Bernie Sanders for President
Comments
-
Same argument... you justify threats and obscenities by saying "look how bad it could have been". Well I guess that's true. Then again, it could have been Rwanda in the 90's, so I guess a break in isn't so bad, is it?rgambs said:
I don't see it as a red herring, I see it as a reminder of what violence ACTUALLY looks like, not what anti-Sanders sources want you to think it looks like.mrussel1 said:^^Sanders has a moral obligation to condemn any violence or harassment done on his campaign's behalf. I don't mean to imply they sanctioned it, but he needs to condone it and state unequivocally that it is counter to his principles. In his statement released on the subject, he condoned it but pivoted immediately to some incident that happened months ago, and in which there is no evidence that it was related to his campaign, him personally or that DNC was behind it. It's a total red herring. What do those incidents have to do with what happened to the Nevada official?
Our campaign of course believes in non-violent change and it goes without saying that I condemn any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals. But, when we speak of violence, I should add here that months ago, during the Nevada campaign, shots were fired into my campaign office in Nevada and apartment housing complex my campaign staff lived in was broken into and ransacked.0 -
Give it up man. Your credibility, and any support of Hillary Clinton right now, is at its worse credibility.mrussel1 said:
No, there should not be a sentence that says ... "BUT..." after the condemnation. There is no 'but'. There's no justification yet Sanders seems to try to justify the actions of the individuals. What if I said, "yes my brother robbed a bank and that was wrong..BUT remember that he was mugged three months ago". Does that fly? Does he think Lange shot up his campaign hq? Does he think she broke into some apartments of his staff? How does whatever happened to his campaign three months ago remotely justify the actions towards Lange?ldent42 said:
To be fair though, He did condone is and state unequivocally that is is counter to his campaign's mission. Like right there. In the first sentence. I don't see what's wrong with him pointing out that violence was done to his campaign staff during the campaign though. Like why is not okay for him to point that out? It seems to me to be speaking to a culture of violence in politics in NV.mrussel1 said:^^Sanders has a moral obligation to condemn any violence or harassment done on his campaign's behalf. I don't mean to imply they sanctioned it, but he needs to condone it and state unequivocally that it is counter to his principles. In his statement released on the subject, he condoned it but pivoted immediately to some incident that happened months ago, and in which there is no evidence that it was related to his campaign, him personally or that DNC was behind it. It's a total red herring. What do those incidents have to do with what happened to the Nevada official?
Our campaign of course believes in non-violent change and it goes without saying that I condemn any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals. But, when we speak of violence, I should add here that months ago, during the Nevada campaign, shots were fired into my campaign office in Nevada and apartment housing complex my campaign staff lived in was broken into and ransacked.
It's a terrible condemnation. Oh and btw, the Politifact was there. For those that are interested in what happened, feel free to read their write-up. http://www.politifact.com/nevada/statements/2016/may/18/jeff-weaver/allegations-fraud-and-misconduct-nevada-democratic/0 -
The sanders crowd bitch more about biased media than any republicans do.mrussel1 said:
The one you attributed to me above is Benjs, not me.. And directly above is taken from Sanders statement posted on his site. Is that adequately sourced for you or biased against Sanders?Free said:
Source? Besides being from Wasserman Shultz, and the 2nd paragraph from Sanders?mrussel1 said:^^Sanders has a moral obligation to condemn any violence or harassment done on his campaign's behalf. I don't mean to imply they sanctioned it, but he needs to condone it and state unequivocally that it is counter to his principles. In his statement released on the subject, he condoned it but pivoted immediately to some incident that happened months ago, and in which there is no evidence that it was related to his campaign, him personally or that DNC was behind it. It's a total red herring. What do those incidents have to do with what happened to the Nevada official?
