2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie Sanders: All the shouting in the world is not going to...keep guns out of the wrong hands
Senator Sanders, we have a gun epidemic in America. Innocent people are dying everyday to gun violence. We need to shout, yell and scream until we can get common sense gun control legislation passed in Congress.
Talking meekly and quietly will not save thousands of American lives from this horrible epidemic. For the first time since 1920, the New York Times has published a first page editorial on the gun epidemic. We must take action. We cannot let mass shootings become the normal.
Senator Sanders, we need to shout until we cannot shout no more. We need to raise our voices and demand action. Shouting is what we need and you will not silence my voice.
trueblue2007
(17,223 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)'Cause.. .that was kinda his whole damn point. Positions, legislation, action are going to be the best way to deal with the problem.Not yelling on the internet. congratulations, you've convinced all the other people on DU that you're very pious on this issue, your version of "thoughts and prayers." Now what?
Support Sanders' gun plan. or support Clinton's. Support O'Malley's, all three are good. 'Cause these are hte methods by which change is achieved.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)He also said, "we can raise our voices, but I come from a rural state, and the views on gun control in rural states are different than in urban states, whether we like it or not."
We have a gun epidemic. Senator Sanders needs to stop triangulating on the issue. He is telling us to stop shouuting because this is supposedly a losing issue in rural areas. Thousands of people die from guns each year. We have blood on our hands. We need to shout. We need to pass legislation to stop the gun epidemic. We need to raise our voices. Senator Sander needs to stop trying to silence my voice.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)I agree with Bernie. I also have no confidence that your argument is being presented in good faith.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)North Dakota and Alaska have a very different outlook on guns than New Jersey or California. That's just an undeniable reality. You also leave out what he said next:
"Our job is to bring people together around strong, common-sense gun legislation."
Let's compare to clinton on the same issue:
"I favor what we have in New York. We have a set of rules in New York city, and we have a totally different set of rules in the rest of the state. What might work in New York City is certainly not going to work in Montana. So for the federal government to be having any kind of, you know, blanket rules that they're going to try to impose, I think doesn't make sense."
Sanders is saying that shouting at each other isn't productive. That's why he's proposing policy instead of you know... shouting. But you keep screaming. See if your voice gives out before you get results. I'll wait.
Or you could sign on and promote some candidate's gun plans. I don't fucking care whose you go for, just go out and do it.
TM99
(8,352 posts)Really y'all need to look up the definition of this term. It has a real meaning beyond what people so desperately want to attribute to it.
Sanders views on gun control are the same as Obama's and the Democratic Party platform.
The official position is as follows --
The Democratic Party platform 2010
Sure, get emotional, express the hurt and rage via shouting. But he and others are right. All the shouting in the world will get us no where. We must deal with the realities at hand and come up with legislative solutions that will pass in both rural AND urban environments.
No one is silencing you.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)Is not a winning strategy you will continue to be ineffective.
Please continue
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Looks like the memo went out, time to recycle the "gun nut" meme again.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)No shame. Just full fledged opportunists. Makes it clear how they can support someone like Hillary though, doesn't it?
.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Whenever they don't want to discuss the real differences between the candidates (every day) they recycle an old meme.
Today it's gunz!
Yesterday it was Bernie is a pro gunner that thinks women enjoy being raped.
Tomorrow - who knows?
Maybe they'll go after him over Israel again.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)But there's probably too many choices to be able to list them all.
.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Maybe we can intercept the memo before they get it.
That way we could pre-empt the daily meme dump.
ESKD
(57 posts)it's going to get stale very fast, and Clinton and the Republicans will need to dig for fresh materials.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)but apparently he thinks we shouldn't shout about guns.
Bernie's shouting talking point is perhaps the dumbest talking point of the primaries.
He looks so foolish when he says it.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Thanks!
.
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)When Bernie said that about a month ago, Hillary's people thought it was an insult because he used her name which you left out. I don't recall Hillary saying too much from 1993-2001 about gun control. Good try though.
Historic NY
(37,449 posts)Here try this since she wasn't elected official until 2001...and there is much more.
Get weapons off the streets; zero tolerance for weapons
The first step is to take weapons off the streets and to put more police on them. The Brady Bill, which my husband signed into law in 1995, imposes a 5-day waiting period for gun purchases, time enough for authorities to check out a buyers record and for the buyer to cool down about any conflict he might have intended the gun to resolve. Since it was enacted, more than 40,000 people with criminal records have been prevented from buying guns. The 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act banned 19 types of military-style assault weapons whose only purpose is to kill people.
