2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forummerrily
(45,251 posts)tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)He seems to what he wants
merrily
(45,251 posts)If you look at who Sanders does put out there, Cornell does not fit the mold. I could be wrong.
I just think we should know something before we attribute it to Sanders.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)Probably not. But he has asked him to do introductions at campaign rallies and appearances at other events.
merrily
(45,251 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)Don't look at me, I don't make the rules!
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)elleng
(131,006 posts)Hope it works. I can't stand West, but he can 'talk.'
Armstead
(47,803 posts)I like much of what he says (though his anti-Obama stuff is a bit much) but his unctuousness rubs my fur the wrong way
bettyellen
(47,209 posts):jawdrop:
cui bono
(19,926 posts):werewolf:
.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)I type with my nose
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)it actually makes sense, (and I had that explained to me by a few local African American University students). It is in the intellectual tradition of Dubois, and has to do with the clash and deep conflict between the outside game, and the inside game, otherwise known as respectability politics.
When he does it, he is really not addressing us, a latina and non community member and you, but the African American community. The reaction you see from African Americans is real. Some people fall in one group, the others in the other, and there has really not been any middle ground since 1910.
He is also within the prophetic tradition. I hope that helps to at least put it in context.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)West's "anti-Obama" talk is for the barbershop and the beauty salon outside of hearing distance from white folks.
Especially when it comes to an elected official and especially when it comes to the first black president.
We apply a different (and higher) standard to talk about Obama than we do of Booker T. Washington, Marcus Garvey, and A. Philip Randolph (all of whom were highly criticized by Dr. DuBois...and with the exception of Booker T., those criticisms could only be read in African American journals and newspapers)
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)where we latinas, and the whites down the hall, could gasp. READ THEM. And by the way, those are read these days by gasp I know, WHITE PEOPLE TOO. IN case you don't know this most of the African American press these days is on the web. I read my local paper regularly, Though every so often I do actually buy an actual copy at the news stand. I know the editor. So I like to support him that way. And yes, we do have a few of those left in town. As rare critters as they are... and news paper machines too.
So instead of going to Democracy Now, they did in the paper.
It was a different era, that is all. So you know I am a fan of both Booker T Washington and Dubois. I find the discussion so prescient to the preset and the present arguments. They were just far more refined in their use of language. but it was the same exact discussion.
By the way, the argument you are making could be made about the Jewish community. So I am familiar about those inside the walls, outside the walls arguments. Most of the intramural arguments are still intramural and you know it. The same goes for the Jewish community, but as far as gasp books, they are not just limited to... gasp Jews... or African Americans, depending on which community we are talking about here.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)were first published in magazines, mainly the NAACP publication "The Crisis" and in other African American newspapers and news sources that the overwhelming number of white people did not read (with the exception of a few socialists).
One of the few exception to that was Dr. Dubois criticism of Booker T. which was first published in the Atlantic (his former college professor, William James, may have lent Dr. DuBois a hand there) and eventually collected in The Souls of Black Folk.
I don't think that many or even most white people even read African American news, analysis, and what not on the web because if they did, they wouldn't talk about African Americans and what and hw we think the way they do.
For West to carry those specific criticisms of President Obama in the language that he used all over CNN and even Fox News does not sit right with black folks, and you know THAT.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)becuase I see there is no point in continuing with this.
Uncle Joe
(58,372 posts)Thanks for the thread, HerbChestnut.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)nc4bo
(17,651 posts)How trollish.
SSDD. Keep fighting back against the deceptive Hill-memes!
Sanders has a messages all Americans need to hear. We must all stand together!
brooklynite
(94,624 posts)HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)brooklynite
(94,624 posts)But it's pretty clear that Cornel West isn't resonating with those who are. Welcome to the real world.
nb - If you think I'm wrong, my opinion shouldn't matter, right?
Response to brooklynite (Reply #14)
Name removed Message auto-removed
brooklynite
(94,624 posts)As for something "new", I posted my predictions for Super Tuesday. Feel free to post yours.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)and why should I or anyone else?
Except of course in the belief that it affects how people will think and might vote. Or helps your argument on DU. Or wins you a bet of sorts if you happen to be right. Whatever.
Since obvioiusly all these predictions are retail and pretty worthless otherwise. March madness brackets.
The days of the actual votes are coming soon enough, and then the next vote, and then the next. Phone banking, canvassing, contributing cash or working those parts of the Internet that are not as decided as this one all seem like better activities. I'm even recommending them to you, not just to me.
brooklynite
(94,624 posts)I change minds in the real world; not on an anonymous blog site.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)I hope tomorrow brings you happiness.
noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)So much for your theory.
brooklynite
(94,624 posts)...but I'm thinking about the overall pool of AA voters in the Southern States, with whom he seems to have little influence.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)and most were not, unlike that person you are talking to, white latte drinking intellectuals, Many, (in fact most the audience) were African Americans.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Downwinder
(12,869 posts)we are doomed.
