General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBernie, There Will Be No Revolution Without Reproductive Rights
The problem is that Sanders’ vision of economic justice is woefully incomplete. Bernie Sanders and many of his supporters seem perfectly content to categorize reproductive rights and abortion access as a social issue—a distraction from economic justice and reforming Wall Street, which they deem the so-called real issues.
And that simply doesn’t work, because reproductive justice and economic justice are inexorably intertwined.
But not according to everyone’s favorite senator from Vermont and his most stalwart supporters. Just this week, when asked whether Jon Ossoff, the Democratic candidate who nearly pulled off a victory in a special election in Georgia’s extremely red 6th District, is a progressive, Sanders said “He’s not a progressive,” according to Dave Weigel at the Washington Post. Sanders is “endorsing Democrats based on their economic populism,” Weigel reported: “[T]hey could differ from progressives on social issues but not on the threat of the mega-rich to American politics.”
There he goes again: categorizing abortion rights as a social issue and differentiating it from his economic message.
..............................................
“And we have got to appreciate where people come from, and do our best to fight for the pro-choice agenda. But I think you just can’t exclude people who disagree with us on one issue,” he continued.
Nonsense.
If this is Sanders’ best, I don’t want to see his worst. But it tells me that he doesn’t view abortion rights as a core progressive value. And this isn’t new: Recall his position that Trump’s controversial comments about imprisoning women who get abortion were a distraction from “a serious discussion about the serious issues facing America.” And last month, when Joe Scarborough asked Bernie Sanders whether Democrats should be open to candidates who aren’t “rigidly pro-choice,” Sanders said they should.
Sanders’ willingness to support anti-choice candidates and dismiss Trump’s extreme comments say he doesn’t really understand the connections between abortion and poverty. As the U.S. Supreme Court said in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, “[t]he ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.”
....................................................
Pro-choice values should be a prerequisite for progressivism. Reproductive autonomy isn’t just a social issue or an issue about which reasonable minds can disagree. Reproductive autonomy is a human right—and last I checked, stripping a basic human right from 50 percent of the population of this country is not progressive.
Here’s the thing that really chaps my hide, though: I’d be willing to bet everything that I own that Sanders would exclude from his reformed Democratic Party any candidate who disagreed about challenging Wall Street or regulating banks. He would likely excoriate any Democratic candidate that he felt was “in bed with Wall Street,” a charge he repeatedly lobbed at Clinton during the primaries.
https://rewire.news/ablc/2017/04/21/bernie-sanders-no-revolution-reproductive-rights/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Me.
(35,454 posts)And it's about time that all party members started paying attention to it for we will never have reproductive justice without it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/reminder-abortion-is-an-economic-issue_us_58f8d11be4b018a9ce58dd4f?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)But perhaps those that won't listen to anyone who disagrees in the slightest won't get that.
I wonder if it isn't more
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Me.
(35,454 posts)“Women lean Democratic by 52%-36%; men are evenly divided (44% identify as Democrats or lean Democratic; 43% affiliate with or lean toward the GOP)”
http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/07/a-deep-dive-into-party-affiliation/
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)
MontanaMama
(23,367 posts)men are that support choice? Their silence is deafening.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)in when and if they will bear children.
And the consent discussion is that is something that makes many men very uncomfortable.
What else is intertwined is if they get a vote from women and those men, like me.
safeinOhio
(32,754 posts)EW. Reproductive rights and progressive economics.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)so that means they are TOTALLY not sexist would actually have listened to her concerning her opinions on leadership....
safeinOhio
(32,754 posts)those that were against Hillary because of her tie to big bankers and those that were against an independent and those that did not want anyone that voted for giving Bush the vote for his war and those for reproductive rights and all human rights and those that wanted someone that supports Democratic people. She would be our President if she would have ran. It was not in the cards then, but now the only one that can bring both factions of our party together now.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)safeinOhio
(32,754 posts)of the Huston press. The same people that assumed Obama didn't have a chance against grumpy McCain.
Tom Rinaldo
(22,919 posts)Yeah, I know the talking point. Kaine and Casey and other prolifers who have been closely linked to our party leaders have all evolved, the positions they took when they were still in local regional and state politics don't count because they moved on, and up. Of course the man nominated by the Democratic Party in Nebraska is still at the local level and so he is only evolving now while running to become a Mayor:
“While my faith guides my personal views, as mayor I would never do anything to restrict access to reproductive health care,” said Mello on Thursday. Take that as you will. Skepticism is appropriate.
Of course if Tim Kaine had gotten politically disowned by Democrats when he backed Virginia’s "informed consent” law, which required women seeking the procedure to undergo medically unnecessary ultrasounds, .he wouldn't have had a chance to evolve politically upon moving up in the party to the point where he was deemed suitable by the Democratic Party to become Vice President of the United States.
Meanwhile, although the DNC Chair endorsed Mello (and no that endorsement has not been formally withdrawn) and the Sierra Club endorsed Mello, and the League of Conservation Voters endorsed Mello, and the Omaha Teacher's Union endorsed Melo, Bernie Sanders is a villain; a man with a decades long record in congress featuring an impeccable voting record on women's issues. Check it out for yourself, it goes way beyond him having a 100% rating from NARAL and a 0% rating from the National Right to Life Committee - the research here goes on for pages with meticulous references on both his stances and votes on dozens of related measures bills and issues:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Bernie_Sanders_Abortion.htm
Fine, maybe Senator Sanders could do some additional soul searching on these issues, and maybe a whole lot of other leading Democrats can also, but to single Sanders out for repeated attacks far more viscous than any directed toward actual prolife politicians in our Party, is no better than a smear.
emulatorloo
(44,270 posts)If I lived in Omaha I'd vote for Mello. I'm pretty sure the majority of DU'ers would do the same.