As part of a zero tolerance policy for weapons, drugs, and other threats to the safety of teachers and students, the President signed an executive order decreeing that any student who comes to school with a gun will be expelled and punished as a condition of federal aid.
http://www.issues2000.org/Takes_A_Village.htm Sep 25, 1996
Dont water down sensible gun control legislation
We have to do everything possible to keep guns out of the hands of children, and we need to stand firm on behalf of the sensible gun control legislation that passed the Senate and then was watered down in the House. It does not make sense for us at this point in our history to turn our backs on the reality that there are too many guns and too many children have access to those guns-and we have to act to prevent that.
Source: Remarks to NEA in Orlando, Florida Jul 5, 1999
Tough gun control keeps guns out of wrong hands
I think it does once again urge us to think hard about what we can do to make sure that we keep guns out of the hands of children and criminals and mentally unbalanced people. I hope we will come together as a nation and do whatever it takes to keep guns away from people who have no business with them.
Source: Press Release Jul 31, 1999
License and register all handgun sales
Hillary Rodham Clinton offered her support for a legislative proposal to license hand guns. The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Charles Schumer, would require anyone who wants to purchase a gun to obtain a state-issued photo gun license. I stand in support of this common sense legislation to license everyone who wishes to purchase a gun, Clinton said. I also believe that every new handgun sale or transfer should be registered in a national registry, such as Chuck is proposing.
Source: CNN.com Jun 2, 2000
Keep guns away from people who shouldnt have them
We need to stand firm on behalf of sensible gun control legislation. We have to enact laws that will keep guns out of the hand of children and criminals and mentally unbalanced persons. Congress should have acted before our children started going back to school. I realize the NRA is a formidable political group; but I believe the American people are ready to come together as a nation and do whatever it takes to keep guns away from people who shouldnt have them.
Source: www.hillary2000.org, Gun Safety Sep 9, 2000
http://www.issues2000.org/Domestic/Hillary_Clinton_Gun_Control.htm
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Who sent these mailers out about Obama?:
Yesterday, Clinton hit Obama for calling Pennsylvanians "bitter," ground on which he fairly ably engaged.
Today, she's onto the other half of his San Francisco remarks, in which he linked economic frustration to clinging to religion and guns (the part he sought to walk back this morning in Muncie, Ind.).
"Sen. Obama's remarks are elitist, and they are out of touch," Clinton said. "The people of faith I know don't 'cling to' religion because they're bitter. ... I also disagree with Sen. Obama's assertion that people in this country 'cling to guns' and have certain attitudes about immigration or trade simply out of frustration. People of all walks of life hunt and they enjoy doing so because it's an important part of their life, not because they are bitter."
http://www.politico.com/blogs/ben-smith/2008/04/hillary-hits-obama-on-faith-guns-007747
But Clinton hasnt always been so forceful in her fight for gun control. As the Post highlights, Clinton has dramatically shifted her tone on gun control since the 2008 campaign. While Clinton touted her husbands record record on gun control (former President Bill Clinton signed into the law an assault weapons ban that has since lapsed) she also heralded personal memories of learning to shoot with her father and defend gun ownership, saying, there is not a contradiction between protecting Second Amendment rights and the effort to reduce crime.
You know, my dad took me out behind the cottage that my grandfather built on a little lake called Lake Winola outside of Scranton and taught me how to shoot when I was a little girl, Clinton said while campaigning ahead of the Indiana primary, where white working class Democrats propelled her to a narrow victory over then-Sen. Barack Obama. You know, some people now continue to teach their children and their grandchildren. Its part of culture. Its part of a way of life. People enjoy hunting and shooting because its an important part of who they are. Not because they are bitter, she continued, in a dig at Obamas remark at a fundraiser that disenfranchised Americans often cling to cultural symbols like guns and religion.
http://www.salon.com/2015/07/10/hillary_clinton_goes_bold_on_gun_safety_but_she_sounded_a_different_note_in_2008/
tecelote
(5,122 posts)Hillary is a weathervane. She'll be pro gun control if it will help her get elected.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)She pandered to the gun nuts in 2008.
tecelote
(5,122 posts)Nobody wants the Presidency more than Hillary. At any cost.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Instead of trying to bring people together--Hillary's minions decide to parlay a national tragedy into political gold.
