Celebrated Photographer: Yes, that is Bernie Sanders. Time Magazine is lying

[cali]

We're always happy to get an email from Danny Lyon, the great American photographer, credited with inventing what became known as 'the new journalism' back in the 1960s. Lyons photographs of society's outsiders and its dispossessed and downtrodden have become legendary over the years, and he remains to this day a peerless - and fearless - chronicler of human integrity, dignity and resistance.

He sent us a link to a couple of photographs he took of Democrat contender Bernie Sanders back in the early 1960s when the then student activist was talking at a gathering of students holding a sit in in protest at institutional racism againt black students in Chicago. This is what Danny said:

"In 1962 and the spring of 1963 I was the student photographer at the University of Chicago, making pictures for the yearbook, the Alumni Magazine and the student paper, The Maroon. By the summer of 1962 I had taken my camera into the deep South, and become the first photographer for SNCC.

"That winter at the University of Chicago, there was a sit-in inside the administration building protesting discrimination against blacks in university owned housing. I went to it with a CORE activist and friend. The sit in was in a crowded hallway, blocking the entrance to the office of Dr. George Beadle, the chancellor.

"I took the photograph of Bernie Sanders speaking to his fellow CORE members at that sit-in. Bob McNamara, a close friend and CORE activist, is in the very corner next to me in the picture. Across the room from me is another campus photographer named Wexler, who taught me how to develop film.

"I photographed Bernie a second time after he got a haircut, as he appeared next to the noble laureate and chancellor Dr. George Beadle. Time Magazine is now claiming it is not Bernie in the picture but someone else. It is Bernie, and it is proof of his very early dedication to justice for African Americans. The CORE sit-in that Bernie helped lead was the first civil rights sit-in to take place in the North."

<snip>
http://www.phaidon.com/agenda/photography/articles/2016/february/02/when-danny-lyon-met-bernie-sanders/

[Recursion]

1. FFS can this please finally settle this?

I can think of literally nothing less important than the answer to this question. Literally. My dog is right now investigating something in the corner of the room, and the identity of that something is more important than this.

It's Sanders. A half-century-plus ago. Whoever thought it was a good idea to either start this argument, or continue it, needs to look at our damn primary and caucus turnout numbers and realize what our actual worries are.

Cali is absolutely right: this is Sanders, and it was stupid to say otherwise. And the fact that anybody still cares is a sign of how completely off the rails this primary has become.

[cali]

4. I agree that it's basically insignificant

but in light of the drastic minimizing of Bernie's civil rights activism and the repeated claims that these photos are not Bernie, I thought posting definitive proof was necessary.

[Recursion]

6. I totally get that.

I just seriously hope everybody can stop re-hashing the circular firing squads of a half-century ago and start asking why we had lower turnout than the GOP in both IA and NH, and fixing that.

[cali]

8. You are right, but

And I know I shouldn't say this, I don't think it is fixable. I've never thought our odds of winning this year were even decent. That is confirmed for me by comparing turnout in Iowa and New Hampshire.

[Recursion]

9. And, we are sadly in exact agreement there

Yeah, I think you're completely right on that.

[cali]

13. Now I'll add why I think, poor as the odds are,

Bernie has a slightly better chance than Hillary to prevail in the general. It may not be likely, but it is possible, that Bernie can bring in enough new voters to win. Hillary is the GOTV tool the republicans could imagine, independents don't just not support her, they dislike her, and she is turning off young potential democratic voters.

[Recursion]

14. I'm probably going to vote for Sanders in the Democrats Abroad Global Primary for basically

that reason.

I think both are longshots but his path is slightly less fraught than hers.

[sammythecat]

121. The only thing that would keep Hillary

Last edited Fri Feb 12, 2016, 02:34 PM - Edit history (1)

from being absolutely slaughtered in the general is the fact that the Republican contenders are so completely awful. As it is, it might be close with her in it. If Kasich was to make it to the general, I think he'd beat her handily. If Bernie makes it to the general, he wins no matter who the Republican is.

[AtheistCrusader]

128. Sanders/Kucinich would make me almost as happy as a Sanders/Warren ticket.

Even though Kucinich is available, I'd prefer Warren, even at the loss of her influence in Congress. But Kucinich would rock too.

[sammythecat]

132. I made a big mistake here

I agree with your thoughts, right down to preferring Warren over Kucinich, but I meant to say Kasich not Kucinich. I'm really sorry about that. Sorry for wasting your time. I should have been more careful because I know I have that tendency to mix up those names.

I think, unlike the other republicans, Kasich would give Hillary a hard time in the general just because (from what little I know of him) he isn't so downright scary to most normal, reality based, people.

[AtheistCrusader]

133. Geeze, get me all excited...

I really don't know much about Kasich.

As a somewhat-near-the-middle republican candidate, I do know he's either not saying a whole lot of batshit crazy stuff, or it's not getting reported on. Not sure.