Jean "Koch Puppet" can't be allowed to become Omaha's next mayor.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)
athena
(4,187 posts)that my concerns are less important than those of some working-class white guy in the Midwest who voted for Trump because he couldn't stand the idea of a woman being allowed to control her reproductivity and thereby be in a position to run for president. There is no way the Democratic Party could win enough such bigots over to make up for the millions of women and minorities they would lose by throwing us all under the bus.
Exactly this.
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)Thank you.
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)I really liked Bernie at one point. Not so much anymore.
And a whole lot of white women voted for Dump too. Some polls say as many as 50%. I'm not over that betrayal. WTF? Dump flat out told everybody where he was on the issue of choice during the election. He touted "punishment" for women who terminated a pregnancy. How any woman could pull the lever for this jackass is beyond me. He should have lost based on the women's vote alone. So many broke ranks.
athena
(4,187 posts)The poster is referring to young women, but I think it is also true of older women who supported Trump. Such women are the saddest victims of patriarchy. They have so completely given up their personhood that they don't even have the strength to form their own opinions. They feel lost without masculine approval.
Silver Gaia
(4,552 posts)I saw a woman at the March for Science today wearing a t-shirt that read: " A Woman's Place is In the Revolution!" But that revolution HAS to include reproductive rights or it is not actually a revolution for all the people. How can reproductive rights NOT be an economic issue? It sure as hell is for women!
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... absolutely sets my head spinning. Our party deserves BETTER than this.
Seems like I've been fighting this shit all my life... and I'll continue to fight until my final heartbeat, my final breath, on my final day!
I'd rather DIE than to give in to this divisive bullshit.
kentuck
(111,111 posts)...and ask why we cannot support both? Can we not chew gum and walk at the same time? Why should Democrats not be fully supportive of women's reproductive rights and more economic equality at the same time?
I think Bernie may be running behind modern socialist thinking with his position on this ?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Response to ehrnst (Reply #10)
Post removed
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)To reduce childbearing as an obligation for having sex is to pervert the gift of life into something akin to a traffic ticket.
Or a way for a man to avoid the draft.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Forcing others to behave in accordance with one's personal views is what I object to. A person can be pro-choice and not believe in abortion for herself.
Curious that Sanders endorsed and campaigned for him. I don't understand it. I wonder if he was fully aware of all that Mello had sponsored in the past.
Response to ehrnst (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
athena
(4,187 posts)That does not make us neoliberals.
It's especially ironic that someone who joined the site today should be criticizing members who have been here for over a decade.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)athena
(4,187 posts)The MIRT is awesome!
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)I think we may be more and more.
bobbieinok
(12,858 posts)Didn't Stokely Carmichael say that 'the only position for women in the movement is prone'? It seems that for some so-called progressives both then and now women are permanently second class citizens. It seems all these guys agree with Evangelicals' support of patriarchy, what the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood calls 'complementarianism'!
Greetings from bobbieinok, the heart of the Bible Belt
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And I believe we're seeing the last vestiges of that particular brand of the left making it's last great grab for glory.
BumRushDaShow
(130,013 posts)(if Stokely were still alive) and are from the same generation with apparently the same mindset, although supposedly that oft-noted remark was supposed to be "a joke". 
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)BumRushDaShow
(130,013 posts)of some in that generation looking for glory. They did the same thing when they were young and they really haven't changed a bit.
I have an uncle around that age and in retrospect, that generation was considered "way ahead" of their parents' generation when it came to acknowledging, respecting, and working side-by-side with women in a workplace. However the men of that generation also seemed to harbor some sort of primordial sense of "macho" and need for male dominance (perhaps as instilled to them from their fathers and/or other men in their lives), and would periodically revert on a dime to some crude paternalistic behavior towards women... after which they might chuckle "I'm just playing with you baby".
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Maybe they might have had to had the Kremlin install their candidate.
George II
(67,782 posts)...to cut off funding for healthcare and Planned Parenthood.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)but equality in every aspect of life is equally important. Racial, sexual, and economic rights are all roots of the tree of equality. Attack one and the tree weakens.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)isn't it?
Not so dogmatic, and galvanizing to crowds.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)But slogans are quite popular among the GOP crowd, and among some Democrats as well.
I can understand that Sanders is concerned with the economic base of capitalism, and how economic inequality is the foundation of capitalism, but capitalism rests on a foundation of general inequality. Racism, sexism, classism, religion, language and other identifiers are all used to weaken working people. There can be no ranking because the division is the problem.
My view.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)for the other.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)What is that walking thing in your posts?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Response to ehrnst (Original post)
Post removed
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)He sides with Roe v. Wade.
He said that he had personal reservations about abortion, but is pro-choice, which is a political stance concerning access to abortion.
You may want to get your facts in order before posting.
http://www.npr.org/2016/09/16/494199381/vp-pick-tim-caines-stand-on-abortion-is-at-odds-with-catholic-teachings
You may also want to educate yourself on what "pro-choice" means.
If you need misinformation to defend someone, maybe you need to rethink why you support them.
And citing your claims when asked to, instead of simply repeating them makes you far more credible than reflexively defending the dogma.
PufPuf23
(8,856 posts)as a Catholic, is personally against abortion.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)First... Having personal reservations about abortion isn't "being against abortion," and is not the same as advocating criminalizing it. Being against drunk driving doesn't mean you advocate prohibition - if that was the case, then MADD would be at every statehouse trying to overturn the 19th amendment.
