How not to treat your allies
Imagine fighting your entire life for social justice, being the most progressive member of the senate and then having your events repeatedly crashed by people yelling at you that you're not doing enough.
I can't get over that look on his face. He looks so sad and defeated by this. I know he is a fighter, but I can't imagine having to deal with something like that.
I would really like an explanation of this. Forget he is a presidential candidate. Who treats a 73 year old man like that? I get he is a public figure, but you'd think a modicum of decency would prevent someone from doing something like that.
= new reply since forum marked as read
:large
I'm black and I think that sucks. I'm so sorry, Bernie! 
Makes me sad. We've got to have his back.
applauded when they went after the president and his wife. My, how the times are a changin'. 
Disagreement if OK - but some (not you) can't remain civil.
Some candidates are discussing one of their major issues and what might be done to deal with it -
Clinton -
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/fivepoints/hillary-clinton-race-criminal-justice-reform
Webb -
http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/01/politics/jim-webb-hillary-clinton-contrast/
O'Malley -
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/31/politics/martin-omalley-criminal-justice-reform/
Sanders -
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2015/07/30/sanders-focuses--racial-justice-reform/30891827/
Oh and as a side note - BLM is the "SNCC" of the 21st century. Note that SNCC practices were roundly rejected by the "establishment" black organizations like the NAACP and SCLC and were considered "radical". And the organization was once lead by the famous (or infamous) Stokely Carmichael. John Lewis was one of those youngin's back then in SNCC and decided to go a different path. You can thank Stokely and the "radicals" for the Black Power Movement - and essentially kickstarting the shift from the use of the term "Negro" to "black", which eventually evolved into "Afro-American" and then "African American".
I think her and Bill learned some lessons. Particularly when you had stuff like this going on during the Convention from her delegate supporters -
And you had pundits siccing Geraldine Ferraro on Obama as well - http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/11/ferraro.comments/
As soon as BLM criticized the "all lives matter" remark, Hillary shifted, quick, fast and in a hurry.
However Bernie Sanders supporters need to note that Bernie is learning as well after this incident. per this -
Sanders' campaign also announced Saturday that Symone D. Sanders, an African-American woman, has been hired as its national press secretary. Sanders serves as the national youth chair of the Coalition on Juvenile Justice.
The new press secretary introduced Sanders with a 10-minute speech on racial tensions and named the African-American men and women who have died at the hands of law enforcement. "You know which candidate for President will shut down the private prison industry," she said to roaring applause. "You know which candidate will have the courage to fight unjust mandatory minimums and the death penalty."
Symone Sanders said her job with the campaign started Saturday, but the process of getting hired started three weeks ago with an hour and a half long meeting with the senator. She said one of the reasons she joined the campaign was because of the senator's willingness to listen to suggestions on race issues. "I wanted to see just who Senator Sanders is, how he thought and how open he was to talking about his actual message and how open he was to suggestions," she said. "He is super flexible, he is cool and he has a great heart."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/09/politics/bernie-sanders-seattle-rally/
I had seen something posted where Bernie had brought in some AA staff but I never got the details and I had to really did to find the above.
The point is - Bernie can walk and chew gum at the same time. He needs to LEARN how to deal with hecklers.
When Obama ran, he had one set of folks sporting shamrock decorated "O'bama" buttons -
Where others were touting his and his family's appearance in one of the biggest black beauty magazines -
(and he and Michelle and the girls continually appear in black owned and/or-targeted magazines). So he had to attract a HUGE coalition to get elected and cross all sorts of demographics. He was made fun of because of this, but it hit a demographic -
Bottom line is that Bernie cannot be elected President without the black vote. Period. It's best he get on the good side now.
treat this like a real candidacy not a protest candidacy. he always said he would run to win, and i don't think he would disappoint all his supporters by running a protest campaign while telling them otherwise.
hey i was for kucinch too! and was a deaniac, as is evidenced by my sig line..
but like Kucinich, he didn't stay in long enough to get to the PA primary.