[sammythecat]

135. I don't know much about him either, except

that he does seem to be positioning himself as the Republican antidote to Trump and Cruz. But, whatever, he's still a Republican so therefore he sucks. Of course.

[geologic]

150. Nobody forceably removed from the stage of a Grateful Dead concert--

could ever become President Of The United States...

[merrily]

11. My theory:

I don't think we need to read tea leaves.

People come out when they are really excited about a candidate. The Republicans had a number of candidates and a some number excited about each one of them. Democrats had only two candidates, one of whom turnout out a lot of people and one of whom does not.

[Recursion]

12. And yet that total is what we're starting with in both states

And that's a damn, damn bad sign.

This latest debate was when it really sank in to me that we're probably going to lose in November.

[merrily]

15. Nominate someone who turns people out. Also, by that time, the Republicans will have only

one candidate.

Also, I forgot to mention two other factors:

Republicans have had over 7 years of a President they really dislike. In that respect, they are like we were in 2008.

A good number of Republicans who turned out wrote in a Democrat.

[Recursion]

17. That is the exact thing that haunts me. They feel like we did in 2008.

They literally are as fed up and angry as we were then, and they'll vote for anything with "R" after its name.

[merrily]

18. Read my prior post again, please. I added an edit I think you will like.

[Recursion]

24. Good catch, thanks. I think even Vermin Supreme got 3 Rep. votes.

If the GOP nominates Trump or Cruz, I think that will help us. But I think the GOP is institutionally averse to that (and the RNC has no compunctions about kneecapping its frontrunner, unlike the DNC), and will wind up with somebody like Kasich (who for that matter is my biggest fear on that side).

I don't think there would be significant crossovers with a Kasich or Rubio on the R ticket.

[merrily]

26. Are you serious?

The DNC has, since at least 2012, been kneecapping anyone who might run against Hillary. It has on occasion seemed to me that they'd rather lose the general than see Bernie be the nominee and I've seen several other posters saying the same thing.

In New Hampshire (or was it Iowa, or both), some Hillary supporters crossed over to Kasich.

Rubio looks and acts boyish. I think some people might fear he is too green.

[Recursion]

28. Right: the DNC has refused to kneecap our frontrunner, despite the fact that any consultant

would say they should have.

Reince has no such peccadillos. He'll get Trump out of the way when the time comes. Probably Cruz too.

[merrily]

30. That is not what I said.

[cali]

29. I think it might end up being Rubio

And he's not as daunting as I originally thought. If it's Kasich, we are well and truly screwed. I saw his speech the other night; he's good. Alas, I think he'd be an effective president.

[Recursion]

32. It's rare I agree with you four times in one day, but here we are

Rubio is probably the most likely. Kasich is the one that absolutely screws us. Some of my punditeratti friends are already talking brokered GOP convention and Ryan coming out of it, but that seems like journalist fantasy right now to me.

[cali]

36. That is journalist fantasy.

We'll find out pretty soon if Kasich stands a chance. He scares the bejeezus out of me.

[Live and Learn]

37. And yet, Bush is making a comeback. I wouldn't rule him out yet either.

He is the establishment favorite (follow the money) on their side.

[cali]

39. I admit, I've ruled him out.

I don't think he has a chance. He's become strangely irrelevant.

[Recursion]

42. Same here

I can't even articulate it; he just lost whatever that mojo is that makes a nomination possible.

[cali]

44. He's so...

Yeah, I have trouble articulating that too.

Colorless?

Dispirited?

Clunky?

[Recursion]

45. Right? (nt)

[Punkingal]

51. I saw a SC Republican focus group yesterday that said no more Bushes basically.

Some of them said they tune him out when he's on.

[Live and Learn]

43. I thought so too but now I am not so sure. Stay tuned. nt

[rhett o rick]

151. It's like the tortus and the hare. Bush being the tortous. Remember he has "Dirty Tricks" Rove

working for the Bush Crime Family. I bet Rove has the dirt on all the other candidates.

[cascadiance]

56. Where Bernie could win over independents and some Republicans from Kasich or Rubio is H-1B visas

There is some strong support from many Republicans and independents currently supporting Trump or Cruz based on their stances on immigration and in particular being against H-1B guest worker programs, a position that Trump and Cruz share with Bernie. Though some of that support is xenophobic in nature, many there are concerned about the exploitive nature of guest worker programs, which Bernie also offers to them when he also rejects these exploitive programs.

Note in this Breitbart.com article that both Rubio and Kasich (and Jeb Bush) are on the wrong side of these guest worker programs and likely would lose a chunk of Republicans and independents now supporting Trump or Cruz to Bernie. Hillary, who supports H-1B (or at least the last time she stated a position in 2008 supports it) would not get these votes. Rubio would especially lose out here...

http://www.financialexpress.com/article/economy/h-1b-fee-hike-india-toughens-stand-mulls-taking-us-to-wto/206903/

...
Trump also wants a “requirement to hire American workers first.”