Second - Why did Kaine cut off funding for "abscense only education" as you call it?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/12/AR2007111201716.html
Where are you getting this stuff?
If you want to talk about years ago, we can dig around into some less than progressive positions that Bernie has held, but that isn't what we're talking about, is it?
But since you brought it up - Tim Kaine has talked at length about the line he draws between his feelings and his legal position on abortion.
https://thinkprogress.org/tim-kaines-journey-on-abortion-rights-781b1f877aa3
Is that clearer? Perhaps you can see where your argument falls short.
Rilgin
(787 posts)He did some major backtracking but Kaine reiterated his support for the Hyde Amendment in 2016. His reform moment and attempt to avoid backlash was a later statement that he would support Hillary's position on it. However, if you support Kaine you support someone who supported the Hyde Amendment while a Vice Presidential Candidate selected by Hillary who presumably knew about that support. If Hillary was elected and then something happened, we would have had a Democratic President who believed in the Hyde Amendment.
Here is one of many links.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/29/politics/tim-kaine-hyde-amendment-abortion/index.html
So please expand your outrage to the candidate who selected as her vice president a politician who had a current position that I would think you would find untenable.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Kaine got NARAL's 100% score on his actual votes. That's not the case with Mello.
She said that voting for abortion rights despite personal beliefs underlines the group's message.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/288952-pro-abortion-rights-group-give-kaine-nod-of-approval
I'm not familiar with Mello's pro-choice actions. Maybe you are?
Now, Perez is doing his job as DNC president. And I sincerely doubt he would be weighing in on the pro-choice bona fides of a mayoral race in Omaha, NE, unless he was on a unity tour with Sanders, who decided to attempt to endow Mello with the "true progressive" title on this candidate, while refusing to call Ossoff a "progressive" title.
Perhaps Perez's message here was really aimed at Bernie:
“In order to execute a 50-state strategy, we need to understand what’s going on in all 50 states, and attract candidates who are consistent with their messages but perhaps not on 100 percent of the issues,” Perez said. “If you demand fealty on every single issue, then it’s a challenge.”
Bernie's "fealty" is not the definition of "progressive" and there are going to be good, actual progressive candidates that fall outside of Bernie's blessing. Corey Booker, for instance.
Rilgin
(787 posts)Once again we see a quote without an attribution. Please cite to an actual Bernie quote saying "true progressive". There is not one. In fact Bernie's statement is about 180 degrees from what you are saying. The one attributed quote (citing an actual statement coming from Bernie) is an acceptance that in deep red states there are Democratic candidates with whom he will disagree but its important that they get elected. Notice I did not put quotes around this because I am paraphrasing. Your quotes are used as spin and implication of something he has not said. Bernie's statement and position is the Democratic Party position and was echoed by Nancy Pelosi this weekend although not related to Bernie in any way.
With regard to Kaine and Mello, I have no problem with Kaine and I know very little about Mello other than that he is the democratic candidate for a mayoral position in Nebraska in a General Election. His opponent is not a pro-choice democrat but a republican and I too hope the Democrat wins and we, as democrats, keep winning.
And the only way we do win is by not making things up to bash half of the party.
The truth of the threads the last few days is that it is all attacks on Bernie and not Mello and is being made by people who have consistently bashed Bernie and elevated Hillary as the "true progressive" (see what I did) and greatest champion of women and children that ever lived and the most capable and qualified and brilliant person who ever set foot on this world. And she selected (not the voters) but Hillary selected a Pro-Life running mate and try as hard as you can to run from it, despite Naral and other endorsers, in 2016 he was a continued supporter of the Hyde Amendment a deeply anti- choice provision used to deny abortion services to poor women. This is a fact. And again, I might have disagreed with Hillary's political calculation but it was hers to make and I do not bash her for it. Just would be good if people did not have 2 standards in these cases.
If Democrats want to win again, hypocritical bashing has to stop. More importantly related to the last few days, the attacks on Bernie using made up quotes really should stop.
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)
MineralMan
(146,351 posts)
mwooldri
(10,303 posts)Like Obama did with marriage equality.
I guess Sanders has been hanging around his brother a bit too much when it comes to abortion, because in the UK it is treated as a social issue. Any votes to change the law are decided on by personal politics, not by political party stand. Abortions are also available through the NHS - legal to 24 weeks, beyond if there's compelling medical reason to do so. However sometimes we have to pick our battles... Tony Blair and Bill Clinton have proven that sometimes you have to run on a Conservative agenda to get a Liberal government in place. Mr. Sanders backing someone who isn't fully on the pro-choice bandwagon is disconcerting but it should not be the be-all and end-all. I hope Heath Mello has an epiphany.
I think it was a Clinton who said abortion should be "safe, legal and rare". This IMO is a good stance and should be the default.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)tribal dogma.
THOUGHTCRIME!!!
JI7
(89,289 posts)He had already supported it before running for president .And then for political reasons said he didn't.
Kath2
(3,089 posts)in making women equal in this country.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)are those that affect white men....
calimary
(81,605 posts)A woman's right to have the last word over HER body - is AN ABSOLUTE.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)On this board people suggested that she was willing to negotiate over Roe vs. Wade. And some podcasters told their viewers not to be so sure that she would appoint pro-choice justices to the Supreme Court.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)So you can't hold Bernie to the same standards. Bernie is right. Bernie has always been right, and always will be.
She will always be wrong.
See, isn't that much clearer?
LenaBaby61
(6,979 posts)"That my concerns are less important than those of some working-class white guy in the Midwest who voted for Trump because he couldn't stand the idea of a woman being allowed to control her reproductivity and thereby be in a position to run for president. There is no way the Democratic Party could win enough such bigots over to make up for the millions of women and minorities they would lose by throwing us all under the bus."
