support sen sanders is racist and completely wrong. You are using race to cause division and devided we fail.

You are exploiting race. BLM are Hillary shills. It's all very transparent.

I agree that Obama handled the Jeremiah Wright situation well,

Not Hillary though , she imagined that attacking Obama over this was good politics

In an interview with the editorial board of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on March 25, 2008, Hillary Clinton commented on Obama's attendance at Trinity United Church of Christ, stating, "You don't choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend." Later the same day, during a press conference, Clinton spoke on her personal preference in a pastor: "I think given all we have heard and seen, would not have been my pastor."

She had an advertisement where she used the private recording of Obama

"And it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion "

Hillary tried to use rural white anger against Obama.

In this OP, you start out by attacking the "white left".......so as usual, the Hillary playbook starts by trying to divide us by race.

You want hold to Bernie responsible for the internet whereas I hold Hillary for her cynical use of race as a strategy.

Donald Trump and DanTex may question Bernie's leadership....that is fine...that is politics.

I'll take Lil B's evaluation of Bernie over yours, DanTex

"I think he handled it very classy," Lil B said. "There's some times when these people, they feel the need to speak and they feel like there's an urgency ... I think Bernie let them speak and its the admirable thing to do ... He didn't have security escort them off stage. That's another plus side for Bernie."

Bernie's 44-37 lead in the new poll in New Hampshire must be scaring Team Hillary to the core.

This time, Hillary isn't saying anything, and Sanders is handling it poorly. Like I said, Sanders is no Obama.

He is a wonderful man who has worked tirelessly to help people throughout his whole life.

These weak attempts to attack him just show what a wonderful record he has. He wants to bring everyone together.

Hillary, not so much.

Sanders definitely isn't a RW trojan horse.

Nothing to see here, she has it all under 'control'.

demonstrators before they entered the building. You're trying to turn yet another example of HRC's authoritarian campaign management into some sort of display of solidarity. What complete horseshit.

Also, I sent you a PM.


On Wed Aug 12, 2015, 08:56 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Now you have.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=512834

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Accusing another DU'er of race baiting, including a direct link which acts as a callout. This is over the top, rude, and not civil. Please vote to hide to help increase the civility of this website. I have alerted on both sides, and this isn't about who you support, this is just mean spirited and should be hidden. Thank you.


You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Aug 12, 2015, 09:02 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Just another partisan alert.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Huh?
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I disagree with just about everything DanTex says but I won't vote to hide it.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Sorry, but you are banished from paradise for your impunity.

but your point is taken

What's really frustrating is that rather than reflect on your comments, it's:

"You only said these things because your a Hillary supporter, you only said these things to drive a wedge....now I don't respect you"..huh?

The hyperventilating over BS has drug the discussion level below ground on DU.

BTW, I like Bernie AND I agree with the OP. All of the candidates better improve if they are going to win the general.

They have things to regret, as you should about this OP. But, I doubt you have that capacity.

Why is this so hard for people to get? Even if you disagree, at least understand that mine is a viable opinion. I mean, certainly the relationship between BLM and Bernie supporters could have turned out much better than it is, at least you can agree with that.

Being 'upset' at protesters isn't a particularly problematic issue for protesters. I sometimes wonder if people understand how MLK was recieved at the time by the vast majority of Americans. Here's a clue; most people didn't think there was any need for any March or civil rights.

Ignorance of that order is indeed white supremacy ; doing nothing in the face of murder make you an accomplice to it. Being angry about labels is neither here nor there. People earn those labels, instead of getting upset about them, and incidentally putting their feelings above black Lives, well earns the description of supremacy.

Think about it; whats more important, white feelings or black Lives? What is a suitable description to describe those who put white feelings above black Lives?

The protests I participated in were truly about black lives however, the one in Seattle seemed to have far more to do with partisan politics than it had to do with black lives.

This is not Martin Luther King, I never heard of him hijacking the microphone and making broadbrush attacks against everyone in the audience.

But that doesn't mean you have influence regarding the movement anymore than Bernie did with MLK when he marched with him.

MLK didn't live in the media age we do currently so it's pointless to compare the power of social media and the impact of soundbites on our media consumption.

I don't doubt at all that MLK would have used social media in ways revisionists think he wouldn't.