I remember sitting there watching CSPAN for almost 5 hours straight while Kucinich read off something like 25 Articles of Impeachment against Bush into the record. 
of those claiming to represent BLM.
Just a couple I can find easily.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141171330#post58
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141171330#post50
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=491104
For others, just peruse the threads in the wake of Netroots & the Seattle incident.
I am not reacting to criticism of a candidate. I am reacting to the tactics used to convey the criticism. There are many ways of engaging in civil disobedience that don't involve almost exclusively targeting candidates who have been the most involved in civil rights & taking over microphones and events, , and screaming in the faces of people who have been supportive for decades - and whose more active support you are trying to gain.
Insisting that the problem is that Sanders isn't shutting down agitators, rather than condemning those of us who find the message appropriate is offensive. Aside from anything else, absent an army of handlers who wouldn't let the protesters into the event - like certain other Democratic candidates who are far less progressive, having the protesters arrested once they take over the microphones would go over really well.
Protesters who continue to disruptively target friendly targets are contributing to the election of someone far less sensitive to the concerns of the black community. The message is appropriate, and needs to be heard, but spewing spittle in the faces of those most likely to be receptive alienates people.
I have a child who needs out of the norm accommodations - I've been fighting the battle for appropriate accommodations for her since 2008. I know the system inside and out, and I know how inadequate the formal accommodation process is unless you have an easily categorizable disability. I'm about the friendliest person to accommodations you are likely to encounter among University faculty. Yet when I had a student who used an all out assault, complete with threats to sue, to gain access to accommodations that were not on the list the University gave me, it took everything I could muster to force myself to step back and make an effort to accommodate her real needs - rather than limiting what I offered to the inadequate accommodations the University required that I provide her. I granted her all the accommodations I was required to, and more. But I did not serve her well. Not because I was not sympathetic or because I did not want to serve her well. But because it is nearly impossible - even for people of good will who are most open to hearing and acting on a message - to address real needs (rather than just going through the motions to do what the law requires) when you're constantly wiping the figurative, and with BLM the literal, spittle from your face.
BLM has a real opportunity to gain access to an effective and popular voice. Rather than taking advantage of the opportunity to leverage a national voice that is already inclined to be open to the message BLM wants to convey, it is choosing an all-out assault on that voice.
I don't believe that tactic is ever effective. I can't imagine any circumstances under which I would support it - and I certainly don't support it here. No matter how strongly I support the underlying message.
And that statement is the whole point of this exercise of people talking past one another. For the majority group to lecture the minority about "tactics" is insulting given all the opportunities were available for this candidate to make some inroads. But he chose a different path.
Bernie had the opportunity to touch base with black folks - sympathetic black folks even - in South Carolina - during the funerals of those gunned down by a lunatic white supremacist. He even had a pre-planned event there already scheduled. Yet he apparently (incorrectly) thought that doing such would have been perceived as "pandering", not understanding that when it comes to a candidate that few of these folks knew, the "risk" is worth it to promote viewpoints and garner support by initiating dialog, and some next steps.
Yet he walked away from that oppportunity.
Only he and his campaign put themselves into this awkward position, but it is exceedingly good that he is finally working his way out of it.
Edit to add - Guess who did show up at a SC funeral?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026878585
to the youngsters who won't have any of that "lecturing" on what they should do and how they should do it. Nor did the "youngsters" of the '60s accept it either. Yet many of them grew up to become a carbon copy of their "parents" and are now telling the next generation of young people to slow it down.
It's generational and ironic but it's how life rolls.
and deep appreciation of his/her wisdom and ability to reflect back to us qualities available to us all. Qualities that heal and unite as opposed to agitate and incite. Usually those qualities aren't born overnight but are the result of years of struggle and lots of introspection..
I agree, it's time for Bernie's campaign to evolve from a grassroots effort into a national movement. Maybe this incident will end up helping the process along.
Enjoyed the conversation, BRDS
who cheered then, are booing now. 
inconsistency around here these days.