In the bolded:
Sgent
(5,857 posts)LA just elected a D governor who is strongly Catholic and anti-abortion and will sign every such bill presented to him.
A lot of people hate this about him.
He just implemented an executive order that gave 400,000 people Medicaid, including birth control. He issued an executive order giving GLBTQ rights to all state workers.
I'll take him over a tea bagger any day.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)But I would not call him a 'rising star' in the Democratic party...a Dem is always better than a repug...but this is a mayor's race...won't affect much...and I find it silly to support such a race with time and money.
musette_sf
(10,209 posts)Birth control directly helps MEN, because it allows them more opportunities for sex without (usually) risking unwanted fatherhood.
Gay rights directly help MEN, well, because there are a lot of gay men.
But our sacred civil, human and Constitutional rights to obtain safe and legal abortion on demand, without interference or obstruction? Doesn't directly help men. Once a woman is pregnant, it is 100% the woman's accountability and risk.
So I will never betray myself or any other woman with a "compromise" that erases my essential humanity.
Cha
(298,049 posts)backlash against anyone who tries to marginalize our Choices for our own Bodies.
Gothmog
(145,908 posts)This is a central or core belief for Democrats
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)No anti-choice candidate can be a rising star...we may vote such a person if he is the only Democrat running but it is always ' a hold your nose vote' for me. Also, why fund a Mayor's race...there are more important races if you want to stop Trump.
Rilgin
(787 posts)I googled "rising star" sanders and mello. That particular statement was not said by Bernie, although it might have been said by Keith Ellison and Nina Turner. I think/hope that you have just been mislead by the recent hits on Sanders and are not part of the exaggerated outrage.
For the past 2 days, DU has been awash with inflated attacks on Bernie from people who have attacked him since he choose to run for president. The pretense is that something new and absolutely beyond belief happened yesterday by inflating and exaggerating and in some cases just lying.
Exaggeration 101. One of the red state stops on the "Unity Tour" organized by the DNC to try to bring the Democratic Party unity was Omaha. It was just one stop and despite NPR saying anonymous DNC staffers are trying to distance themselves from the selection who knows who picked it or why. It was one day and Mello right or wrong is the Democratic Party mayoral candidate for OMAHA. I would expect him to be on the stage. From the angst yesterday and today directed at Bernie, you would think he hand picked Mello at a young age, mentoring him always, has given speech after speech endorsing him rather than stopping in Omaha as one of many stops and answering a question about him by saying in essence that he hopes Mello wins and at the same time saying only if Democrats get in can they actually accomplish reproductive freedom. His quote "endorsement" is pretty tepid. I have only seen quotes saying he disagrees with him on reproductive rights and links his hoping he wins only to the fact that he is a democrat.
Ignore everything else besides the one cherry picked quote. Sanders has a long history of support for civil rights, women's rights, and reproductive choice. Before he ran, you would not have found anyone on this site attacking him with the fervor they attack him now. He does think they are not distinct issues from economic rights and thinks that improving economic equality will address some racial and social issues. I have never seen any quotes where he says that everything is economic. Yes some people in the democratic party disagree with the linkage and some agree but this is a long way from the exaggerated claims made the last few days.
Inflate. Make the argument that a Vermont senator on a nationwide tour organized with the DNC is responsible for a local candidate with a mixed history on an important issue but who is a democrat being supported by the DNC. Ignore arguments that other prominent democrats have the same mixed histories including prominently Tim Kaine who both supported mandatory ultrasound in Virginia in the early to mid 2000's and said he disagreed with Hillary with respect to Abortion in 2016 and did a few day flip flop over his support of the Hyde Amendment. In both cases, I do not personally support either Kaine or Mello other than the fact that they are not actual republicans but I do not seen any difference. Both have supported repressive measures in the past and both have had statements that they would not let their personal opinions affect their performance. The only real difference is if you discuss Kaine, you can not attack Sanders and the last two days has only been about that attack.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)I do not appreciate being called a liar.
"Mr. Sanders and the new leadership of the Democratic National Committee touched a party sore spot this week when they took their “Unity Tour” to Omaha to rally for a mayoral candidate who opposes abortion rights. Mr. Sanders, repurposing the themes of his presidential bid, told a crowd of about 6,000 on Thursday night that the candidate, Heath Mello, 37, would be a future star in the Democratic Party who could help break the grip of big money on the nation’s politics."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/21/us/politics/bernie-sanders-democrats-nebraska.html
Rilgin
(787 posts)You added quotes to the term "rising star". Bernie did not say that. Further, this is a reporter saying what the Reporter wanted to say Bernie said rather than a quote. I looked at the original article and nowhere is there a quote from Bernie Sanders himself saying "rising star" nor future star not any quotes whatsoever from what Bernie said or when or where.
In the article itself, you see direct bias on the reporters side. It is the reporters view that the Unity Tour went to Omaha to "rally for a mayoral candidate". Forgive me but I thought the Unity Tour was visiting a number of red and blue states to promote unity amongst 2 wings of the democratic party. One of the stops scheduled was Omaha. I have no idea why or when it was scheduled nor do you nor does the reporter. If scheduled as one of the stops, I would find it pretty strange if the democratic mayoral candidate for that city did not attend. However, this is a far cry from making the purpose of this unity stop to campaign for a single candidate.
