... However, some of us are paying attention to the real issues.

But if you think they are the issues with the Sander's demonstration as a candidate, then you aren't paying much attention at all.

There are other issues, which you haven't mentioned, so maybe that is your only issue. Fair enough. There are a lot of "issues" voters out there, as you must know.

What is the center of this concern with Sanders? Are you saying that is what he is? We stand a better chance of a dialogue if you just come out with it. Or, are you saying "we" outside the Sanders campaign concerns have to make progress through racism as a life or death condition. I agree, then.

Yes, I suppose you do, but I'll be damned if you've made anything clear on what I should be remembering...

Maybe you think I keep track of your posts. Sorry, but I do not do that. Should I be following you on FB or something? Are you supposed to be saying something that everyone should remember because we are not good at remembering?

Tell you what, bravenak.... I bothered to support you in a post a few months back asking if I would stand with you, given that you were targeted. Well, I embraced you without doing a research project on who you were and what was implied. It was enough that you were someone who needed to have someone else "stand" with you.

But, right now, you are someone who sounds pretty disturbed about stuff they have said who thinks I should know exactly what it was, or I'm not good at remembering.

You give yourself a little too much credit. Frankly, I reached out to you here, but there doesn't seem to be anybody home.

And it drives people absolutely bananas just because I wrote it is a very big problem. There was nothing in that post to merit photos of police with fire hoses spraying black folks or police dogs attacking black folks. But that is what I get. Insults, accusations, nasty implications, pile ons of great magnitude, but at least they can focus their negativity on me and leave the aa group alone now.

You want my honest opinion? Some people cannot handle people who do not agree with them and try their damndest to harass them into submission. I hate that. If you think that one black lady in alaska is bulllying the hundreds of folks who drop by just to insult her?

Do you not see the nasty things folks say to me over and over and over and over? How rude? How demanding they are? How they expect me to EXPLAIN myself to their satisfaction otherwise they resort to insults? Look how many! That's one me, a gang of them. Who are the ones doing it? Not hillary fans. How does it look? Just like this summer.

Ain't nobody changed. The very fact that people feel oppressed by me posting that hillary did well is a sign that something is very wrong.

I am strong. No need to stnd up for me. I would advise you to tell people voting for the same candidate as you hhow they LOOK when they pile up on one black lady and insult her to the point that she KNOWS WHAT IS WRONG WITH THEM. I know that all I have to do is say anything nice about anybody and the knives come out. What a wonderful and inclusive environment for blacks! No wonder Bernie has the entirety of the black vote with folks like this on his side! K.

(and no, I won't ask you to link those posts... It's enough that you explained some of this stuff to me).

No, I did not see the nasty things said to you over and over. I saw a lot of persons on THIS thread asking you to explain yourself or complaining that you didn't, or thinking people who beat the drum, "vote for Hillary, or you're mean" to be ridiculous. They sounded like they had it with you.

But, the majority of the people I've met (not just here) who think Senator Sanders is our best hope are NOT like the people who did that to you. I've spent time with them. I just finished doing this on the streets of Pittsburgh yesterday. I think you need to step outside whoever the DU person(s) may be and stop to smell the coffee... seeing the rest of us might be a good respite.

Speaking of being strong, okay... I'm happy you're strong. That is the way it should be. I STILL will stand up for you, should you be mistreated, and maybe that's a bit difficult for you to believe coming from someone in Pennsylvania who is not black and thinks Bernie Sanders is the best hope for our country. But, we all need each other. A strong person would not project the hurt as much as tell the others to just fuck off (well, words to that effect).

Then, we can talk about the real issues, which is, after all, what this election should be all about.

Peace to you bravenak,


MMM

--deal with them.

--$15/hr minimum wage, and expanding Social Security. Advocating for those things is just ssoooooo disrespectful! Sanders would never say he was the candidate of hardworking white people, or say that McCain was better qualified on foreign policy than Obama.

... the venue?

That the "unwelcoming atmosphere" you babbling on about?

Bernie had recently hired her as his Press Secretary, a
concrete action, not just words and platitudes.

Others focus on the issues.

That.

Here's an example: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141245892#post2

Just find mud and sling it. People know its not muckraking (facts). Its mud (confabulation). The charges of racism are about as justified as the ones for sexism.