What a sick attempt to capitalize on the hurt and outrage that America is feeling because of the San Bernardino attacks. It's also a tacky attempt--cherry picking one sentence that Bernie said and building up a straw man argument with it.
How shameful and sick.
When a political candidate, or supporters of that candidate, use fourteen dead people to bolster a political message and to position your opponent in a negative light--you've pretty much lost your soul.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)Thoughts and prayers isn't going to fix the gun epidemic in America. We need real solutions. We need to take action. We need to shout and demand that Congress pass common sense gun control legislation. Senator Sanders isn't going to silence me. I am going to shout until I cannot shout no more.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Oh the drama.
Bernie is pro-gun control and has been for decades.
Maybe you should shout at the pro-NRA Republicans instead of pro-gun control Democrats.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)...it appears that you've got the vapors.
You might want to steady yourself next to something heavy.
The faux outrage about Bernie attempting to silence you is a nice touch.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Why are you trying to silence my mind?????
OMG.... you're trying to silence my thoughts!!! The horror!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
See how stupid that is?
.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)This has been a public service announcement.
.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Hillary supporters exploited that church shooting when it happened by trying to paint Bernie as a gun nut then as well.
It's really sad what a pathetic joke DU has become. I really don't know why I still come here. It's a bad habit at this point.
.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)...but they are a vocal minority. Look at DU. Pro-Hillary posts are rarely, if ever, on the Greatest page. DU is 90 percent in the tank for Bernie.
Please remember that some of her support most likely isn't real. Hillary purchased Twitter followers, and a paid operative has come forward to reveal that he was employed by the Hillary campaign to troll Internet sites for Hillary.
http://reverbpress.com/politics/battlegrounds/confessions-hillary-shill-people-getting-paid-bash-bernie-sanders/
I'm not calling out any individual person. Some of the Hillary supporter are wonderful. However, I worked in PR for many years and it's entirely possible that some of her support is not authentic--throughout the Internet. Many companies hire people to post on their behalf. BP did this after the Gulf War disaster. Their FB page was a disgrace and you could watch as these paid operatives attempted to overpower and drive out anyone who dared to criticize BP after the spill.
One of their tactics is to mock and laugh at posters who speak truth. BP's page had a cadre of posters who did this.
They worked as a team to attack anyone who dared to suggest that BP was at fault. If someone posted about the wildlife being covered in oil and how sad it was, within seconds (they're fast!) one would post about BP's new wildlife protection fund. Another would chime in and attack the poster for criticizing the Gulf, insisting that that the poster was damaging Gulf tourism as BP worked hard to clean up the Gulf. Then the "sorority girls" would show up. They'd post lots of LOLs and they'd mock and make people feel outnumbered and intimidated. It was very well orchestrated. It was obvious kabuki theater. Who actually liked BP a month after the oil spill?
So...this kind of nonsense does happen and apparently there are unethical PR people who consider this a fantastic way to spend their time. It's actually a form of lying. The Public Relations Society of America considers this highly unethical behavior and other companies have been called out for this practice. I guess there's a dark side to every profession.
Historic NY
(37,449 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Bernie's pro-gun control positions are just fine.
Cha
(297,275 posts)zalinda
(5,621 posts)The real problem is much, much more complicated. For how many guns that are out there, we should be drowning in gun violence, but that is not the case. Just like Prohibition did not stop drinking, taking away the guns will not stop the killing.
First, we have to recognize that 60% of the gun deaths are suicide. Does police shooting also get added into this 33,000 number? I don't know. This is what I do know. People who kill are unbalanced. Whatever their reason is to take out a gun and kill, is not normal. There is not adequate health care, whether mental or physical. Physical pain can take as much a toll on people's lives as mental pain. When people have had enough pain in their lives, they fight back, they could hurt themselves or others.
People have been treated cruelly by corporations, lives ruined, houses taken away, job taken away, children taken away, spouse leaving or a huge combination of all of it. The anger is there. Why do you think that Trump and even Bernie is doing well. It's because the people are suffering, and they know that the establishment politicians are not listening to them, or are in fact even aware of them. The politicians only think about their friends and making money. They do not care about the people they are sending into war, or taking away their pension or taking away their house or just making it difficult to live.