With regard to the concept of endorsement, you see the same inflation in analyzing a single interview of Bernie posted over and over where he said he did not agree with Mello but hoped as a Democratic candidate Mello would win and that only through more democratic victories would we be able to protect reproductive freedoms. DU attackers have equated that with Bernie being a full throated endorser of this guy as though he has supported him for years, supported him and campaigned with him against another democrat who was pro-choice rather than against a republican and dedicated weeks of his life to traveling around Omaha to campaign with him rather than share a stage on the Unity Tour and express a desire that the democratic candidate wins against a republican even though he disagrees with him on some issues.
Coincidentally, I basically heard Bernie's statement repeated by Nancy Pelosi today on one of the talk shows where she said there are pro-life democrats and she serves with them and supports them as democrats. I support and vote for Nancy and think in many areas she gets a raw deal. More importantly, have seen this tolerance of Democrats with pro-life tendencies from a variety of influential democrats including Hillary who selected Tim Kaine as her Vice Presidential running mate even though in 2016 he reiterated his support for the Hyde Amendment (promptly walked back to personal support but would follow Hillary's policy choice). This leaves the question open to whether if Kaine became president because something happened to Hillary would he be against the Hyde Amendment.
For your part, you might take the quotes off and be less certain as to what he said that gave rise to one reporter's version. Without a direct quote of Sanders himself, your post is a lie as to attributing a quoted line to Sanders. Take your quotes off and then just say you dont like Bernie because he ran against Hillary. That is the real truth. Before he ran, I suspect (without trying to quoting anyone) very few people would attack Bernie as not supporting reproductive freedoms.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)you he did...how dare call me a liar.
"Mr. Sanders and the new leadership of the Democratic National Committee touched a party sore spot this week when they took their “Unity Tour” to Omaha to rally for a mayoral candidate who opposes abortion rights. Mr. Sanders, repurposing the themes of his presidential bid, told a crowd of about 6,000 on Thursday night that the candidate, Heath Mello, 37, would be a future star in the Democratic Party who could help break the grip of big money on the nation’s politics."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/21/us/politics/bernie-sanders-democrats-nebraska.html
Rilgin
(787 posts)Seemingly, unlike you, I actually read the New York Times article. It does not quote Sanders it contains a single reporters interpretation of what Sanders says and even then it does not use the phrase "rising star" which you put in quotes as something Sanders in fact said.
Note the article contains actual quotes from Randi Weingarden meaning the Times is reporting what she said. It contains an actual quote from Ilsye Hogue to back up a reporters contention. It contains a quote from Erin Matson backing up the reporters contention of Hogues position.
I hope you see the pattern here.
It contains a quote of Tom Perez It contains a quote of Tom Begalia. It contains a quote of Nina Turner. It contains a quote of Jane Keeb who the reporter said is the DNC official who aorganized the event.
What the article does not have is a quote of Bernie saying "rising star". In fact it has no quote of Bernie whatsoever. If the reporter was there and Bernie said that, it could have been quoted and would give you the support you needed. However, it pretty clearly is not the case. He did not say that, it is what the Reporter interprets a speech as and which you have taken as gospel and changed it from an interpretation to a quote. It is even probable given the budgets of news organizations that this Reporter was not even there, just trying to report what the other quoted individuals who have political points what to say about the meaning of the event. If the reporter has no actual quotes how do you even know he was there.
So remove your quotes or find an actual quote of what Bernie said if you want to use quotes.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)That is how it works...it is not a direct quote, but I would be plagiarizing if I did not use quotes. The article states that Sander said it at the rally...states it. Thus the quotes are correct because the New York Times is reporting he said it. Now if you doubt the accuracy of the New York Times...take it up with them. I am merely quoting what they claimed Sen. Sanders said at his rally. There are 6000 potential witnesses...so it should not be hard for you to find out.
"Mr. Sanders, repurposing the themes of his presidential bid, told a crowd of about 6,000 on Thursday night that the candidate, Heath Mello, 37, would be a future star in the Democratic Party who could help break the grip of big money on the nation’s politics."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/21/us/politics/bernie-sanders-democrats-nebraska.html
Rilgin
(787 posts)You seem to have a good opinion on the Times so we will let them instruct you. Just look at the article. If Bernie had used the words "future star" then the Times would have put those words in quotes ascribing those words to Bernie and not to the Reporter's summary of a speech. The Times did not nor should you unless you want to quote Bernie. This is the problem with your attribution. You attribute the actual words "future star" to Bernie not to a reporter who is trying to give his take on the event. The times did not attribute the words "future star" to Bernie as a quote, they put it forward as the Times Reporter's take/summary on what Bernie told people at an event.
From what I have seen it is likely that the Times Reporter was in New York and not even in Kansas and reporting second hand what he heard about the event trying to summarize the event. Take a clue from the Times as to how to use quotes. Quotes are used when you want to ascribe words to a person not a message that you are summarizing. You can see that in the very times article you are using.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)they did not pull it out of their hat...they said it.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)Rilgin
(787 posts)Your post is not saying the Times said Rising Star. Your point is you want to say Bernie said it and use the times as proof that he used the words future star. However, once again, the times did not put those words in quotes because Bernie did not use it and your use of quotes is to imply that Bernie used those words and sentiments.
Further, the Times did not get it right possibly because the reporter may not even have been in Omaha or wanted to also twist the speech to make the reporters point. I don't actually know why the Times got it wrong but I know they did because I have seen an actual video of the speech which you can look at yourself and I have looked at an actual quote of what Bernie said to NPR about Mello (note an actual quote). In both cases, he never calls, states, or implies that Mello is a future star of the Democratic Party. Yet you persist in trying to say he said it despite now being given the source material.
With respect to the use of quotation marks. You are not using them to say that is how the Times characterized Bernies speech (which the video shows was inaccurate) but to imply that "rising star" were two words used by Bernie in the Omaha speech.