“Too many visas, like the H-1B, have no such requirement,” the Trump plan continues. “In the year 2015, with 92 million Americans outside the workforce and incomes collapsing, we need companies to hire from the domestic pool of unemployed. Petitions for workers should be mailed to the unemployment office, not USCIS.”

Other candidates, like former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, have been strong like Trump on the issue. Huckabee has hammered the issue many times—even specifically calling out Disney for its practices—on the campaign trail and in interviews with Breitbart News. Santorum has as well, laying out on the trail how he wants a 25 percent reduction in legal immigration.

Other candidates, like Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), especially because of his work on the Senate “Gang of Eight” amnesty bill last Congress, and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)37%, stand against American workers like Perrero and Powers with their policy positions of supporting an increase in H1B levels.
...

My prediction is that if Bernie were to win the nomination and either Rubio or Kasich were to win the nomination for the Republican side, that Bernie would gain a lot of Republicans on this issue, especially if Democrats and the Bernie campaign were to talk about it more than they have been. Republicans have been talking on this.

If Bernie faced Cruz or Trump, I think that might be the situation where Bloomberg (who upon entering the race stated he supports no limits on H-1B visas) might enter the race, and be the "rescue" for the H-1B favoring lobbyists and the corporatist media would then try to make Bloomberg sound like the "reasonable" candidate on immigration and try to make both either Trump or Cruz and Bernie in to "xenophobic" candidates opposed to immigration.

There are other issues such as free trade that are also populist in nature that could factor in the same way too, but I don't think that Rubio or Kasich are necessarily "favored" over Bernie if the Democrats campaign right on this issue to capture some of the populist righties and independents as well as the heavy populist support Bernie gets amongst Democrats now.

[cali]

67. That's true, but is that a significant number?

[cascadiance]

85. I think that it should be put to the test by asking about this issue in the debates...

We're running out of time on this, but I do think if more Americans are made aware of this on the Democratic side, and more Republicans and independents can also see Bernie's stances on it, I think he has room to grow his populist support. But the establishment press and party leadership seems to want to hide this from the electorate, knowing that it is a weakness for Clinton, and also probably from the establishment not wanting to elevate this to the point that they have to have Bloomberg in the race to support their desires with "free trade" and these guest worker programs if it were a Bernie/Cruz or Trump matchup.

Not sure how we can get this lobbied for as a debate question in any of the remaining debates, but I think it needs to be asked, and soon!

When you see Rubio in a debate criticizing Cruz for switching from being pro-H-1B to now being one to want to limit it like Trump has campaigned on, I think that it must be a bigger issue than we might think for Republican voters. Though there is a lot of xenophobic sentiment that Trump and Cruz are trying to appeal to (and I note that to split these voters, the corporate media will try to position this issue as a xenophobic one), I do think that there are a LOT of Republicans (like Reagan Democrats in Reagan's time) who are worried about their jobs, and Bernie could come across as the one to get Republicans to cross over and become Sanders Republicans like Reagan got Democrats to become Reagan Democrats on a populist issue like this. This is why you have right wing sites like Breitbart.com, Daily Caller, and others talking even more heavily than progressive sites. The Disney lawsuit, etc. recently has brought it more to the mainstream, and even Thom Hartmann has talked more about this over the last week, and I think gives Democrats like Bernie the room to give a more nuanced support for the controlling this program for the right reasons, and not just to "keep foreigners out". that I don't think is the focus of concern over it even amongst Republicans.

[merrily]

174. They may have thought Vermin Supreme was a ratfscker.

[Hissyspit]

60. Please, by all means, give Rep. Lewis a call.

Let him know this was beneath his reputation.

[Recursion]

64. Seriously?

This is why we lose.

[Hissyspit]

66. No. Democrats using tactics like he did yesterday is why we lose.

It was petty and fallacious.

[BeanMusical]

170. +1

[truedelphi]

163. "This is why we lose" Say WH-HAT?

Pretty sure I don't follow you.

[sus453]

143. Perhaps because the

mainstream media has had a celebrity-like fixation on the Republican debates - they want to sell their popcorn.

[questionseverything]

144. i can tell you why we had lower turn out

because dws let the repubs have 2 months head start on airtime when she delayed the dem debates

trump took many low info voters that should be voting d

what these people like about trump...

he says he can't be bought

he says the system is corrupt and all his opponents can be bought

he says he can bring back some jobs,make better deals

he says no income taxes under 25 grand a year

doesn't that sound familiar?

these should be our voters

the dnc left a void when they refused to start debating....trump has filled that void

we can get some of them back but it will not be hc doing it

[femmedem]

89. It isn't just a minimizing of Bernie's civil rights activism, but also of his honesty.

The upfront message is about questioning his activism, of course. But the subtext is that he isn't as honest as he's being made out to be.