What I have seen in the last 50 years is astounding. It used to be that employees were valued. That you local bank knew you and actually wanted your business. That children could play outside safely. You only needed one paycheck in the family to live a descent life. You could trust your local news show and news paper. Now people have been reduced to no more than a number on a chart.
We have had a number of revolutions in this world when the elites would shout "let them eat cake". We are seeing the signs of that revolution coming again. Guns are not the problem, the inequality is the problem. Put enough stress on people, they will break and we are seeing the cracks opening up. Getting rid of guns is a feel good band-aid, but it doesn't solve the problem.
Z
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)The problem is a culture of fear, violence and exploitation.
tecelote
(5,122 posts)"There are many American traits which we Australians could well emulate to our great benefit," he concluded. "But when it comes to guns, we have been right to take a radically different path." - John Howard
"...the firearm homicide rate fell by 59 percent, and the firearm suicide rate fell by 65 percent, in the decade after the law was introduced, without a parallel increase in non-firearm homicides and suicides. That provides strong circumstantial evidence for the law's effectiveness."
That 59% decrease in the US would have saved about 160,000 lives in one decade.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)shenmue
(38,506 posts)Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Enough with the drama, no one here is going to be swayed by recycled memes.
Bernie has always been pro-gun control and has already explained his vote against the Brady Bill:
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Gun_Control.htm
....However, the Nation and the other reports like it dont shed real light on where Sanders is coming from. They dont explain why he supports some gun controls but not others. Nor do they ask if theres a consistency to Sanders positions and votes over the years? They simply suggest that Bernies position is muddled and makes a good target for Hillary.
Yet there is an explanation. Its consistent and simpler than many pundits think. And its in Bernies own words dating back to the campaign where he was first elected to the U.S. Housein 1990where he was endorsed by the NRA, even after Sanders told them that he would ban assault rifles. That year, Bernie faced Republican incumbent Peter Smith, who beat him by less than 4 percentage points in a three-way race two years before.
In that 1988 race, Bernie told Vermont sportsmen that he backed an assault weapons ban. Smith told the same sportsmens groups that he opposed it, but midway through his first term he changed his mind and co-sponsored an assault rifle baneven bringing an AK-47 to his press conference. That about-face was seen as a betrayal and is the background to a June 1990 debate sponsored by the Vermont Federation of Sportsmens Clubs.
I was at that debate with Smith and three other candidatesas the Sanders campaign press secretaryand recorded it. Bernie spoke at length three times and much of what he said is relevant today, and anticipates his congressional record on gun control ever since. Look at how Bernie describes what being a sportsperson is in a rural state, where he is quick to draw the line with weapons that threaten police and have no legitimate use in huntinghe previously was mayor of Vermonts biggest city, and his record of being very clear with the gun lobby and rural people about where he stands. His approach, despite the Nations characterization, isnt open-minded.
As you can see, Berniewho moved to rural northeastern Vermont in the late 1960shas an appreciation and feeling for where hunting and fishing fit into the lives of lower income rural people. Hes not a hunter or a fisherman. When he grew up in Brooklyn, he was a nerdy jockbeing captivated by ideas and a high school miler who hoped for a track scholarship for college. But like many people who settled in Vermont for generations, he was drawn to its freer and greener pastures and respected its local culture.
I went before the sportsmen of Vermont and said that I have concerns about certain types of assault weapons that have nothing to do with hunting. I believe in hunting. I will not support any legislation that limits the rights of Vermonters or any other hunters to practice what they have enjoyed for decades. I do have concerns about certain types of assault weapons.
That was not the end of his remarks. But it is worth noting that his separating the rights of traditional hunters from the concerns of police chiefs has been a constant thread in many subsequent votes he would take in Congress. Its also noteworthy that Bernie consistently has opposed assault weapons from the late 1980sbefore he was in Congresswhich he reiterated to the moderator.
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/10/what_bernies_gun_control_critics_get_wrong_partner/
Next, the 1990 debate turned to gun control. The moderator, who clearly was a Second Amendment absolutist, went after Bernieto test his mettle after Smiths about-face.
Do you support additional restrictions on firearms? Do you support additional restrictive firearms legislation? he asked. Bernie Sanders, explain yourself, yes or no?