There is tons of bad behavior from the pro-Clinton camp, asserting they're insulted over comments without explaining why. Just insinuations of tone-deafness and racism. Linking to posts is some kind of 'silent' explanation. That's called "playing the card" and its cowardly.

Further misgivings result from the insinuation that we Marissa-critics are racist because we disapprove of an individual's character. HUGE PROBLEM! That is also playing the card. It smacks of the nasty, dysfunctional side of Political Correctness (or, PC run amok).

Quite frankly, very many of us also suffer discrimination and we're sick of the kind of hollow moral superiority and mudslinging that suits Clinton partisans to a 'T'. As you see from recs, many of us disapprove of Marissa Johnson's behavior and her "Seattle liberal white-supremacists" justification that you repeat.

I took your advice, bravenak, and Googled that phrase to find 3 references to Marissa quotes plus a bunch of KKK stuff that didn't relate to liberalism. So the wave of 'liberal white-supremacists' you allude to is Marissa's paranoid blathering.

On Bernie boosters' side, there was the accusation that BLM got funding from Soros and that has been dropped. The same for spurious claims of collusion. Persistent campaigns to sling mud? I don't see them coming from us.

Hell no. I wanted you guys to stop too. Nobody gave a damn what I wanted and I don't care what they want now.

A candidate's position on issues resonate differently for different people.
Clinton resonates with Bravnak more these days and that may change as the primaries creep on.
But, it is not fair to pillory her or other Black posters for their focus and opinions on issues that matter to them.
If economics matters more to you, then that is great, but social justice matters more to others and is just as valid.

I think we should all be able to agree on where we want to be as a society in the end.
How we get there is what we are arguing about. But in our arguing we can't lose sight of the goal.

At least as Democrats and like minded independents we actually have a goal of a free egalitarian society.
Unlike the GOP which has shit to offer.

It's about vilifying Bernie's supporters and a waging a smear campaign against the Senator from Vermont because of perceived slights by those supporters.

It's a page out straight out of Karl Rove's playbook and imo, if someone truly cares about the issues they shouldn't be swift boating a Dem candidate who could very well end up with the nomination.

Afaic, Bernie is the better candidate on both social and economic justice - some may consider one more important than the other but I don't believe they can be separated. You cannot have one without the other.

If others feel Hillary is better on the issues that is their right.

as well as the Social/Economic justice sides.
At some point though, you have to realize that the vitriol has to stop sometime with each individual making an effort to think before they type.
That is the direction I'm heading. I'm not all there yet but, hopefully others will make that decision as well.

And after being attacked and alert stalked by the members of the other website I have no intention of making nice with the people responsible. I refuse to be intimidated by them and if I have something to say I do it here, not behind anyone's back.

If I was ever tempted to behave as they do I hope I would have the good sense to walk away from DU and stay away.

I have to live with myself after the primaries and I refuse to engage in character assassination of people just because they disagree with me about a candidate.

I have to live with myself after the primaries and I refuse to engage in character assassination of people just because they disagree with me about a candidate.

I know what you're doing and it's appreciated. DU has to come together after the primaries but since this is turning out to be as divisive as 2008 I don't know how much can be forgiven and forgotten.

Thanks!

The Rovian "both sides do it" horseshit.

They become what they claim to oppose, ever more, every day.

Yes, and some say shitty things.
I'm not weighing in on who is more OTT at this point.
I don't think it matters in many ways.

But, as a Sanders supporter I would like to see my side of the Party cut the crap and stick to the issues without making the back and forth personal.
Hard sometimes, but you have to let personal stuff pass you by.

If DU has become "Bernie Underground" as some claim, then let's make it a better place for all of us.

I wouldn't presume to tell you how to conduct yourself. Nor will I be lectured to "let personal stuff pass" by others. That's what authoritarian bullies want you to do, just shut the fuck up and take it. Hell no I won't, but as I said, do as you please.

I'm not saying you have to take it, but you don't have to be shitty about it.
Be intelligent and make your case and move on.
Sanders supporters need to be adults about issues. Let others expose themselves for what they are.

Then I can confide that I do not dwell on the one percent very much. I know. It is a character flaw. I just don't.

as "bashing" in an attempt to silence the discussion.

There is no need to repeat it post after post after post.

I was recently told to go away for same.