Thanks for the OP.

[Ferd Berfel]

140. Good on ya cali !

[cali]

141. Thanks, ferd

[AikidoSoul]

176. And again...this is a Rovian tactic. Attack the strengths of

those you wish to discredit and defeat.

I do loathe liars. Their souls must be dried up and their hearts made of the assholes of pigs.

[Live and Learn]

27. It was a ridiculous meme to begin with but memes when ignored have ways of killing campaigns, eg.,

Last edited Fri Feb 12, 2016, 09:23 AM - Edit history (1)

Kerry swift-boating, Dean and his 'scream'. We will not let that happen to Bernie!!!!!

[jeff47]

98. No. It will be brought up from now until the convention.

Even if the photographer and every single person in the picture says "That was Sanders".

It will come up again, and again, and again, and again. Because there is a group of people that has to find something to attack with.

[mikehiggins]

99. This photo flap only has significance because it adds to the "throw everything and see if it sticks"

narrative.

So now the guy who took the pictures stipulates it, and lots of others, were actually of Bernie doing what he said he was doing, even if the congressman never met him.

Move along now. Nothing to see here. Oh, and why did those commie, pinko ice cream makers put together a special treat for Bernie? What about the lactose intolerant? How can Bernie be for the people if he coldly (ice cream. Get it?) turns his back on all these poor LI Americans?

And so it goes.

The Establishment is going to pull out all the stops. It has already begun.

Back in 64 the Democratic candidate ran an ad claiming Goldwater wanted to nuke little girls sitting in a meadow.

And the pols actually like Barry as a person, just didn't want the Great Society derailed.

[Divernan]

2. This puts paid to the doubters, spinners and liars.

[mhatrw]

149. The depths of this little episode of ratfuckery are truly unfathomable.

Sally Cook, the retired government lawyer University of Chicago alumni who contacted the University of Chicago archives to get the caption of the photo changed, conceded to Time magazine reporter Sam Frizell that she could not "say for certain the man is not Sanders."

So what made it so important to her that she felt she needed to change the caption in order to identify the individual at a 40+-year-old sit in as some long dead acquaintance rather than as Bernie Sanders?

Who then told Sam Frizell, Time magazine's Clinton pool reporter, about this trifling photo flap? What induced Sam Frizell to devote 1000 words to this complete non-story without making any attempt to contact the original photographer?

What then induced the WaPo's Jonathan Capehart, the live in partner of a rich Clinton campaign staffer, to pick up this complete non-story and spin it into a direct attack of Sanders' integrity without making any attempt to contact the original photographer?

Why did corporate cable news then trot out Capehart on 10 different shows to promulgate this complete non-story?

[cui bono]

157. Holy shit! Did all this info come out today?

I'm just poking around here on a break at work.

If what you said here isn't an OP you should make it so.

Thanks for the info.

.

[truedelphi]

161. This brings to mind the atrocious swift boating of John Kerry.

True to the workings of his brilliant mind, political comic Jon Stewart said to John Kerry, when welcoming Kerry to his show during the Autumn of 2004, "So Mr Senator, Sir, you just never were in Vietnam, were you?"

Which got a huge laugh from not only the audience but Kerry as well.

The task before each and every one of us who is adamantly for Sen Sanders is in seeing that these Big Lies are repudiated. And in seeing that many of the problems with the election system are ironed out, long before the Election Night in November.

We really don't need yet another situation wherein the Establishment Itself announces who won, before the votes are even counted!

[SamKnause]

3. K&R !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[SamKnause]

5. I bet the MSM will not report this.

I know Chris Mathews was discussing this on his show yesterday.

I bet it will not be discussed again and no corrections made.

I am so grateful for social media !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[cali]

7. We'll just have to keep correcting MSM bullshit

[SamKnause]

10. I just watched the clip again.

I don't know the journalist name, but he said IT WAS NOT BERNIE.

He said Bernie supporters were posting the picture and it IS NOT BERNIE.

Chris Mathews made some snide remark as usual agreeing with the guy.

I am so sick of the LIES and INTENTIONAL SMEARS of the ESTABLISHMENT !!!!!!!!!!

Bernie is so damn strong.

I could never be in politics.

[cali]

23. It's also lazy ass journalism.

[SamKnause]

25. They are not journalists.

They are the establishment.

That is why I get my news from independent sources.

[Bangbangdem]

104. But watch....

Maddow will probably address this. She has been really great on the campaign. She's really good with hypocrisy. And this on has it in spades.

[cantbeserious]

16. Thank You For Setting The Record Straight

eom

[cali]

20. Very happy to do it. Thanks for the kick

[ReasonableToo]

19. K n r

[Enthusiast]

21. Kicked and recommended!

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

22. I must have missed this photo kerfuffle.

I've seen the other photo one brought up at least 4 or 5 separate times (not just OPs, but days or weeks apart). There does seem to be a concerted effort to try to scrub Bernie's history, to try to strip him of any involvement in Civil Rights from a certain camp.