Our campaign of course believes in non-violent change and it goes without saying that I condemn any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals. But, when we speak of violence, I should add here that months ago, during the Nevada campaign, shots were fired into my campaign office in Nevada and apartment housing complex my campaign staff lived in was broken into and ransacked.hippiemom = goodness0 -
Try and structure a proper sentence first, and second pay attention to the words I'm writing. No one is defending Clinton because there is nothing to defend. This has nothing to do with her. I'm accusing Sanders of being a weak leader with a poor moral compass regarding this situation. And I'm accusing his small band of supporters of being nothing more than leftist thugs who resorted sexist and violent threats because their petulance wasn't rewarded with TWO FUCKING EXTRA DELEGATES. I find it ironic that this board is quick to point the finger at Trump supporters who harass dissent at meetings and town halls (and right to point the finger) but can't fucking see the same thing happening on their side.Free said:
Give it up man. Your credibility, and any support of Hillary Clinton right now, is at its worse credibility.mrussel1 said:
No, there should not be a sentence that says ... "BUT..." after the condemnation. There is no 'but'. There's no justification yet Sanders seems to try to justify the actions of the individuals. What if I said, "yes my brother robbed a bank and that was wrong..BUT remember that he was mugged three months ago". Does that fly? Does he think Lange shot up his campaign hq? Does he think she broke into some apartments of his staff? How does whatever happened to his campaign three months ago remotely justify the actions towards Lange?ldent42 said:
To be fair though, He did condone is and state unequivocally that is is counter to his campaign's mission. Like right there. In the first sentence. I don't see what's wrong with him pointing out that violence was done to his campaign staff during the campaign though. Like why is not okay for him to point that out? It seems to me to be speaking to a culture of violence in politics in NV.mrussel1 said:^^Sanders has a moral obligation to condemn any violence or harassment done on his campaign's behalf. I don't mean to imply they sanctioned it, but he needs to condone it and state unequivocally that it is counter to his principles. In his statement released on the subject, he condoned it but pivoted immediately to some incident that happened months ago, and in which there is no evidence that it was related to his campaign, him personally or that DNC was behind it. It's a total red herring. What do those incidents have to do with what happened to the Nevada official?
Our campaign of course believes in non-violent change and it goes without saying that I condemn any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals. But, when we speak of violence, I should add here that months ago, during the Nevada campaign, shots were fired into my campaign office in Nevada and apartment housing complex my campaign staff lived in was broken into and ransacked.
It's a terrible condemnation. Oh and btw, the Politifact was there. For those that are interested in what happened, feel free to read their write-up. http://www.politifact.com/nevada/statements/2016/may/18/jeff-weaver/allegations-fraud-and-misconduct-nevada-democratic/0 -
It's quite sad how they have co-opted the Right Wing talking points... lamestream media, Clinton News Network, media bias, Vince Foster, etc. Now Democrats have to deal with insanity from both sides. But the kids will tucker themselves out soon enough.cincybearcat said:
The sanders crowd bitch more about biased media than any republicans do.mrussel1 said:
The one you attributed to me above is Benjs, not me.. And directly above is taken from Sanders statement posted on his site. Is that adequately sourced for you or biased against Sanders?Free said:
Source? Besides being from Wasserman Shultz, and the 2nd paragraph from Sanders?mrussel1 said:^^Sanders has a moral obligation to condemn any violence or harassment done on his campaign's behalf. I don't mean to imply they sanctioned it, but he needs to condone it and state unequivocally that it is counter to his principles. In his statement released on the subject, he condoned it but pivoted immediately to some incident that happened months ago, and in which there is no evidence that it was related to his campaign, him personally or that DNC was behind it. It's a total red herring. What do those incidents have to do with what happened to the Nevada official?
Our campaign of course believes in non-violent change and it goes without saying that I condemn any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals. But, when we speak of violence, I should add here that months ago, during the Nevada campaign, shots were fired into my campaign office in Nevada and apartment housing complex my campaign staff lived in was broken into and ransacked.0 -
What's hilarious is you two backing up a vehicle that's been proven outright to lie to the public.
Keep on with your fight against Sanders, Russell... Yawn.0 -
I don't need to fight Sanders. He lost. Sorry buddy, you've got to pay for your substandard education after all. I recommend Comp101 and Macroeconomics to start. Remember what I said to you all those months ago...Free said:What's hilarious is you two backing up a vehicle that's been proven outright to lie to the public.
Keep on with your fight against Sanders, Russell... Yawn.