And I never feel bad for listening to Heinlein. As long as you are willing to argue with him. I argued the Heinlein newsgroup, back in the day, into the proposition that a) The opinion on neutering cats was his own, not his characters' and b) It was wrong.

For what that is worth, but really, don't let puppies and kittens without human families be born.

Enough really is enough.

If you would check back in time, you would find that I and many others in the Bernie group have been fervent supporters of BLM since it began (and even before it began actually).

As such, I can't support your posts chastising Bernie and his supporters when they have been BLM supporters. In fact, if you really go back in time on DU, you will find that many of those that chastised supporters of Michael Brown are Hillary supporters not Bernie supporters.

I support Bernie because I think he really will do something about the unjust justice system, racial injustice and economic injustice. Oh, and he wants to do something real to stop or slow climate change which will affect us all and kill many of all races. Plus, he is against war which as you know, kills a whole slew of minorities all over the world.

Bernie voted yes on the crime bill which gave us mass incarceration. If people did not place halos on him and tell black people that he is best for them, Bernie would have more of a shot. We can look this stuff up.
If people stopped quoting MLK to us like we never read MLK. Bernie would do better.
If people did not follow me to call me racist constantly. I would shut up.
If people did not lie about their behaviour or pretend that it was not bad. I would shut up.
If the same people who blasted BLM and called them trolls and inhuman and terrible names did not now try to use that same group as a weapon against me? I COULD shut up.
If people stopped pretending that he is a saint and she is a mad villain from another planet? I could shut up.
If people spent more time telling their side to not say stuff like race card and gender card and race baiter and whine and whine about BLM callimg out Seattle for white supremacy and stopped pretending those women sent a personal letter directly naming them white supremacist to their door? It would be easy to shut up.
If I could get that. Fine. But I won't. So, nobody gets what they want. I'm not gonna shut up while they get to blah blah blah, but I for some reason need to stop. Why the different standard? Shut them up and let me know you got it done then I will promptly shut up too.

And I have a major problem with drones in current use.

How about a science fiction solution that involves elected officials putting THEIR soft, pink bodies on the line...

I could take each line and oppose it but it seems pointless.

Nobody wants you to shut up. And I have no idea who you want to shut up. I just don't want to read the same flame bait over and over again, day after day.

You'll love it, one of the things shown is the MLK March on Washington, heh.

things that did not happen to excuse herself and Bill from what they did to millions of LGBT people and for their continued use of DOMA in campaigns and for the both of them spending 17 years ranting against equality.
It's hard for me to believe anyone can buy into that line of bullshit.

Let's also consider Obama 08, a campaign by a man who kept saying he was opposed to the equal rights of LGBT, whose boosters on the internet posted nasty attacks on LGBT and who held official campaign rallies with 700 Club anti gay preachers infamous for calling us vampires and pedophiles. Rick Warren called us all pedophiles and our relationships like incest days before Obama rewarded his hate speech with high honors.

So that's the treatment I'm used to. Candidates saying hateful things, endorsing hateful clergy and their boosters shouting 'you people just want a fabulous pink pony' all over DU.

Do you? You think we don't know they all sell us out? Do you? We know that shit.

Aaaaayup.

We'll see about that BLM double standard on election day when those who say they care about BLM decide to stay home and allow SCOTUS to go wingnut for a generation because their preferred candidate isn't on the ballot.

Declaring this exact sentiment about not voting for Hillary or SANDERS OR BUST!!!

I will admit I've been a bit busy in real life, and haven't spent as much time on DU as I used to, but I have only seen one single post like what you've described. And even that wasn't a clear cut statement. So I'd be quite impressed to see 300+ of them. Even a clean 2 dozen would be pretty persuasive.

"literally 300+ posts on DU declaring this exact sentiment about not voting for Hillary or SANDERS OR BUST!!!"

I don't believe you can do that. Time to show the evidence.
You made the claim.

I'll wait.

... Again, the same.

If you say the same senseless thing over and over again, it's true. Didn't you know that?

you JaneyVee, are absolutely correct.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251741263#post15

we won't have a progressive in the general. Seems it's up to you. Vote for the People's candidate, and insure that we defeat the Republicons and get a good SCOTUS. But a vote for HRC may well see us go Republicon. It's up to you. If you want to solve the poverty problem, you must vote for the People's choice. Goldman-Sachs don't give a crap about poverty.