Yes, he replied. Two years ago, I went before the Vermont Sportsmans Federation and was asked exactly the same question. It was a controversial question. I know how they felt on the issue. And that was before the DiConcini Bill. That was before a lot of discussion about the Brady Bill. That was before New Jersey and California passed bills limiting assault weapons.
I went before the sportsmen of Vermont and said that I have concerns about certain types of assault weapons that have nothing to do with hunting. I believe in hunting. I will not support any legislation that limits the rights of Vermonters or any other hunters to practice what they have enjoyed for decades. I do have concerns about certain types of assault weapons.
That was not the end of his remarks. But it is worth noting that his separating the rights of traditional hunters from the concerns of police chiefs has been a constant thread in many subsequent votes he would take in Congress. Its also noteworthy that Bernie consistently has opposed assault weapons from the late 1980sbefore he was in Congresswhich he reiterated to the moderator.
I said that before the election, he continued. The Vermont sportspeople, as is their right, made their endorsement. The endorsed Peter Smith. They endorsed Paul Poirier. I lost that election by about three-and-one-half percentage points, a very close election. Was my failure to get that endorsement pivotal? It might have been. We dont know. Maybe it was. Maybe it wasnt. All I can say is I told the sportspeople of Vermont what I believe before the election and I am going to say it again.
I do believe we need to ban certain types of assault weapons. I have taked to police chiefs. I have talked to the police officers out on the street. I have read some of the literature all over this country. Police chiefs, police officers are concerned about the types of weapons which are ending up in the hands of drug dealers and other criminals and our police oficers are getting outgunned.
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernies-gun-control-critics-are-wrong-his-stance-has-been-consistent-decades
WASHINGTON, April 17 Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today voted for expanded background checks on gun buyers and for a ban on assault weapons but the Senate rejected those central planks of legislation inspired by the shootings of 20 first-grade students and six teachers in Newtown, Conn.
Nobody believes that gun control by itself is going to end the horrors we have seen in Newtown, Conn., Aurora, Colo., Blacksburg, Va., Tucson, Ariz. and other American communities, Sanders said. There is a growing consensus, however, in Vermont and across America that we have got to do as much as we can to end the cold-blooded, mass murders of innocent people. I believe very strongly that we also have got to address the mental health crisis in our country and make certain that help is available for people who may be a danger to themselves and others, Sanders added.
The amendment on expanded background checks needed 60 votes to pass but only 54 senators voted for it. To my mind it makes common sense to keep these weapons out of the hands of people with criminal records or mental health histories, Sanders said.
Under current federal law, background checks are not performed for tens of thousands of sales up to 40 percent of all gun transfers at gun shows or over the Internet. The amendment would have required background checks for all gun sales in commercial settings regardless of whether the seller is a licensed dealer. The compromise proposal would have exempted sales between family, friends, and neighbors.
In a separate roll call, the Senate rejected a proposal to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. That proposal was defeated by a vote of 60 to 40.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-votes-for-background-checks-assault-weapons-ban
He even voted for the 1994 crime bill because it included the Violence against Women Act and assault weapons ban:
A spokesman for Sanders said he voted for the bill "because it included the Violence Against Women Act and the ban on certain assault weapons."
Sanders reiterated his opposition to capital punishment in 2015. "I just dont think the state itself, whether its the state government or federal government, should be in the business of killing people," he said on a radio show.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/sep/02/viral-image/where-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-stand-/
cui bono
(19,926 posts)omg.... the desperation in these attempts to twist Bernie's words into something he never said is astounding!
You think Bernie's is "talking meekly"?. You've clearly never heard him speak then. Fail.
You think Bernie is trying to silence you? You clearly do not know of his appeals to bring the people into a movement. Fail.
I would explain to you that he meant that only shouting doesn't do anything, but you knew that, you can't be that stupid to think he doesn't want anyone to say anything and doesn't want any action taken. You should be embarrassed to have written this disingenuous, transparent and slanderous OP.
.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)Your aggressive and in your face attitude will not stop me from shouting. I will raise my voice until I cannot shout no more. You won't scare me into silence.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)omg you're killing me!!!
That post deserves the trademarked
Such drama! Did you study theater or does it come naturally?
Oh, so where did I say you should be silent? Exact quote please. Thanks!
.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts).
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)A lot of Hillary Clinton supporters like Maggie are aggressively being followed and alerted upon. I will not fall for your trap. Nice try.
Cha
(297,275 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)You claimed I said something so back it up. Of course I never did what you accused me of, so now you deflect and make a different false accusation.