MLK made a name for himself by challenging the status quo which by necessity meant by 'broadbrushing' the populace which in their ignorance saw as an 'attack'. Thus history repeats itself.

The numbers that Black Lives Matter is able to turn out are very important for sustaining the movement, if a wedge is driven into the movement and people start to feel hostility and quit showing up the movement is diminished. I want Black Lives Matter to stay strong and that is why I am so opposed to using them for partisan purposes, this is something we need both Hillary supporters and Bernie supporters to participate in and if people feel the movement is hostile towards them they are less likely to participate.

MLK did not live in the time of social media but he did live in a time in which there were microphones and I never heard of him hijacking one. While MLK may have used social media in ways that would surprise us if he were around today, I suspect that Bernie would not be his primary target.

I think you have it wrong.

Movements and protests are not the be all and end all. It the end goals that are important not the journey. It doesn't matter how many people are part of BLM if it's ineffective and numbers joining a movement in the US have little to do with its success.

For example, if you achieve your goals but I'm the process you upset a lot of people, would you still do it? If the answer is no, or you need to think it over, you dont really understand the urgency of a situation.

Do you rememeber that guy who out the phone down on a woman who called emergency services? Because her tone was wrong or some such nonsense and his delicate emotions and sense of respectability trumped her sense of urgency?

Yeah, a LOT of bernie supporters sound just like that. And let me be clear. This isn't a dig at Bernie supporters, as I'm pretty sure the same would occur in most if not all progressive parties comprised of white Americans.

MLK recognised that the people he was supposed to relay on were the most disappointing. He is quoted specifically regarding that. Of course he would target progressives as he did in the past.

The equivalent to grabbing the Mic in his day was to March in the street and disrupt traffic to a populace that hated him or didn't understand his message. Picking up the Mic in his day was not the same sort of thing, nor was the culture the same. Its not a good to make a direct comparison in regard to technology and media.

You made an already good OP even better.

You nailed it.

But I lost respect for them long before this latest attempt to exploit BLM.

They have been parroting the meme that Bernie doesn't care about poc for months, this is just the latest installment.

Shame isn't something they're capable of, if it was they would have stopped after poc on DU told them repeately how offensive this tactic is.

Your post is full of inaccuracies, but I confess I'm bored with this topic. It's been hashed to mush.

....supposed to do? Hurt somebody?


Silly person. I wave my private parts at your auntie.

before any of this happened. Instead of just sticking to his economic message until he was basically forced to broaden it.

You know, leadership. The thing Obama has and Sanders doesn't.

.... and yer just all riled up!

1? Who are you working for?

hmmm....Pinkerton?

and Bernie has lead Hillary on every issue.

Other than a very lame attempt to smear Bernie, what was your point?

Oh! That was your point? Well, that explains everything...

Right then and there and had control of the conversation immediately.

That's why the comparisons are so inapt. Bernie will never be able to beat any Republican.

They just wanted to wreck, ruin and throw stink bombs, and they did so very incoherently.

The more they do this the more people will see the level of desperation necessary to be a true Hillary 'supporter'.

Would have handled it better and made it work for him. If you deny that, you underarrate the art of communication.

Bernie doesn't have the natural charisma and charm that Obama or Bill Clinton has. That's simply the way it is.

He would do well to work on communication skills and his supporters would do well to understand their candidates strengths and weaknesses.

Obama has done nothing to demilitarize our police. It was under Obama's presidency that BLM came into being. If he had done something than BLM might not have been necessary.

It's not Obama's fault that the police are acting like an arm of the KKK. But he certainly did nothing to prevent it. Oh, except say somthing in a speech now and then. He certainly gave good speeches.

He could have developed a taskforce to investigate. He could have the AG report and investigate. He could have stopped passing out bennies to corporations that discriminate. There was and is a lot a determined president could do but he did not do anything, like he did nothing to combat poverty.

So many people here will blast Bernie for his response to BLM and how he handled the incident in Seattle but will give President Obama and his handpicked AGs a pass on doing nothing over the past 6 1/2 years, and especially nothing over the last year while holding the power to do so. Instead, they would rather turn it into a political pissing match over how the current second place candidate in the Democratic primary isn't good enough on the issue.