[Live and Learn]

33. 'A concerted effort to try to scrub Bernie's history' Exactly and well said. nt

[cui bono]

158. And when they can't do that, they claim none of it matters anyway, it was decades ago!

.

[BeanMusical]

171. Yep, they are pathetic and nauseating.

[KoKo]

61. Chris Matthews (after last night's debate) brought it up and said it wasn't Bernie

in the Photo. He confronted Tad Divine and pretty much accused him of lying about the photo being of Bernie. Tad said that all their information was that it was Bernie but Matthews went off about how the wife of the person in the photo claims it wasn't Bernie. I didn't catch the name of the person it was supposed to be because I tuned out and went to bed.

I didn't know there was a photo problem, either, until last night. So, now it looks like Matthews was putting a lie out there and threw that at Bernie's Campaign Manager to blindside him.

The Dirty Tricks have begun!

[Live and Learn]

31. Great Find. Thank you. K&R nt

[cali]

34. Missing all the du Hillary fans who insisted we were lying when

we posted these pics of Bernie.

Come on in.

[flpoljunkie]

35. Of course, it's Bernie!

[cali]

46. But some in the MSM and hill fans have been saying that it absolutely isn't

Very satisfying to have a world renowned photographer say definitively that it is, and that he should know as he took those photographs.

[Generic Other]

68. I'm surprised they haven't tried to photoshop

Hillary in to the shots.

[Live and Learn]

53. But if you can't prove it is a duck even though it looks, walks and talks like one and has

for many years, it is not a duck.

[Duppers]

38. Also, Cali, did you see this Mother Jones' article?

What Bernie Sanders Really Did During the Civil Rights Movement

http://convio.motherjones.com/site/R?i=30CmVqqNGH0H6xEZiWYdeQ

It backs up Danny Lyon.

[cali]

41. Yes, thank you. It does indeed

[appalachiablue]

102. When you compare the two photos and look first at the hands and wrists

it's clear they're similar and Bernie's, unquestionably. The length of the fingers and thumbs, the shape and angle of the wrists, the hand positions and gestures, combined with long arms, legs and feet, distinctive body stance and build all identify Bernie. Same for characteristics of the head, neck, face, ears and torso that are indisputably Bernie Sanders.

[Duppers]

120. Good observations, my friend.

Plus, there were people there who said it was Bernie. He was very active in Chicago.

[Kensan]

146. Isn't that Bruce in the upper right corner?

The one squatting and striking the "Thinking Man" pose with his fist under his chin?

Based on the series of other photographs released today, Bernie is clearly the person standing in the foreground. The clothing is a dead giveaway...not to mention the photographer himself has confirmed who is in the picture.

I would have thought the catapult would have been worn out after so much use during the Bush the Lesser years, but it appears someone has spent a lot of money refurbishing that ancient device. That propaganda isn't going to just hurl itself.

[Kalidurga]

156. Oh man I was going on ears alone.

Seriously I took side by side pictures and compared ears. I didn't care enough to post my findings though.

But, here are the images I was looking at and I thought that is clearly not Bruce in the disputed picture.

[denbot]

40. K&R

More Hillary ratfucking exposed.

[myrna minx]

47. It's just an attempt to swift boat of Sanders' civil rights record and it's disgusting.

Thanks for posting.

[cali]

52. Exactly so.

[cali]

48. Go ahead Hillary fans, call Lyon a liar. I double dog dare you

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Lyon

[Bohunk68]

50. Thanks for posting. Giving a K & R.

Just saw a post from Jonathan Capehart of the conservative WaPo repeating that the pic was of someone else.

[Doctor_J]

49. I'm sorry that John Lewis got involved in this debacle. he's an American hero who is above

This sort of thing. It's also not going to change any votes. His endorsement would have meant a lot to Hillary without the smear

[Gene Debs]

103. Evidence would seem to indicate that he is not, in fact, "above this sort of thing." Funny how, when

the Clinton machine goes into full desperation mode and starts throwing shit, people too close to it seem to end up with shit on them.

[bravenak]

54. I think this should be the focus until May

[cali]

57. I think you don't give a damn how much hilly lies.

[bravenak]

58. They all lie. I'm just observant enough to realize it.

[Iggy Knorr]

65. May the Best Liar Win!

[cali]

69. Some are far more dishonest than others. Your powers of observation

don't encompass that obvious point. Hill is over the top dishonest. Bernie is not.

[bravenak]

74. And some speak to everybody but us with respect and thats my thing

They are going to lie, at least have some respect for my demographic is all I ask. Sensitivity and attention to our needs separate from others. Only 2 candidates were doing that but Omalley dropped out. Only hillary left, and she has respect for our president which shows she understands us and listens. She knows we hate people disrespecting obama and she knows how racism affects our abilities to get a fair share. Only she digs into that.