So explain that one then. I mean really, if you are going to make claims you are supposed to be able to back them up. Never mind that you can't even back up your OP.
What a joke.
.
Cha
(297,275 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Oh my god, you are hilarious.
MAYBE YOU SHOULD TYPE IN ALL CAPS, THAT WAY PEOPLE KNOW YOU'RE SHOUTING.
Everyone gets a voice here, trying to get cui bono's post hidden isn't going to work.
If you feel intimidated by that post then this forum probably isn't for you.
Go shout somewhere else if you don't want to be challenged.
Maybe an echo chamber, that way you can enjoy the sound of your own voice more than once.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)It won't.
Cha
(297,275 posts)Thank you, PTBL!
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Thanks!
.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)You are doing your candidate a disservice. Getting our post deleted is a cheap way to silence us. Can you at least try to be more reasonable?
cui bono
(19,926 posts)So stop trying to deflect by making yet another false accusation.
I'm not trying to silence you, I'm trying to get you to explain something that I'm too thick to get. So, where did I say that you should be silent? Is that what the accusation was? We've gone back and forth a few times now, it's hard to remember. If you don't mind, could you trouble yourself to read upthread and see what it was you said I said and then quote me saying it?
Thanks!
.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)Are you happy now? Like I said, I won't fall for your trap. I refuse to be silenced whether it's through intimidation or having my posts deleted.
You can visit the Hillary group and see many stories of Hillary Clinton's supporters having their post maliciously alerted upon.
I know what you are trying to do. I would rather lose the argument than have my post be silenced through deletion. So you win the argument. Congratulations.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)I am merely standing up for my words and not allowing you to make a false accusation towards me without backing it up.
You've shown you can't back it up, even if you tried to do it in a way that you think allows you to save face. That's fine. We all see that you couldn't provide the quote.
As to visiting the Hillary group, no thanks!
And no, you don't know what I'm trying to do. That's just another false accusation. Care to show proof of it? Oh, never mind, you can't because it never happened.
.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)Please stop bragging about your victory. It's unbecoming and unseemly. Be humble in victory be gracious in defeat. Like I said, congratulations. Enjoy your victory.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)It's unbecoming and unseemly.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)If you don't want people to respond to you don't post in an open forum.
If you don't want to read someone's posts, put them on ignore.
But quit playing the victim because people are challenging you.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)I will post here and you will not stop me.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Your manipulation won't work.
Try another tactic.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)We need a sense of humour to post here.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)Cha
(297,275 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Americans are being slaughtered by unrestricted deadly weapons and Bernie Sanders is a part of this horrible problem.
He is defiant in the face of these terrible events and still stands in front of the big gun lobby to protect them.
Has Bernie admitted his terrible lack of judgment in voting against the Brady Bill yet? Of course not!
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)You got weak sauce here.
quakerboy
(13,920 posts)at least, not technically. The media will ignore you, though. And all your shouting will be completely ineffective.
When it comes to shouting or action.. I will take action any day. When it comes to hashtags vs action.. again action. When it comes to bluster VS action.. again I chose action.
But Im not the boss of you, so you are free to keep on ineffectively shouting your self in the foot as long as you like, and the country will continue to suffer for it, with shooting after shooting and no hope or change.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)Not just the ones that are politically expedient.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Sorry that inconvenient little fact slipped right by you pal.
So scream away, for all of the fucking good it does.
zazen
(2,978 posts)While I want all sorts of serious gun regulation too, the reality is that
1) lack of access to decent, affordable (free) health care (physical and mental)
2) lack of decent, guaranteed paying jobs, including ones that allow parents to spend more time with their kids
3) a for-profit criminal justice system that preys on minority communities
4) grossly unaffordable higher education that disproportionate and further excludes minorities from decent paying jobs
5) lack of affordable child care and paid parental leave
6) little to no safety net for older and partially disabled persons who aren't on Medicare and SS but don't qualify for benefits
lead to many more deaths per year. Sanders is the only politician who is addressing these issues at the root--not putting a bandaid on them.
Would Bernie's policies if enacted stop serial killers, politically motivated fundamentalist extremist killers, and half of the domestic gun-related violence? No. But it'd remove a lot of the deeper motivations/exigencies that lead to the rest of the gun violence.
We need movements on both fronts.
TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)They miss the forest for the trees.