Same shit different day.

The few actual progressive Democrats won, and repubs lite lost?

either you can go to freeperville and feast all you want but it should not be put here

complaining about the ugliness while adding to it is hypocrisy too

Just tired of the bullshit.

acting like FIVE-YEAR OLDS

it is SICKENING

swooners SUCK no matter who they are swooning for

It's like the difference between the Religion group and the Interfaith group, the Religion group (a free for all) has had 2,714 posts in the last 30 days, the Interfaith group (where no negative posts are allowed) has had 11 posts in the last 30 days.

But yes, sometimes the writing can get insulting. People feel strongly and that feeling comes out. Better this in my opinion than an endless fascination with sports or celebrity.

...we didn't find it necessary to go found another website where we could talk about how horrible DU's HRC supporters are.

Now, EOM.

Nice redirect though.

Same poster doesn't (s/he says) know the difference between voter fraud and election fraud. Oooookaaaaay....

Geez even posting poll results results in all kinds of silly accusations. They simply don't want to face that BS is not the choice of a majority of democrats. The solution to that is to call us not-Democrats as pure as Bernie is.

Call BS names and it gets suggested you should delete all the while Hillary can be called almost anything.

So glad you are a member of Team Bernie! Pay no attention to the snarky comments. "Ignore" is your friend.

People keep saying that but I've never seen an actual quote.

Thanks in advance.

...so you are being either deliberately disingenuous or you are not very bright. And since I've read several of your posts, I know the latter is not the case.

Thanks in advance for retreating from your untenable position.

about gun control -- because he made his statement about the shouting right after Hillary disagreed with his position on gun control.

How come it's okay for Bernie to "imply" negative things, but not for Hillary?

There are many instances prior to the debate when Bernie used similar language talking about gun control, and used the same language replying to O'Malley in the debate. O'Malley isn't out there "shouting" about Bernie's sexism. Like I said earlier, you are not stupid. If Bernie was indeed "implying" that Hillary was one of the shouters, along with everyone he referred to in statements prior the debates, and O'Malley DURING the debate, please tell me how that is sexist????

BTW - I am a middle-aged NY female. As a long-time committee person, I have supported HRC in the past. But this twisting of words is pissing me the fuck off. As a middle-aged female in a professional career, I've dealt with fucking plenty of sexism in my lifetime. HRC claiming it in this case makes those women who have a REAL claim to injury from sexism that much more likely to be ignored!

exchange in the debate itself, which went like this:

1) Hillary makes a calm, reasoned statement about gun control
2) Bernie says that he "can tell Senator Clinton" "that all the shouting in the world is not going to do what I hope all of us would want."

She wasn't shouting and she wasn't advocating for shouting. She was merely criticizing his position on a gun bill. Given the context, and his specifically naming her, it is logical to conclude that he was "implying" that she had been shouting.

The only question is why?

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/10/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-clash-over-guns-democratic-debate

Cooper then asked Clinton if Sanders was being tough enough on guns. She replied:

No, not at all. I think we have to look at the fact that we lose 90 people a day from gun violence. This has gone on too long, and it's time the entire country stood up against the NRA. The majority of our country supports background checks, and even the majority of gun owners do. Senator Sanders did vote five times against the Brady bill. Since it was passed, nearly 2 million illegal purchases have been prevented. He also did, as he said, vote for this immunity provision. I voted against it. I was in the Senate the same time. It wasn’t that complicated to me. It was pretty straightforward to me that he was going to give immunity to the only industry in America—everybody else has to be accountable, but not the gun manufacturers, and we need to be able to stand up and say enough of that, we're not gonna let it continue.

Sanders responded:

As the senator from a rural state, what I can tell Secretary Clinton is that all the shouting in the world is not gonna do what I would hope all of us want, which is to keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have those guns, and end this horrible violence that we are seeing. I believe that there is a consensus in this country. A consensus that says we need to strengthen and expand instant background checks, do away with this gun show loophole, that we have to address the issue of mental health, that we have to deal with the straw-man purchasing issue, and that when we develop that consensus we can finally do something.