More to the point, the source video is dispositive not a NYT article written by a reporter who may or may not have been there and does not put quotes around those words.
Look at the link yourself. Its pretty easy to backtrack from this point and say THAT THE TIMES GOT IT WRONG. Bernie did not say rising star future star or anything close to that. And perhaps next time you will not put quotes around a paraphrase in a news article to imply that a principal said that exact thing.
Rilgin
(787 posts)Here is a statement on Mello attributed directly to Bernie by the use of quotes.
http://www.npr.org/2017/04/20/524962482/sanders-defends-campaigning-for-anti-abortion-rights-democrat
Sanders pushed back against the criticism. "The truth is that in some conservative states there will be candidates that are popular candidates who may not agree with me on every issue. I understand it. That's what politics is about," Sanders told NPR.
"If we are going to protect a woman's right to choose, at the end of the day we're going to need Democratic control over the House and the Senate, and state governments all over this nation," he said. "And we have got to appreciate where people come from, and do our best to fight for the pro-choice agenda. But I think you just can't exclude people who disagree with us on one issue."
See the use of quotes, that is what Bernie actually said on his support for Mello. Does that sound anything like boosting Mello for the future of the party or dismissing a pro-choice agenda other than the fact Mello is a Democratic party mayoral candidate running against a republican. Mello is clearly on the pro-life side and would not be my candidate in a primary but his record and the event itself has been clearly inflated to be used as just another way of hitting Bernie and your use of quotes is one of the tools people use to ascribe to someone words they do not use which have an extreme meaning.
I have given you the actual words of Bernie Sanders. Please find where he said that Mello is a "future star". And btw, this is almost exactly what Nancy Pelosi said on meet the press when asked about other pro-life democrats. I support both Nancy and Bernie and would not misquote either one or ascribe words and meanings that they do not use.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)Ask them for a retraction. And don't imply or say that I am a liar again...the article clearly states he told a crowd of 6000...blah blah. Read it for yourself.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/21/us/politics/bernie-sanders-democrats-nebraska.html
Rilgin
(787 posts)Here is the link, I listened to it at no place does he call, imply, or state that Mello is a "future star" He does not use those words nor does he try to imply it.
Mello is mentioned three times. At the beginning, Bernie says it is important to elect Mello. He then goes on to mention and thank all the other supporters and attendees of the event including Planned Parenthood, firefighters, the DNC for Nebraska.
The second reference to Mello is in the middle of his speech talking about Republican control over the States. Bernie says (paraphrasing not quoting) that Nebraska is totally controlled by Republicans and then mentions the Mello election as trying to break that in Nebraska. He does not boost or say anything about Mello's political future. Repeat that he does not say a single thing about Mello and either the future of Mello or the future of the Democratic Party.
The Third is at the end where again he asks people to vote for Mello as a way of beating the republicans and forming grass root coalitions. Again, nothing about Mello as a future star of the democratic party just another fight against republicans
The times got some things right, mostly it was a speech about Bernie's main issues and against Republicans similar to the themes of his campaign. This is about 99% of his hour speech. The times reporter distorted his 3 mentions of Mello for no reason whatsoever and you compound it by putting quotes around it and saying Bernie said it even though the Times does not even go that far. That is the problem with relying on Newspaper articles and then adding your own quotes.
Go ahead listen to it yourself. You will not find anything supporting your claim that Bernie stated that Mello was a future star of the Democratic Party. This is the actual video of the Event.
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)but I am not certain of that source...But Sen. Sanders did say Mello was a 'rising star' according to a very reliable source...the New York Times.
Rilgin
(787 posts)Of course you could just believe the NYT reporter's opinion on what Bernie's speech was about where he did not use quotes or you could believe your ears and listen to the speech.
Bernie did not say the words "future star" or "rising star". On a more fundamental level, Bernie did not state imply or suggest that Mello was the future of the Democratic Party although he said it was important to vote for Mello and that it was an important vote but again not in the context that Mello or Mello's is the future of the party. His speech was on the issues he usually speaks about: inequality and climate change and the need to make the Democratic Party a grass roots coalition to beat the republicans.
On another post, I gave you an actual quote of Bernie's from an article that itself used quotes to say Bernie said those words (rather than the columnist's interpretation or summary). Again, in the actual quotes, Bernie is accepting about Mello in a deep red state which is a far cry from trying to push Mello as a "future star".
So again, are you finally going to possibly understand that adding your own quotes to a newspaper article that does not put the words in quotes is misleading and that sometimes columnists are not being exact in their reporting of speeches.
Again, here is the link, go to the source and prove me wrong. Prove that Bernie Sanders said "future star" at the event.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)"Ilyse Hogue, the president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, a prominent abortion rights advocacy group, called it a betrayal, especially of the women who have fueled the “resistance” that has energized Democrats since Mr. Trump’s unexpected triumph.
“It tells your most active political base that we’re just negotiable political property,” Ms. Hogue said of the statement sent by Mr. Sanders and Representative Keith Ellison, the Democratic National Committee’s new deputy chairman, who appeared with Mr. Mello. “Since the election, women have been engaged on the front lines of every progressive fight. So what message does it send for the party to start this tour with an anti-choice candidate?”
I saw it again about Turner and Ellison on a Hillary website...if you have a video let me know.
Rilgin
(787 posts)As you mention I have seen a news report saying that Turner and Ellison used the term "rising star" using quotes in the article implying they actually used those words. This is attribution of words to a speaker and it would interest me as to why Turner and Ellison said that and what they meant.