And no one is asking that you agree with "their methods". That's what activism is. It makes you feel uncomfortable. Big whoop.
line of defense, perhaps he's too old for the office? I mean, it's not gonna get any easier if he's president. Just ask Obama, it's gonna get wwwaaaayyyyy worse. We've been told all this time that his advanced years should be irrelevant, I find it curious now that his "supporters" are dragging it up. For what? Sympathy? Curious, indeed.
Either his age is an issue, or it's not. You guys should make up your minds.
is investigating these rogue police departments, and their racist practices? The Keebler Elf?
I'm sorry, but I'm not a part of the BLM Planning Committee, and I won't tell them how & who to target. My hunch is they'll get around to everyone in time. If the reaction around here is any indication, they probably won't bother with Republicans. I'm gonna guess that BLM will most likely be supporting the Democratic nominee, so it makes sense that they'll put the most pressure on those who they'll eventually end up supporting. My next hunch is that they will be targeting those with the highest profile who aren't Democrats. BS falls into that category.
I know you guys would love for the media to focus solely on BS' crowd size, but s**t just got real.
because Presidents are accosted by much worse.
If he had been a master teacher, he might have stepped aside, let them do their thing to get it out of their system, and then waited for (or called for) security to come up on the stage to haul them off under arrest for their act of civil disobedience. The end. Continue with what you are doing.
Yet he did none of that. He walked away and the event was declared "shut down" because of a couple people yelling on the stage.
Hell, Act Up! and many other more radical groups had or continue to use more difficult-to-dislodge methods of protest like those in Chicago who protested the Obama administration's deportations several years ago -
How any candidate deals with discord among the people, is a telling trait that needs to be evaluated.
for everything you've said here. I hope you hang around here -- and all over the blasted internet, because you, like Bernie, have the gift of truth-telling and courage. In the age of electronic media, when so much is at stake, it's pure gold.
"Mr. Sanders has had little direct experience with black voters as a politician in a state that is 95 percent white. And they have been largely absent from his campaign events so far."
He should thank BLM, at least there were some black folks in the room, and he's no longer an "unknown".
Hilarious! Not only have you demonstrated hypocrisy, you then double down with self-destructive behavior.
Keep it up, we like laughing at you. 
cuz somebody made their golden idol feel bad. Poor BS. 
For the record, I'm a Democrat, something BS hasn't been for decades. So, no he is not now, nor has he ever been an option for me. His "liberal" bona fides, notwithstanding, he is totally unsuited & obviously ill prepared for the national stage. He & team could take lessons from a pro in how to handle disruption.
You're on a roll. Keep typing!
runs through black America, not Seattle. And someone sporting single digit support among the party's most loyal constituency, unlike you, can't afford to if he's serious about the nomination.
I'll be over here >>>>>>>>> while he's getting his ass handed to him by those he's only reflected on as an afterthought.
There the candidates can present their case to the people.
Granted it's HRC to lose at that point, but it's far easier to just lay low for a while and not shoot herself in the foot.
white folk can't help him now. He's got to come to America, and stop hiding out in the homogenous enclaves that already love him. Cuz, truthfully, we ain't "Feeling the Bern" out here. Either that, or we just ain't falling for the BS (pun intended).
And if your last best hope is the debates? Well.....
You guys are certainly running scared if you believe you can keep up with this horse shit, but carry on.
New Iowa numbers from PPP
Released today, 8/10, polling from 8/7-8/9
via ideology.
Hillary 52% overall support
49% identifying at very liberal
57% identifying as liberal
54% identifying as moderate
32% identifying as somewhat conservative
43% identifying as very conservative
Sanders 25% overall support
39% identifying at very liberal
22% identifying as liberal
18% identifying as moderate
26% identifying as somewhat conservative
16% identifying as very conservative
So +27 overall, +10 very liberal, +35 liberal, +6 somewhat conservative and +27 very conservative
And head to head, straight up, to be the nominee
HRC 52%
BS 25%
So +27 straight up
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110714975
Wasn't he recently within single digits of HRC? My, my, what a difference a couple of weeks makes. What could have happened?
Oh, and she's crushing him in SC. That's the place where we ALL get a say.
Good luck.