[cali]

78. Okay

Not getting pulled into this with you

[Kittycat]

145. +1

[AtheistCrusader]

105. History says otherwise.

Despite repeated and concerted efforts to scrub Bernie's contributions from the civil rights era.

'Showing respect' includes not lying about someone.

[bravenak]

106. Scrub?

Maybe they just question folks who were not visible or there for a long time. We fought for yesrs before him and years after so peopke get irritated at the idea that he is one of OUR heroes.

[AtheistCrusader]

108. Yes, scrub.

He was there. He tried. He contributed.

If that's not important to you in today's context, ok, no quibble with you over that. But for the MSM/Hillary supporters to just outright try and erase it, make it 'someone else', that's fucked up.

[bravenak]

109. But do we have to make admiration over him?

No. Do we have to be all excited? No. Was his contribution bigger than say John Lewis? No.

[tkmorris]

114. No one said anyone had to be excited

But it isn't asking too much that people not LIE about it. I really don't know why you find the act of trying to deliberately deceive people acceptable behavior.

[bravenak]

116. Whats a lie? That picture?

This is such a small battle to waste energy on.

[AtheistCrusader]

126. The lie is the attempt to deny Bernie Sanders part of his own history and legacy.

To erase him.

[bravenak]

127. Well. I guess he understand now why

Leaving things out hurts.

[AtheistCrusader]

129. We all have to own the consequences of our actions.

Recent actions in Bernie's campaign didn't appeal to you. Hillary's have. I get that. Totally fair. I don't begrudge you that.

I only spoke up because some are attempting to erase his past to bolster a recent viewpoint. I'm not ok with that. If it had been the other way around, I'd have spoken up for Hillary too.

[bravenak]

131. I felt it when he discussed the sanitation strikers.

Sanitized the race from the equation. It hurt.
I get this now but damn. It's almost too much watching people ignore the push for black votes to fight about this. It's almost like this was the intention.

[AtheistCrusader]

134. I do know it's getting added to a whole lot of confirmation biases for people on all sides

and that's not helpful, for sure.


'Grrr, you guys are trying to diminish my candidate's record!'
'Grrr, you guys are trying to overstate your candidate's record!'

I agree it's not productive, when subjects like race still aren't getting much material attention.

[bravenak]

136. Thank you, this is so true.

[AtheistCrusader]

115. All true, and I agree.

I can't tell you how to feel about him, or what he did or didn't do in the past. That's not for me.


I take issue with your claim that Hillary is the only candidate that "Only she digs into that.". Sanders has been critical of the president over issues like his hopes that he could sit down and work out a deal with republicans. That's not disrespect. And he flipped his shit in September when Trump called the President a foreigner. So it's not like he's disrespected the president directly, or sat back and passively watched others do it when he had a voice to say something about it. He's done it over his career. Public record. When so many other white people did nothing, he stepped up and tried to do something. At the same era when Hillary was working for Barry Goldwater, who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. (I don't hold that against her directly, we all change over time, and she was looking for political/legal relevant employment at the time. But it DOES speak to her RECORD in comparison to Bernie.)

You like Hillary, fine. You prefer her contributions to issues that are important to you, over Sanders, your right. I don't question it. But when you make claims like that, others will comment on what they see as true or not true from different vantage points than your own, and with data points you may or may not have considered or dismissed.

[radical noodle]

172. In 1964 Hillary was in high school

She was not looking for political/legal relevant employment at the time. She was a kid in high school with Republican parents.

[AtheistCrusader]

177. You should read her autobiography. "Living History"

"I was an active Young Republican, and, later, a Goldwater girl, right down to my cowgirl outfit and straw cowboy hat emblazoned with the slogan "AuH2O.""

Yes, kids do what their parents want for a variety of reasons. And she was too young to vote.

""By the time I was a college junior, I had gone from being a Goldwater Girl to supporting the [1968] anti-war campaign of Eugene McCarthy.""

It's a stark contrast considering, as Bernie was doing his thing for civil rights, and Hillary was stumping for Goldwater. He wanted to overturn title 2 of the 1964 CRA, removing it's teeth.

Victim of family circumstance? Sure. Still a material contrast.

[radical noodle]

178. I did read her biography

Sanders was six years older when he was doing his thing for civil rights in 1964. This is a silly argument since it really has nothing to do with what they've done since. My point was that high school kids do a lot of things that they wouldn't consider when they're mature. I know I did, and I'm willing to bet most people here did as well.

[AtheistCrusader]

179. I did as well.

Still a material contrast, and trying to dismiss and erase Sander's history from that timeperiod is unappreciated.

Not saying you're doing it, but some people here are. And Times and WaPo just got in on it too.