However, that was not your line of attack. You wanted to attack Bernie for words and sentiments he did not express and changed a reporter's summary (which the video itself shows to be wrong) to be a quote. The real motive is Bernie bashing which is the opposite of Unity.
Our whole back and forth started when you titled your post he (meaning Bernie) said "Rising Star" using quotes. I told you he didn't say it and you insisted he did. You then brought in a times article as proof that he said it even though the Times does not attribute it as a quote like you did. Now I have even shown you a direct quote of Bernie on why he wants Mello to win and the actual video where the times reported that he said future star (without quotes). The video shows that Bernie did not say future star. Is it time to maybe unring the bell and go back to your claim and state that maybe you were wrong.
So look at the video you asked about and find the words future star or rising star and get back to us.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)they are wrong. I may watch the video later (probably) but not tonight. If it wasn't true...why would Bernie defend his remarks? I have sent you links all day. Thanks for the video.
Rilgin
(787 posts)He did not actually have to defend saying Mello was a rising star because he did not say that. His defense was not a defense because he does not need to defend anything he said. Nor was he responding to a NYT article but was responding to the attacks on sites like this which caused an NPR interviewer to ask him about the attacks.
On NPR he game an explanation of his support for Mello and addressed why he would want a democratic mayoral candidate to win a local race in a red state even if his pro-choice pro-life issues were suspect. His explanation is the actual democratic party position that has been used with respect to many other politicians who are not purely pro-choice. In fact, Bernie's explanation is the same basic answer that Nancy Pelosi gave on Meet The Press this past weekend (I can probably find a link if you need one to compare to Bernie's explanation of why he would ask local Nebraskans to vote for Mello over the Republican mayoral candidate).
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)that Bernie supported was grounds to accuse Booker of not only being "not a progressive" but a "corporate shill."
Ignoring everything else besides the one cherry picked vot.
Tom Rinaldo
(22,919 posts)Last edited Mon Apr 24, 2017, 10:43 AM - Edit history (1)
He is rising but he may not get very far. Kaine did become a star in the Democratic Party though he once held some clearly anti-choice views (that is indisputable during an earlier phase of his career when he active in Virginia State politics). Kaine "evolved" which I am happy with. It takes time to see if an "evolution" sticks. I am willing to say that it has with Tim Kaine (his last evolution was to back away from supporting the Hyde Amendment when he became our VP candidate).
If Mello argued in favor of anti-choice policies now support for him would not be excusable. From what I can tell he doesn't now. Some say he's had a sudden conversion on that. Could be, I don't know what's been going through hi mind for the last year or two. There obviously was a time when Tim Kaine's conversion was fresh also.
If Mello wants to continue to rise in the Democratic Party, if he does not want to be primaried by pro choice Democrats in the future even if he does become Mayor, he will have to walk the walk and not just talk the talk. Meanwhile he is running against a Republican incumbent who does walk the walk when it comes to fighting against women's reproductive freedom.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)He sponsored and voted for legislation that was anti-choice.
"Mello is a sponsor of the final version of a 20-week abortion ban approved by the governor in 2010, and cast anti-choice votes in favor of requiring physicians to be physically present for an abortion in order to impede access to telemedicine abortion care, and a law banning insurance plans in the state from covering abortions. He was endorsed in 2010 by anti-choice group Nebraska Right to Life."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/omaha-mayoral-candidate-under-fire-says-he-would-never-do-anything-to-restrict-access-to-reproductive-health-care_us_58f8e868e4b018a9ce590a84
If you go to my link and click on the links in the above quote. It takes you to the NE legislature documents...I have posted some on other posts...endorsing this guy is a disaster for Democrats.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Making his selection as VP something you vehemently opposed?
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)Kentonio
(4,377 posts)For passing laws to fund pro-life organizations and impose anti-choice restrictions?
Look if you want to judge both harshly, then I'm right there with you, but I'm tired of the mental gymnastics required to think one is awesome and great and the other is an irredeemable monster.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)him when he ran for Governor ....they didn't endorse the other Democrat either. I can't link it as it is on a GOP website but google is your friend. Now Sen. Kaine never voted anti-choice and Mello did numerous times.
"While Senator Kaine has been open about his personal reservations about abortion, he’s maintained a 100% pro-choice voting record in the U.S. Senate. He voted against dangerous abortion bans, he has fought against efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, and he voted to strengthen clinic security by establishing a federal fund for it," NARAL President Ilyse Hogue said in the statement.
She said that voting for abortion rights despite personal beliefs underlines the group's message.
"This is core part of what it means to be pro-choice – supporting everyone’s individual decision making," the statement read."
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/288952-pro-abortion-rights-group-give-kaine-nod-of-approval
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/tim-kaine-abortion-predicament-225053
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)They did not endorse him in 2005...but in 2016 they gave him 100%. Mello voted against insurance for abortion, for a 20 week ban, having a doctor present etc...very different. Adoption and abstinence focused education are not even close to no insurance for abortions or a 20 week ban...and he end abstinence based education as governor when it did not work. Nice try.
"But he hasn’t always advanced policies directly in line with those of abortion rights advocacy groups. He pledged in his 2005 gubernatorial campaign to reduce the number of terminated pregnancies in the state by promoting adoption and abstinence-focused education. That cycle, the state NARAL chapter ripped Kaine’s GOP opponent, Jerry Kilgore, as “an extremely anti-choice candidate” but still withheld its endorsement of Kaine because he “embraces many of the restrictions on a woman’s right to choose.”
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Just the state that he was governor of, and helped pass various pieces of anti-choice legislation that led to NARAL refusing to endorse him.