And yes, that little tidbit of yours certainly shows some fear.
to be consistent with BLM. Nothing has changed except the target. Just because the object of focus is one of DU's golden idols, they've forgotten how much they used to praise radical activism.
sure did.
who now want the top job, to be "tedious". There, you figured it out. I hope we're all done here.
As to BS' motivations in 2012, I could give less than a shit.
Very wise, could teach you something. But...perhaps a bit above your pay grade.
claim about "Hillary supporters", got called on it, and are now blowing it off because substantiating a libelous claim is not a priority? I hope the movie turns out better than your performance here today. I mean it, best of luck to ya.
have called BS a racist. My response, "pissy" or not, is that I want proof of that, or a retraction. Sorry you don't agree.
What's up with that?
"He's been called that repeatedly by Hillary Supporters on DU."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7058832
I just need the link, and you can get back to the movie set. I know how busy you must be. Thanks in advance.
Looking around at what going around here. You really do give me a good laugh
Here is a rough search.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026737025
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026737441#post3
you get back to us, okay? I'll be here in the "sandbox".
In fact, she posted awhile back that she still supported BS, and was still trying educate some of his more exuberant supporters. Since she was on team BS, she may actually know some "white supremacists" among his supporters. Who knows? However, the charge was that "Hillary supporters" repeatedly call BS a "racist"; "white supremacist". I understand you're having trouble finding it, but when you do, please get back to me. Until you can show that, this ludicrous & libelous claim remains baseless. TIA.
I forgot how common it is for white supremacists to support Jews. Happens all the time.
Mea maxima culpa.
and the holocaust in terms of U.S. history?
African Americans reference THEIR and their family's historical experiences regarding the behavior of a number U.S. whites who hunted, captured, terrorized, raped, beat, maimed, hung, and otherwise subjugated them. They don't know or care about his past. They focus on THEIR past and to them, he just another "white man" who has dismissed THEIR past.
I don't understand why some on DU don't "get it" (whether they disagree or agree or not).
Last edited Sun Aug 9, 2015, 03:07 PM - Edit history (1)
Juxtaposing European horror shows as being an American horror show, and dismissing stuff like this -
or this -
is disingenuous. The above happened in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Not Germany or Poland.
I *know* that much of the demographic who posts on DU never had anything taught to them in the schools about the black horror show that manifested in this great nation that was purportedly "discovered" by someone "in 1492 who sailed the ocean blue", where the young soon-to-be-first-President "never told a lie" and "cut down a cherry tree" and other nonsense. That was only something that happened recently after a lot protests and sit ins to get the curriculums changed. Yet much of my grade-school schooling in the early '70s comprised of plenty of WWII films and film strips about the European holocaust and its horrible aftermath. I rarely if ever saw any of MY history and its horrors and aftermath. That I had to learn on my own.
So don't lecture me on my "focus". My "focus" has been summarily dismissed by this country for several hundred years.
happened with President Obama, did it not? With states like West Virginia that have been reliably Democratic except when the black man was running... And even while DUers virulently attacked and continue to attack him as a sitting U.S. President, who is a Democrat, by using RW memes and sources as part and parcel of their bag of tricks to bring about their own agendas. There's a whole cadre right here on DU who strove to "drive away allies", questioning every move by this current President, Insulting every statement, fabricating worst-case scenarios of a dystopian America, and pissing on every single piece of "good news" offered under Barack Obama. And yet the same sort of complaints being made in this thread were roundly and dismissively ridiculed as "We are being told to 'shut up and eat our peas!"" and "He's doing eleventy-dimensional chess!!!11!"and other such nonsense.