Using the logic that the "sexist police" have been using, I'm sure I could vet every single statement he said during the debate and find something to be offended by. Believe me, as a feminist I'm fully capable of doing that. Why aren't you as offended by his "coming to her rescue" about the email bullshit? Wasn't that condescending and paternalistic? She certainly had no problem with that! And she didn't seem to have any problem with the debate language until almost a week later. Why was that? Did one of her handlers decide that would play well with the media?

In other words, HRC's trying to use this as a weapon so long after the fact is so transparently manipulative, and completely unfair, and, AS A WOMAN, I lost any respect I had for her after that. And that is the last I have to say about the matter.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

People may not realize this, but Sanders had been using a variation on 'shouting' with regards to gun legislation for awhile in his stump speeches. It was NOT a personal attack on Hillary Clinton and certainly not sexist. At worst it was a clumsy attempt to slip some stump speech buzzwords into the debate.

From August 31st, 2015:

“I do not accept the fact that I have been weak on this issue. I have been strong on this issue,” Sanders claimed.
“In fact, coming from a rural state that has almost no gun control, I think I can get beyond the noise and all of these arguments and people shouting at each other and come up with real constructive gun control legislation which, most significantly, gets guns out of the hands of people who should not have them,” he said.

for behavior that would never be criticized in a man. For example, for "shouting" when all a woman has done is speak assertively.

This is the world in which he addressed her by name, and then made his statement about shouting. Whatever his intentions were, she and her supporters shouldn't be criticized for interpreting his statement that way. They're not mind readers. He addressed her by name and spoke about shouting. The logical conclusion is that he was referring to her.

This article was written about Elizabeth Warren, but it describes the situation all women in politics face. They're constantly trying to walk a tightrope that white males don't have to walk.

With evidence that this particular case does not stem from sexism (evidence provided in previous message) it seems disingenuous and politically motivated to continue claiming sexism.

Anyone who has lived in the USA for the last 20 years knows who Bernie means by "shouting" isn't going to get where we want to go.

I was going to reply and then saw your response. You did better than I would have and I'm relieved you saved me the trouble.

This constant slandering of Bernie Sanders is just sickening. It's become a prejudice and you can't argue with prejudice. Proof is irrelevant. It's been shown over and over that his use of the word "shouting" had absolutely nothing to do with gender and yet they still go on repeating the lie. They want to believe the lies. Bernie Sanders is their enemy, a redneck racist misogynist who wants to make their lives miserable. He's out to get them! It's disgusting and it's depressing. It seems every time I come to DU anymore I just wind up getting pissed off.

I'm sure someone will help us out and post it.

in that spirit, plenty of company around, company Sanders himself does not keep.

I am making a donation to Senator Sanders' campaign tomorrow and made plans tonight to co host a house party for him.
Positive action is better than negative words anyday. I think Hilary would make a great Sect'y of Health. She did a wonderful job of working for a health care plan for America and she was only attacked for it.

Any arguing, bitching, or hateful DUers can go to their own little playpen and have it out so the rest of us can have adult discussions about the issues and stances of candidates. If you get ugly, you're transferred to the PP to play with the other children.

Or maybe we need a group called Adult Primary Discussion. You know, so we can discuss things. I'd really love healthy, informed debate among supporters that is about learning instead of flinging poo every day. Moderate the hate. I learned so much from DU over the years, but now I have to go to dig through reddit for some scraps of helpful information. How sad is that? I hate that the place I loved for so many years looks like this. Of course, I didn't participate in GDP during 2008, so I don't know how to compare it or if this is worse than usual. I try not to get involved...but that just means I keep trashing threads and it gets pretty boring after that.

Nice knowing some of you...

Instead of wasting my night answering a bunch of threads accomplishing nothing, I donated money.

Admittedly, I was unable to resist lobbing a couple grenades on the most obnoxious accusations from the Hillary crowd.

Guess the truth hurts.

I'd say it's beneath DU, but sadly it isn't any more.

What is sad is how fast people have grown to hate Bernie since June nothing but hate directed toward a popular senator and why cuz he has the audacity to challenge Hillary.

Me too.



[font size=16 color=orange]Trick or Treat![/font]

It's like looking in a mirror.....

Just skimming the first few replies, I see so many people I respect.

I'm bed and I wanna go to tired, but I hope y'all converse productively amongst yourselves. If that's not too presumptuous.

And I have no particular problem here. We are not kings of the world.

are mad that Hillary is running a vile campaign against their candidate again?