Why is nobody challenging the president and AG on this? They are the ones who have the power to do something right now, without hoping and waiting for Bernie Sanders to be elected and take office in 2017. Is this an urgent matter or not?

White House gates? Why harass a guy who's probably never going to be President? I mean, I'm voting for Bernie, but I understand that, at this point, he has a long way to go before he actually wins anything. Why bug him?

Every time Obama even suggests that he is a black man, the media goes insane. His hands are shackled. Most black people know that. Maybe the 5th or 6th black president might be allowed to represent 'black issues' without accusations of being called a 'reverse racist'.

who fucking cares if he's called a 'reverse racist'? This is a matter of life and death -- why is it acceptable to wait until Inauguration Day 2017? Why do Obama and Holder and Lynch get passes?

Everyone has their strengths and single weakness. Pretending your favoured candidates have none does them no service at all.

Like the previous post, instead of addressing my point, you've instead gone on to talk about policy.

If you focus on what I type, it makes the beginnings of a conversation.

All of the candidates have their weaknesses, with this of course being the topic du jour, and to assume I think otherwise is solely in your mind.

My point is this. I take no issue with the decisions to protest whoever, whenever. I may take issue with the physical contact or some of the generalizations but that is neither here nor there. The question I have asked is, why not approach the people who actually have the power to do something now? Is this an urgent matter or are we good to wait another 17 months when a new president takes over? I am pretty sure we are all in agreement that black lives matter now. How many more need to die in the next 17 months while we wait for the possibility of Bernie Sanders becoming president?

I have no issue with continuing to disrupt, speak out, and fight the good fight against whoever the movement feels is the right target of those disruptions. I just believe that, perhaps, this could also be spread to those who are in a position to do something now while black men and women are dying rather than seeing how high the count can climb over the next 17 months.

Perhaps, as you seem to have the pulse of the movement and the methodology, you can explain it so we can all have a better understanding, and quit treating those who are fully behind the cause as the enemy rather than soldiers who are willing to get in the trenches beside you.

Was to do with how Bernie handled the protesters'. I spoke about how Obama would have done given his skills as an orator.

This has nothing to do with him as a president. The two are completely different things.

You wish to focus on the latter. You can talk with someone who wishes to talk about that.

In relation to protesting whoever is the encombant, that would depend upon who it is. As most people should know, especially progressives, Obama can't talk about his ethnicity and the issues that he has experienced without running into a number of problems. The most predictable of which is being referred to as a 'race baiter' and the rest of the accusations are obvious. If I need to explain this further to you, then the conversation is wasted.

That is part of the issue. The other is Obama himself; the first black president in the US would have been him or someone like him. It could never have been anyone willing to make waves as a black president. It would have meant that another black president would have been almost impossible. Obama is a conservative at heart, there is so many splits you can ask a man to separate himself into. I think he has walked a fine tightrope, but he can't do it alone, obviously.

Saying that, he has been protested numerous times throughout his tenure, but even more so than Hillary, you are simply not going to upstage any US president. Again, we should understand that.

Perhaps, as you seem to have the pulse of the movement and the methodology, you can explain it so we can all have a better understanding, and quit treating those who are fully behind the cause as the enemy rather than soldiers who are willing to get in the trenches beside you.

So my original focus was not on your post but on the post to which I responded. That is perhaps where the confusion comes in as to why I responded differently than you would have liked.

As such, I can respond to what you have written here. I am not saying that the president has to be protested and I am not suggesting the best way to approach him. I wouldn't dare speak to how anyone else should approach the situation as they know what is best for themselves. I did question why there has been nothing directed toward him, the AG, or anyone in power that can get things done now rather than in 17 months and I feel that is a valid question. And, you have every right to answer or ignore that. I do understand what you are saying about the difficulties in getting his ear, but many people have done it throughout his term on many levels so it is not an impossibility.

As far as an "us", I am speaking about a group of people I know exist (and I have seen over the past few days here) that are willing to fight for the cause but have been advised they can't understand or they ask the wrong questions. Maybe rather than being combative with the very people who want to do all they can for Black Lives Matter, try to realize they want the same things you do, whether it directly or indirectly has an effect on them. I asked a reasonable question without taking sides in response to another poster and, even without knowing me or what I stand for, you chose to to speak down to me. That, honestly, helps neither of us.