#feelthemath. I hope you believe in that mathematical sorcery after all.0 -
Wow! You and I either saw two different videos (the mainstream and the ones shot by people who were there) or you really don't see that the system is hijacked and arrogated beyond anything that can reasonably be called "democracy" .mrussel1 said:
Try and structure a proper sentence first, and second pay attention to the words I'm writing. No one is defending Clinton because there is nothing to defend. This has nothing to do with her. I'm accusing Sanders of being a weak leader with a poor moral compass regarding this situation. And I'm accusing his small band of supporters of being nothing more than leftist thugs who resorted sexist and violent threats because their petulance wasn't rewarded with TWO FUCKING EXTRA DELEGATES. I find it ironic that this board is quick to point the finger at Trump supporters who harass dissent at meetings and town halls (and right to point the finger) but can't fucking see the same thing happening on their side.Free said:
Give it up man. Your credibility, and any support of Hillary Clinton right now, is at its worse credibility.mrussel1 said:
No, there should not be a sentence that says ... "BUT..." after the condemnation. There is no 'but'. There's no justification yet Sanders seems to try to justify the actions of the individuals. What if I said, "yes my brother robbed a bank and that was wrong..BUT remember that he was mugged three months ago". Does that fly? Does he think Lange shot up his campaign hq? Does he think she broke into some apartments of his staff? How does whatever happened to his campaign three months ago remotely justify the actions towards Lange?ldent42 said:
To be fair though, He did condone is and state unequivocally that is is counter to his campaign's mission. Like right there. In the first sentence. I don't see what's wrong with him pointing out that violence was done to his campaign staff during the campaign though. Like why is not okay for him to point that out? It seems to me to be speaking to a culture of violence in politics in NV.mrussel1 said:^^Sanders has a moral obligation to condemn any violence or harassment done on his campaign's behalf. I don't mean to imply they sanctioned it, but he needs to condone it and state unequivocally that it is counter to his principles. In his statement released on the subject, he condoned it but pivoted immediately to some incident that happened months ago, and in which there is no evidence that it was related to his campaign, him personally or that DNC was behind it. It's a total red herring. What do those incidents have to do with what happened to the Nevada official?
Our campaign of course believes in non-violent change and it goes without saying that I condemn any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals. But, when we speak of violence, I should add here that months ago, during the Nevada campaign, shots were fired into my campaign office in Nevada and apartment housing complex my campaign staff lived in was broken into and ransacked.
It's a terrible condemnation. Oh and btw, the Politifact was there. For those that are interested in what happened, feel free to read their write-up. http://www.politifact.com/nevada/statements/2016/may/18/jeff-weaver/allegations-fraud-and-misconduct-nevada-democratic/
But I do agree that I don't see anything about Clinton that needs defending. I don't see how anyone could.
Point three: your comparisons of the Trump disturbances and the Nevada situation just don't make sense. Two totally different sets of circumstances. Sounds a bit reaching to me.
Point four. Once upon a time I didn't know what a college graduate was. Now I are one."It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
Brian
My point is and continues to be the harassment of Lang after the convention and the vandalizing of the DNC property. I haven't talked about the proceedings themselves other than pointing of the Politifact review.0 -
Um, look Mr., it's Lange.mrussel1 said:Brian
My point is and continues to be the harassment of Lang after the convention and the vandalizing of the DNC property. I haven't talked about the proceedings themselves other than pointing of the Politifact review.
Edit: Changed my semi-colon to an apostrophe. "It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
Can you defend the behavior? That's what I really want to know from Bernie's supporters.brianlux said:
Um, look Mr., it's Lange.mrussel1 said:Brian
My point is and continues to be the harassment of Lang after the convention and the vandalizing of the DNC property. I haven't talked about the proceedings themselves other than pointing of the Politifact review.
Edit: Changed my semi-colon to an apostrophe.0 -
http://m.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/media_democrats_exploit_nevada_uproar_to_diss_bernie_sanders_20160518
Media, Democratic Establishment Exploit Nevada Uproar to Diss Bernie Sanders
The trouble at Saturday’s Nevada State Democratic Convention has become another excuse for the party establishment and the mainstream media to attack Bernie Sanders and his passionate followers.
In the media’s telling, the dispute over the delegate count has grown into a violent scene. Though we can find no video proof, chairs were reported to have been thrown. That, apparently, was the worst of it. With unabashed hyperbole, The Washington Post now calls it a “donnybrook.”