[rhett o rick]

153. Ah yes, rationalization is the key to happiness. Correct? nm

[Admiral Loinpresser]

168. I'm interested to know when Bernie lied. n/t

[Iggy Knorr]

55. Inartful Ratfuckers

[AzDar]

59. THIS. Is what Bernie is up against. A once-venerable news-magazine attempting to LIE about him.

And then you must ask yourself: WHY?

[cali]

63. Not just Time. Yesterday Jonathan Capehart

wrote a piece saying these pics weren't of Bernie.

[TTUBatfan2008]

80. Does Capehart have Twitter?

I think this needs to be pointed out to him. Provide the evidence directly to him on Twitter.

[cali]

110. Yes

https://mobile.twitter.com/capehartj

[dreamnightwind]

113. Yes, Capehart has been all over TV saying it isn't Bernie

and that, according to Capehart, we need to quit using that picture. Either he or the host (I am pretty sure it was Capehart) also extended the argument to say that it showed Bernie's authenticity was what it was presented to be.

And that is the real goal here, to chip away at the thing that most separates Bernie from Hillary in the minds of the voters, authenticiity. It's why we have to actively push back on this effort and not let them succeed in tarnishing this good man's (Bernie's) reputation.

[FailureToCommunicate]

62. What a find! To have the actual photographer verify the authenticity, then ADD that it was the first

or at least one of the first civil rights sit-in in the North, is great!

Little things like this discussion in the press (over the authenticity of Bernie's involvement) certainly must help in the long run, no?

Or, does the initial lie 'race around the globe while the truth is still tie-ing it's shoes' ?

Thanks for posting cali

[cali]

70. Please contact the Post, Time and Chris Matthews

demanding retractions

[in_cog_ni_to]

71. Are these the pictures Tweety was whining about on his show?

If so, he owes Bernie an apology.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[cali]

73. Yes. And Capehart and the WaPo and and and

I'd bet anything it's a hilly lie from brock and the hilly men

[in_cog_ni_to]

77. Okay. Thanks! I'm going to go enlighten Matthews again.

No doubt this is Brock/Clinton sleazy campaign at work!

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[nyabingi]

72. Looks like Bernie to me (nt)

[cali]

75. It doesn't matter who it looks like.

The photographer has spoken

[valerief]

79. But now Time will have to call the photographer a liar.

[KoKo]

123. Just so you know Andrea Mitchell just had Capehart on her Noon show

and he went into a long discourse over the picture first appearing in Time Magazine, with Bernie in the photo caption, and then "Time" said that they had gotten it fro U of C. He then said that U of C alumni started calling and writing that it was Bruce Rappaport and not Bernie. The widow of Rappaport then contacted Capehart (or Capehart contacted her) and he talked to her and has a transcript that he hasn't transcribed it into print yet.

THEN he added that the photographer has contacted him and says that he is convinced that the photo is of Bernie and not Rappaport. Andrea concluded the interview with something like "....and, so the story continues."

Hopefully the photographer will be contacted by media so he can give his version rather than relying solely on than Bruce Rappaport's widow. And, that Chris Matthews and others will have to retract, unless it becomes a "he said...she said." Anyway, Bernie knows he was there and that's what is important, here. It sure looks like a young Bernie to me and others.

[valerief]

76. Proof schmoof. You're ruining the narrative!

[cali]

81. And I intend to keep removing those turds.

[retrowire]

82. retractions need to be demanded on all fronts nt

[cali]

87. Yep. Pretty vile swiftboating

[WillyT]

83. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[TTUBatfan2008]

84. Worse than the Kerry Swift Boat

Supposed liberal reporters like Capehart just did a hit job on Sanders. Sad to see.

[cali]

86. There's a reason capehart keeps lying about Bernie

Capitol File Magazine

Look Inside Jonathan Capehart and Nick Schmit's Home
By Elizabeth Thorp | November 16, 2015 | Home & Real Estate

Five years ago, while Nick Schmit, the deputy chief of protocol at the US State Department, was traveling in Japan for work, he got a message from a friend suggesting he meet Pulitzer Prize–winning reporter and MSNBC contributor Jonathan Capehart. They were both single at the time, and the friend thought they would have a lot in common. She was right! As Schmit and Capehart prepare to celebrate their fifth anniversary in November, this lively duo agreed to let Capitol File take a peek into their home to learn more about their happy, busy lives.

snip

http://capitolfile-magazine.com/inside-jonathan-capehart-and-nick-schmits-house

[SoapBox]

112. Oh......

I never knew...I have really bad radar.

Guess he's blinded by living the inside the beltway bubble.

[dreamnightwind]

117. Wow, that is interesting

His partner is deputy chief of protocol at State, a Hillary connection.