I am specifically talking about how he dealt with people on his stage. Not what he has or has not done.

Changing the conversation isn't a good look.

You have a point.

But the whole thing, looking at the last 6 or 7 years of the Obana administration, he did nothing to address this racist militarization of the police.

And had they done that to him, they would have been tased and dragged away kicking and screaming.

With kale.

Propaganda and desperation.

All candidates make missteps at times. Sanders is no different. Obama was criticized at the time for not responding well either. It took him time to make that truly great speech in response.

Also the situations were different.

Obama was ambushed with race by the GOP/Right Wing attacking him as essentially a Black Radical..... And that was reinforced by that paragon of racial unification Hillary Clinton, who said" "You don't choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend. (Wright) would not have been my pastor." and..."For pastor Wright to have given his first sermon after 9/11 and to have blamed the United States for the attack, which happened in my city of New York, would have been just intolerable for me."

Basically, silence and staying the course doesn't work in this kind of situation. Part of the reason that Sanders's supporters have taken to attacking BLM is because Sanders himself hasn't given any direction on the issue.

And, true, the comparison with Obama is imperfect, but still it is an example of taking a tough situation and boldly turning it around.

He has adopted more of their message into his campaign.

He didn't showboat about it. But to be honest, I think as a former activist himself, he has had mixed feelings about BLM.

He has shown dignity and restraint, which is also a pretty good leadership quality.

is an indictment of his leadership. I think if he had gotten ahead of this, he could have prevented this, and brought the two sides together. It's not just about style, it's about results. Sure, he's been dignified, in the sense that he didn't have security people haul the BLM protesters off, which would have been a disaster. But he could have embraced BLM before this whole thing blew up. Even before Netroots, he could have realized that he needed to talk more about social issues.

I agree that he probably has mixed feelings about BLM. In fact, I'm pretty sure he's supportive of it. Like you said, he was an activist, I'm sure that in his time he did more disruptive things than grabbing the mic uninvited.

So far no one has responded, but it addresses that.

...is manufactured by Hillary supporters like yourself.

Have you guys not heard this?

http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/bernie-sanders-campaign-adds-young-black-woman-as-new-public#.kq7DOG15Y

She led off his LA rally. I'm not a Bernie supporter. I back BLM (that second protest seemed to be all about those 2-3 protestors and not the BLM movement) and I have to say 2-3 weeks after not handling the first BLM protest that well, Sanders has shown pretty responsive leadership with this hire.

Obama's "missteps" were quiet minor. He would have handled this way way better. Obama can handle hecklers and disruptors.

see my other response above

But it's cool.

The Himalayas of Bullshit, in fact.

And not a Sherpa in sight.

I like how you HRC fanatics keep adjusting the expectations.

HRC isn't Obama either.

eom

And that NH poll surely didn't help their confidence.

So they are going to lash out more.

Getting pushed off your own stage at your own speech. There's got to be a better way of handling that.

Last edited Wed Aug 12, 2015, 11:50 AM - Edit history (1)

The fact of the matter is, those girls (and yes I call them girls because they were acting like bratty little children), should never have gotten that far onto the stage. Anything Bernie could've done would've made it worse. His best bet was to turn it over to the organizer because thats who the stage belonged to and thats what he did.

if he had engaged them they would have accused him of not letting them speak. if anything had gotten physical, they would have said he attacked them even though they pushed him.

i think bernie going forward is going to have to be mindful of security, especially at events that his campaign did not plan.

this should not be happening with any of the candidates.

What should he have done?

instead of talking to them. I think Obama would have talked to them.

They came to throw stink bombs and that's exactly what they did.

Hillary's supporters are unhinged desperate and it's still 7 months out from the first primary.

whether they intended that or not.

The attack on Hillary supporters is not needed in this debate.

Bernie doesn't have leadership skills. That does not mean Hillary does.

Easy to say when Hillary has not faced the same test.

wth did I just read? my brain hurts.

I completely disagree of course. Bernie's reacted in the best way possible each and every time. the majority can see that he did the best with what he had.

dantex, you've fallen from grace quite a bit with this post I think.

And later on Eds podcast, and later with Michael Eric Dyson. You're mischaracterizing the interview and it's content by whittling it down to one sentence and losing everything else.
but like I said, it's cool. You carry right on and we'll will too.