And with respect to Jews - I grew up in one of the few neighborhoods in Philadelphia where Jews were allowed to live in peace. Most of my teachers were of that religion and were of German descent, and many many friends were Jewish along with Scout Leaders, etc., (all of whom taught me all sorts of cultural tidbits). I even attended my best friend's Bat Mitzvah. I don't say this to say "But I have 'Jewish friends!!!11!!!!" but as the truth of my life. As I noted in another post in this thread, my mother, in an all-girls public high school in the 1940s here in Philly, where only 2 black girls were permitted per class thanks to this being before Brown v Board (where when she graduated college and sought secondary education as a teacher, she was forbidden because blacks could not teach in the high schools in Philadelphia pre-Brown), had always told me the story about how the white protestant girls who would attack and beat up the jewish girls (many of them immigrants) in that school and how those few black girls would come to their defense yelling "Hey! Leave her alone!", etc., (and they would get right up in their faces - these "mild-mannered Depression children" ).... Because why? THEY had been there, done that here in the U.S.
And if you think that "rage" hasn't changed anything, tell that to some of the Vietnam War protestors or Act Up! Most movements that bring about "change" are not monogamous. They deploy various methods to get what they want.
This woman activist climbed a flag pole and took down a Confederate flag -
Yet DUers insisted that she "went about it the wrong way" and "shouldn't have done that" and other crap. When you have "others" insist that they can "define" you and "tell" you what to do, then you know that paternalism has set in.
The United States of America has a sickness and that sickness is vomiting forth here on DU.
You'll have to ask their mommas.
<--- adding this for the sarcasm impaired
I'm also talking about the Primaries. Aren't you? What you saw happen in 2008 with certain states (including here in PA in what is often dubbed "Pennsyltucky"
was pure prejudice. Where in WV, you had 40% supporting a convict over Obama and DLC Fast Eddie Rendell was doing everything he could to "drive away black allies" when it came to Obama vs Hillary (despite the fact that DUers keep insisting that Obama is somehow DLC) 
.
Uh, project much? I never said anything about "alone". In fact, I wrote that movements are not "monogamous" and offer a variety of methods. But apparently you ignored that and chose to "lop off" any sense of urgency and intensity that any group might feel with respect to what they feel is happening to them. In fact - THIS is what I wrote that you ignored-
"And if you think that "rage" hasn't changed anything, tell that to some of the Vietnam War protestors or Act Up! Most movements that bring about "change" are not monogamous. They deploy various methods to get what they want. "
Right now, BLM has rage. They do not appear to have any planning. How do they propose for the President to "end racism"? What specific steps should he or she take? Are those actions actually legal?
Here we go with what people keep saying over and over and over again. STOP. Just STOP defining what other people are and what they are "supposed to do". This is the very height of paternalistic white superiority. Unless you have gone full blown into joining that organization and even know how they operate, how can you sit on the high horse and dictate what you think they should do or not do?
And the obedient response must be "Yessuh massa suh".
was pure prejudice. Where in WV, you had 40% supporting a convict over Obama and DLC Fast Eddie Rendell was doing everything he could to "drive away black allies" when it came to Obama vs HillaryAll the more reason for BLM to be protesting Clinton. Yet they aren't even holding signs by the side of the road (AFAIK).
DLC is an electoral and economic philosophy. It doesn't have anything directly to do with race.
The electoral philosophy ("run to the center"
may cause some DLCers to dogwhistle, but they're doing it for electoral reasons instead of outright racism.
Yes, that's why I complained about you lopping off "alone". Wouldn't make much sense to talk about that if you did actually say "alone".
"And if you think that "rage" hasn't changed anything, tell that to some of the Vietnam War protestors or Act Up! Most movements that bring about "change" are not monogamous. They deploy various methods to get what they want. "
No, I pointed out they used rage and planning so that the rage caused change instead of fragmentation.
I see rage from BLM. I see zero planning from BLM. Rage alone will not get what they want.
No, they should be protesting both the people who can do something in 2017 and protest the people who can do something now. Any action they want Sanders to take in 2017, Obama can start doing now.
Since Obama doesn't have much time left in office, it's critical to "deal" with the potential nominees. At the same time, you don't wait 16 months to respond to an emergency.
See my links in Post #151. They went after her very early - as far back as last December when she hadn't even declared yet. That's why she had to do a major pivot. They even went after Obama during the 50th anniversary of the Selma protest.
The problem is that many Bernie supporters ignored anything to do with BLM and their interactions with any other candidate or potential candidate (like Elizabeth Warren) until they suddenly "woke up" when it was his turn.