Certainly, there was much yelling and tension at the long and exhausting event. But when the convention leaders ignored the results of a voice vote, then failed to follow the party’s own convention rules, Sanders’ supporters had every right to protest. That’s called democracy in action.
A sober analysis of the event posted on YouTube by Jordan Liles clearly shows the convention leaders’ role in escalating the trouble. Nevada Democratic Party Chairwoman Roberta Lange’s arbitrary dismissal of the Sanders camp’s complaints could have had no other result than to infuriate all concerned.
There is no excuse for the threats Lange subsequently received. But had she played fair and kept her cool, all this trouble could have been avoided. That’s a narrative you won’t hear from the Democratic establishment or its close friends, the mainstream media.0 -
Of course you do! Because like I said before, that's all you've been doing since day 1: to attack Sanders and his supporters. You have nothing else obviously, and you appear to be unable to see past that hate. Try to enjoy your evening.mrussel1 said:
Can you defend the behavior? That's what I really want to know from Bernie's supporters.brianlux said:
Um, look Mr., it's Lange.mrussel1 said:Brian
My point is and continues to be the harassment of Lang after the convention and the vandalizing of the DNC property. I haven't talked about the proceedings themselves other than pointing of the Politifact review.
Edit: Changed my semi-colon to an apostrophe.0 -
So she deserved it, right Free? That's what this author is saying. Fucking pathetic.
Ironic how you warn everyone not to trust the media but you continue to copy and paste media for everyone to read.0 -
Oh hell yeah. If I had been there and Lange pulled that shit I would have yelled the same thing you can hear on the video, "What the fuck was THAT?"mrussel1 said:
Can you defend the behavior? That's what I really want to know from Bernie's supporters.brianlux said:
Um, look Mr., it's Lange.mrussel1 said:Brian
My point is and continues to be the harassment of Lang after the convention and the vandalizing of the DNC property. I haven't talked about the proceedings themselves other than pointing of the Politifact review.
Edit: Changed my semi-colon to an apostrophe."It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
Are we disconnected here or are you deliberately ignoring what I'm talking about? I'm referring to the threats against her, the obscene and sexist texts and voice mails, the listing of her grandchildren's school as a threat and the vandalism of the party HQ.0 -
I'm not convinced these voicemails are authentic.
If they are, of course she didn't deserve them. She should step down from her position, though, regardless.Post edited by EarlWelsh on0 -
OK, sorry. Missed that. No, I never condone violence toward another person. But look, are those typical Bernie supporters? Of course not.mrussel1 said:
Are we disconnected here or are you deliberately ignoring what I'm talking about? I'm referring to the threats against her, the obscene and sexist texts and voice mails, the listing of her grandchildren's school as a threat and the vandalism of the party HQ.
But you also might want to consider how obscene and akin to criminal Lange's actions were. That's where the focus needs to be with this issue, not the few who make the headlines with their over-the-top violent reactions. And of course you might also consider that some of those threats were planted by people trying to make Bernie supporters look bad because that really does happen too. Sort of like Spy vs Spy.
But see how we get detracted from the core issues? Now isn't that interesting?!"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
I wore a "I (heart) Ninjas" shirt the first time I boarded a Pirate ship. Lets just say they didn't see the humor in that and that's how I ended up with my eye patch.Jason P said:
It is common sense that should be applied to multiple situations. If you go confront a large group in a disrespectful manner, be it Trump supporters, Eagles fans, Hells Angels, Pirates, etc, you are taking on a risk of getting pepper sprayed or your butt kicked.PJ_Soul said:
So when peaceful protesters get attacked it is the fault of the peaceful protesters??? Okay.Jason P said:Yeah.^^^ And where did this happen?
People looking for trouble found trouble. I don't want to defend the clown, but the left have got to get there shit together. 4 or 5 Midwest states may decide this election, and antics of violence that the left has instigated will swing critical votes to Trump.
0 -
Balance? It's right or wrong. Balance has no place in law.2-feign-reluctance said:I'd be worried about who Bernie would 'install' in the Supreme Court. Might be an overlooked area of concern, but a balanced Supreme Court isn't a terrible thing.
10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help