You don't have to keep posting shit about Mello, I already think he's an asshole. I'm just confused by why your targetting is apparently so very selective.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)Naral trashed his Democratic opponent but refused to endorse ...in 2016 they did endorse. He never voted for anti-choice legislature as Mello did.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)He even ran in 2005 on an anti-choice platform.
Him being anti-abortion is not some huge controversial story, its been known by basically everyone for as long as Tim Kaine has been around.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)Did he ever vote to deny insurance for abortion as Mello did? or did he vote to ban abortion after 20 weeks so women are forced to carry dead babies or deliver babies with serious things wrong with them...such as a lack of a brain?...Mello is bad on pro-choice...and trashing Kaine unfairly won't change that.
emulatorloo
(44,270 posts)Bernie's a tough guy, he can handle a little criticism for what some see as problematic endorsement.
Please note: Bernie is definitely NOT drawing false equivalencies between Kaine and Mello like some DU'ers are.
Kaine has a solid pro-choice voting record, as does Bernie. Mello does not. He's promised to do better so I take him at his word.
Bernie definitely doesn't need you to smear Kaine in some misguided attempt to "save" Bernie. Bernie's strong and he doesn't need to be saved.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)I'm not, I'm describing my own opinion. I was deeply dissatisfied with Kaine as VP pick, and with how the party in general makes room for conservative Democrats. I know why we do it, but I think it undermines us long term.
emulatorloo
(44,270 posts)JCanete
(5,272 posts)keep pro-choice legislation and judges, etc., so just to clarify, he isn't suggesting that he is in favor of abandoning women's rights.
That said, if Mello is bad on this issue, Sander's endorsement of him is not helpful to his own causes at all to say nothing of local women's rights in this city, and as an advocate of his messaging, this is more a problem for me, not less of one.
But there does seem to be a certain degree of selective outrage as to when we have an issue with pro-life politicians here. Sanders is throwing women under the bus, but the party we all belong to is not? There aren't other instances of pro-life dems that our leadership has endorsed or financially supported? I get that Sander's litmus test is supposedly the rigid one, so I can accept a call for this being hypocrisy, but further vitriol if earned for this support, should also go to the Democratic party at large for Mello and others.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And Perez is doing his job as DNC Chair to support the Democratic candidate, and would likely not have been doing so for a Mayoral race, but Perez is on this tour with Sanders, and for him to not appear with Bernie and praise this more centrist Democrat would have been damning Mello by omission. Like Bernie did Ossoff.
Bernie defines himself as a progressive, but has shown a lack of progressive support for reproductive rights, considering them "optional" when the candidate adheres to Sanders' specific economic ideas.
This makes Sanders as much a "centrist" on women's health care, as it makes Mello. But Bernie will never just own that - he feels that his views define "progressive."
This is not new with Bernie - in 2013, he said that Democrats need to stop "getting hung up on abortion and gay marriage," in order to help out Southern Democrats running for office who aligned more with him economically.
http://www.rawstory.com/2013/10/bernie-sanders-tells-ed-schultz-southern-democrats-are-tired-of-being-abandoned-by-the-party/
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)He wasn't so clearly say that women's reproductive rights are less important that his economic agenda. I agree that we need a majority, and that means we don't benefit from purity tests. But it very much bothers me that Sandrs and his ilk think they get to decide what that means, and that somehow women's reproductive rights are importnat enough to amke the list, especially at a time when they are so clearly under threat.
uponit7771
(90,371 posts)... on certain stances.
Purism for a and not for issue b is fucked up
JCanete
(5,272 posts)but it hardly matters, if at the end of the day nothing gets off the ground and progress isn't ultimately made on either, and certainly not on both, fronts. Sanders thinking he can start with these communities on economics alone may have a point that they are currently unreachable on culture issues until we erode their misconceptions by showing them common cause first, but he is forgetting that we can't even galvanize on the liberal side of things if people think, and for good reason when we back a candidate like Mello, that they are being left out of the picture.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)a majority...who has any abysmal record on Pro-choice issues. I would vote for him if I lived in the district but he should be endorsed by no party leader. You can follow the link and click on word links in the quote provided...I have provided the link needed as well. This takes you to the NE records of actual votes.
"Mello is a sponsor of the final version of a 20-week abortion ban approved by the governor in 2010, and cast anti-choice votes in favor of requiring physicians to be physically present for an abortion in order to impede access to telemedicine abortion care, and a law banning insurance plans in the state from covering abortions. He was endorsed in 2010 by anti-choice group Nebraska Right to Life."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/omaha-mayoral-candidate-under-fire-says-he-would-never-do-anything-to-restrict-access-to-reproductive-health-care_us_58f8e868e4b018a9ce590a84
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... so that they won't have to face the uncomfortable reality, or defend the indefensible, or explain the hypocrisy. That's why they're attacking Tim Kaine and telling lies about him. It's all very sordid and unseemly. Our beloved Democratic Party and our bright and promising Democrats deserve better.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)I was wondering why this uninspiring race...and then I saw her name.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)you know...the one where I said I did not agree with Sanders on this. I think I'm grasping his logic but I also think he's making a mistake. You think its for entirely different reasons, and that is fine.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)when we could be working for the House, Senate, or important state races (governors and legislatures). One of the Our Revolution people is chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party...It is my opinion that is why this race was chosen...it just doesn't make sense otherwise.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)I understand Sanders trying to get grass-roots anti-corporate people into office, even the small ones, and public coverage is good for that kind of advocacy. I even understand him backing Mello, but as I stated, I think it was short-sighted, not as long game as I believe he thinks. He's eating shit on this one for good reason.
Demsrule86
(68,803 posts)the party and trying to define what being a progressive means.