The electoral philosophy ("run to the center"
may cause some DLCers to dogwhistle, but they're doing it for electoral reasons instead of outright racism. Yes I know because my lunatic Mayor (Nutter, who is black) was right there with Rendell dissing Obama back during the 2008 primaries. HOWEVER, DLCers will pull out the racist snake card quick, fast, and in a hurry. Recall Bill Clinton during the 2008 primaries comparing Obama to Jessie Jackson and essentially "damning him with faint praise". It's an art that whole cadre of them have learned.
Since Obama doesn't have much time left in office, it's critical to "deal" with the potential nominees. At the same time, you don't wait 16 months to respond to an emergency.
So they should just "sit down, shut up, and eat their peas". Where have I heard that before?
Went after her by...not protesting her.
Uh-huh.
She said black lives matter? That's nice. Sanders did too. More often than Clinton. Heck, Sanders never said "All Lives Matter", and Clinton did say that repeatedly.
No Clinton protest. Two Sanders protests.
Say her name? Sanders did before NRN. And he has said all of their names repeatedly. Clinton? Once on Facebook right after NRN.
No Clinton protest. Two Sanders protests.
Sure. They're trying to win over Republicans, and many Republicans are racists.
I say they need to protest more, and you label that as "sit down, shut up".
You aren't that dumb. Stop pretending to be in a mistaken attempt to "score points".
Is there a point of reference. I'm on a quiet mission with BehindTheAegis to eradicate anti Semitism in America.
So keep giving to Generation Forward .
In many black communities in the '50s, '60s, and '70s, when large numbers of Jews emigrated here to the U.S. from Europe during and just after the WWII, many settled in the urban areas because of white protestant anti-semitism, and they were often forced to live in black communities, where they set up shop. In fact, in many segregated black communities, Europeans of Jewish religion were the only whites who they may have had day-to-day contact with. There was quite an interaction that went on and many life-long friendships established as both groups were targets of the system of white supremacy and Christian hegemony. My mother, who was in high school in the '40s, told me how the Jewish girls were beat up all the time and the few black girls in her school would confront the bullies in defense of these new citizens.
Fast-forward to now. As "whites", many European Jews assimilated (both as a white race and even becoming secular and inter-marying outside of their religion). And away they went to greener pastures as few may have known they were Jews or descendents of those practicing that religion. Meanwhile, blacks were never allowed to "assimilate" (unless they were able to "pass for white" nor even live in the greener pastures - including being excluded by some of the most famous housing developments like Levittown (there were several - in NY, PA, and other developments in NJ with a different name), where, per the 1997 NY Times article linked -
''When I hear 'Levittown,' what rings in my mind is when the salesman said: 'It's not me, you see, but the owners of this development have not as yet decided whether they're going to sell these homes to Negroes,' '' Mr. Burnett, now a retired Suffolk County police sergeant, recalled. He said he still stings from ''the feeling of rejection on that long ride back to Harlem.'' The salesman was not honest with Mr. Burnett. Blacks and other minorities had no chance of getting in, because Levitt had decided from the start to admit only whites. Delano Stewart, editor of The Point of View, a Long Island biweekly on black affairs, said of Levittown: ''It's something we'd like to forget rather than celebrate. It's a black mark on the Island, or maybe I should say a white mark.''
The whites-only policy was not some unspoken gentlemen's agreement. It was cast in bold capital letters in clause 25 of the standard lease for the first Levitt houses, which included an option to buy. It stated that the home could not ''be used or occupied by any person other than members of the Caucasian race.'' That clause was dropped in 1948 after the United States Supreme Court, ruling on another case, declared such restrictions to be ''unenforceable as law and contrary to public policy.''
Ignoring the law of the land, however, Levitt continued adhering to its racial bar. Levittown quickly filled up with young white families. Minority residents trickled in during the 1950's, but the pattern was set.