[cali]

118. Actually, he is now a paid staffer in her campaign

[dreamnightwind]

119. Damn, that does indeed put some context into Capehart's sliming - eom

[mhatrw]

138. "Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?" nt

[Eleanors38]

155. Time's B.S. repeated on NPR this morning.

[MisterP]

160. Capehart, eh?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026374636

[JRLeft]

88. NT

[jillan]

90. Can you believe that Chris Matthews and Jonathan Capeheart went there on the air????

Tad Devine was there and Tweety was ripping Tad a new one.

I'm sorry, it's time to reign in tweety. He has gone of the edge.

[cali]

92. Oh.yes, I can believe that hillshills have no problem brazenly lying

[Zorra]

91. The constant flow of cheesy, transparent lies, smears, and dirty tricks coming from the

Hillary camp is dark and ugly like the 8 years of Bush was dark and ugly.

[Geronimoe]

93. Lewis supported Hillary against Obama too

I was disappointed in him in 2007, especially given Bill/Hillary policies in the 90;s that destroyed Black lives and caued the 2008 great recession.

[cali]

94. He finally switched to Obama after his district voted for him 3-1

[jeff47]

100. And note it took his district's vote to make him switch.

Not the dogwhistles, not the outright racism of Ferraro, not the "carry our bags" crap, not the darkening of Obama's picture on a Clinton mailer, not the "African clothing" photo....

It is disappointing when the mighty turn out to be human like the rest of us.

[frylock]

125. Dragged kicking and screaming.

[Arazi]

95. Come on Hillary supporters, where are you?

Thanks for this cali

[cali]

111. Thanks for the kick

[zentrum]

96. Actually it's clear

…..to me that it is Bernie.

[eppur_se_muova]

97. I have seldom seen two photos of the same individual, taken so many years apart, and yet ...

so clearly identifiable as the same individual. Bernie's profile stands out as the same one we're seeing in 2016. Even the glasses don't look much different.

[cali]

101. I agree. But I figured that is because I've been familiar

with him for 40 years.

[AtheistCrusader]

107. He's the real McCoy, and that scares the shit out of some people.

[berni_mccoy]

139. Actually, I'M the real Berni McCoy.

But I love Bernie Sanders!

[renate]

169. That's too awesome to go unapplauded

[Jefferson23]

122. Good, it is settled and e-mailed to spread around..thanks.

After last night it is way too soon imo to speculate what happens with the nomination
never mind November.

The DNC fucked themselves banking on her and they should be careful how
millennials perceive their political antics/advocacy for Clinton going forward,
very careful.

[cali]

130. Thank you.

[99th_Monkey]

124. KnR nt

[TIME TO PANIC]

137. K & R!

[raging moderate]

142. That is OBVIOUSLY Bernie Sanders in that photo!

If you have ever watched someone go from young to old, you get used to how the changes occur. Bernie's hair today shows the usual effect of aging on the curly dark hair of the guy sitting on the right. The other guy has the lighter wavy brownette hair which is typical of hair in my family. When we are old, our hair hangs in stringy hanks. Bernie's hair type turns into the electrified fringe we see on Bernie's head today. Not to mention the cast of the mouth and the knitting of the eyebrows in the guy on the right. Seeing the other photos of Bernie sitting only made me more certain that the speaker standing in the hallway was Bernie Sanders!

[Duppers]

147. Another K & R

[DirkGently]

148. How did Time and WaPo both decide this photo was so important

... and both get it so wrong at exactly the same time?

I agree with everyone saying it's small potatoes, except Capehart was all over major national news media talking it up last night (along with his rather bizarre "Sanders doesn't talk about being Jewish enough" beat).

Oppo memo from someone? Someone in the campaign?

The story here is not the bogus, small-fry smear. It's the nature and the source of the smear that bears discussion.

This is not the way people with any kind of integrity do their politics.

[Eleanors38]

154. Same reason for the anti-Gary Webb editorials in NYT, WaPo, LA Times ON SAME DAY...

They were told in no uncertain terms that this had gone to far.

Bad journalistic art? Yes, but good enough for gubmint work, as long as it's fast-moving stink.

[Eleanors38]

152. Time mag's claim repeated this A.M. on NPR.

Must be the new social media: Christ makes his second coming; claim questioned by secret video activists at noon; subject of late night comedy at 11. That's all, folks!

[EndElectoral]

159. Rovian politics...why would the photographer lie?

[EndElectoral]

162. Has Time and WaPo apologized yet?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

175. I think they should apologize

[MadDAsHell]

164. Electing a President whose genetilia "make history"...

is far more important than telling the truth.

[Jack Rabbit]

165. I thought this was debanked months ago

Shame on Time Magazine. Shame on the MSM. Shame all who support the establishment's war on democracy.

[Land Shark]

166. Important story

[mikehiggins]

167. I was overjoyed when Tweetie admitted the whole thing was a lie. Oh, wait. That didn't happen?

Well at least the guy on CNN gave Bernie's guy the chance to point out what a crock the whole thing was. That was nice.

[BeanMusical]

173. Kick and R