So what people keep trying to say over and over and over - our BLACK FACES are the most outward obvious thing (visual) that is used to trample all over our rights, and despite being Jewish, Bernie is still "white" upon first impression by anyone who can see but may not know his religious/familial background. Those who are anti-semitic may choose to delve deeper and then apply the screws against him, but blacks never make it to the 2nd stage of "investigation". We are automatically rejected, lock, stock, and barrel right off the bat, because of what we look like.
And as a sidenote, my father was a WWII vet and my parents would not have been permitted to move into the Levittown here in PA (Bucks County). The GI Bill $100 down did not apply to him there or most housing developments.
That was THEN, this is NOW.
Based on what you wrote, you seem to agree that anti-Jewish feeling might be a factor.
Disagree. BLM and similar groups and their supporters' outrage has nothing to do with his religion. Once again - LOOK at the man. HE is WHITE. THEY are NOT.
Why not? He is running for President. People have asked him to address their issues in his platform. They know the BILL Clinton record ("End Welfare as we know it", slashing governement, "Crime Bill"
- and BILL (where he really has nothing to do with his wife unless you think they are co-joined twins) has recently come out to apologize for this crap. And people who were residents of Baltimore KNOW O'Malley's issues when he was mayor there. And the others (e.g., Webb and Chaffee) have been under the radar in terms of active campaigning.
If they want to draw attention to their cause they should demonstrate at events that get broad news coverage.
Again disagree - they are making their anger known to the candidate. It's useless to only protest at events with "broad news coverage". Hell - how many people yelled here on DU when > 500,000 showed up at an anti-Iraq war rally and no one covered it?
Sadly, negative things such as "riots" get "coverage". But that's not necessarily what one might want the outcome to be - just to get "coverage". America knows what the problems are. BLM and many other groups are asking the CURRENT candidates to at least ADDRESS these problems in some sort of framework in a candidate platform and then THEY can pledge to help that candidate realize the positive outcomes of getting these things enacted by registering people to vote, taking states to court that try to limit voting, making sure people not only vote in Presidential elections, but in EVERY election (notably state and local where things that directly impact them happen), etc. But if a candidate keeps dismissing them, then they are going to turn up the heat a notch.
And it's ironic the threads I saw on DU cheering Greenpeace activists hanging from ropes off a bridge trying to block Shell from getting a ship to an Arctic drilling site. Yet BLM disrupting a candidate is apparently the worst thing since Dick Cheney (yes hyperbole).
then maybe you r are not a Democrat. "
Wow. Just wow.
This is why we will go nowhere in any discussion. "If you're white, you're right". "If you're black, step back". "Yessuh Missy. I do wut you says".
after the convention.
Will you?
Or even care?
Let's ask Congressman Stephen Cohen------>>>>>>>
Fascinating.
Even more fascinating.
That girl was not even born when BS was "active" in the Civil Rights movement. But I ask you this - when was the last time he was "active" in any of the CURRENT movements?
When folks were marching in Louisiana regarding Jena?
or when there were 100s of rallies in support of Trayvon Martin?
This idiocy about what happened in the '60s is not unlike the idiotic question I heard all my life about "Where were you on November 22, 1963?" I know that I was not yet 2 years old but the question is bullshit to me... and this insistence about marches in 1963 and stuff in Chicago when I was in 1st grade in 1968, is even more bullshit to this current generation.
He hasn't done anything "over his career". He did it during the earlier part of his career and then off he went to Vermont from Chicago after hanging up his "civil rights suit", to start a new life as a 3rd party candidate in a predominantly white state.
Also, a lot of people are pretty thinly transparent with their "supporting" of this when no way in hell would they favor the exact same thing being pulled with a certain other primary candidate.
In other words, let Sanders get his chance to speak. An ally is someone who doesn't deny you a chance at the microphone.
But this has gone from just making ones point of view heard. It's now also about accumulating political influence. And imo some see Senator Sanders as holding a supply that can be hijacked.
P.S. "You are not an ally if you get angry feelings from listening to, or being made to listen to, a point of view from someone you claim to be supporting."
Bold added by me. Again, if that is going to be applied to everyone, then this forum will explode.
Thanks for the thread, Kurska.