artislife
(9,497 posts)loyalsister
(13,390 posts)Isn't that sort of an oxymoron? Like most people, Bakari Sellers is out of his league debating CW.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)For months we've been hearing it from the Clinton camp that Bernie doesn't have any specific plans. Yet if you listen to Clinton's speeches and answers to questions she is vague on *everything*. Even when she talks about foreign policy she's very good at listing off facts and names but she doesn't actually say anything. Matter of fact, right now on msnbc.com at #7 in their headline list is this gem: 'Clinton: Sanders doesn't have a plan'
You can't make this stuff up.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)It's a discussion on mass incarceration and racial justice and which candidate is more credible on the issue.
azmom
(5,208 posts)Gregorian
(23,867 posts)There seems to be a disconnect. It's almost as if he can't see the facts. I'm trying to understand this because it happens to all of us.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)He's just parroting the Clinton campaign's talking points. You can tell he knows that West made a good point by the way he just falls back onto memorized responses.
senz
(11,945 posts)BostonBob
(18 posts)Just like her repeated assertion about having some super ability to get things done, Clinton uses the "one issue" repeated assertion to push another bogus meme. Hillary is the candidate of corrupt special interests - that's her one issue.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)seems to happen lately...
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Or John Lewis, who voted No. Ron Dellums, no. Bobby Scott, No. Earl Hilliard. Charlie Rangle, no....64 Democrats voted No, 10 of them from the Black Caucus.
Another interesting point is that I have covered all of this a few times on DU recently because a month or so ago the Crime Bill was being blamed on Bernie Sanders 'Bernie's Bill for Mass Incarceration'. Here is an example of how Team Hillary had been presenting this Bill in December :
"Bernie pie in the sky about mass incarceration?
So we know that Sanders voted for mass incarceration while in congress. But now he says he will fix it. However, the promise he made apparently cannot be fulfilled unless he wants hundreds of thousands of violent criminals convicted of rape, murder, etc on the streets."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251885143
All along I have been attacked for presenting the facts while Hillary supporters rage and misrepresent....
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)will just continue to lie (along with their corporate media buddies).
ReallyIAmAnOptimist
(357 posts)The video is on YouTube of him railing against it, so it's clear he wasn't for it in any way.
Was it slipped into an omnibus vote like the commodities & futures modernization act was?
In fact if you watch the video Bernie predicted exactly what has happened because of it.
Dr. West is a character, but I in my opinion he has always spoke the truth, without regard of who doesn't want to hear it or face it.
I hope people start to listen.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)Someone else might be able to explain it in more detail, but the crime bill was jammed together with several other bills, including one that had an assault weapons ban and one that tried to deal with domestic violence against women (or something close to that). So it's one of those deals where if Bernie votes 'no' then he gets attacked for not supporting gun control and women. He votes 'yes' then he gets attacked for supporting the crime bill. It's a crazy world we live in.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)and I gotta say it SLACKERS, that was only three major rewrites, the ACA was at least 10
senz
(11,945 posts)http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-criminal-justice/
ReallyIAmAnOptimist
(357 posts)A couple comments below filled in the details which you alluded to.
The sleazy way laws are sometimes (often?) passed in this country is a joke. Depressing.
We need to scream far and wide that Bernie wasn't for/was never for the 'Crime Act', but was for the Violence Against Women Act. And (in our male dominated Congress) the only way to get the later was to tag it onto the former.
Anyway, today I'm focusing my time on GOTV it's time for the rubber to meet the road!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)The fact that I had to write that (after an exchange on social media) with a college educated person was gobsmacking on it's own.
So we scored the claims and explained the claims.
senz
(11,945 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)so we did.
senz
(11,945 posts)ReallyIAmAnOptimist
(357 posts)Thanks for the link (and all your posts, which I've been following).
The sleazy way laws are sometimes (often?) passed in this country is a joke. Depressing.
We need to scream far and wide that Bernie wasn't for/was never for the 'Crime Act', but was for the Violence Against Women Act. And (in our male dominated Congress) the only way to get the later was to tag it onto the former.
Anyway, today I'm focusing my time on GOTV it's time for the rubber to meet the road!
BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)Down the page on Bernie's website at the link below is an explanation on Bernie's vote for the 1994. There were provisions of the bill that he argued against (you have apparently seen the YouTube video), but the bill also included the Violence Against Women Act and funding for it that he was strongly in favor of. So he had to weigh the pros and cons of what was in a major bill that had been put together to get enough votes to pass. That's the way I read it. I'm sure others know more.
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-criminal-justice/
It is easy to label these long ago votes in a misleading way. I see that Bernie has been consistent over the years in terms of what he is for and against, and I know he has not been bought by special interests or abandoned his principles, so I am giving him the benefit of the doubt in terms of weighing the pros and cons of all or nothing bills like this.
ReallyIAmAnOptimist
(357 posts)Thanks for the great link, I read most of it and watched a couple of the videos that I hadn't previously seen.
The sleazy way laws are sometimes (often?) passed in this country is a joke. Depressing.
We need to scream far and wide that Bernie wasn't for/was never for the 'Crime Act', but was for the Violence Against Women Act. And (in our male dominated Congress) the only way to get the later was to tag it onto the former.
Anyway, today I'm focusing my time on GOTV it's time for the rubber to meet the road!
bobbobbins01
(1,681 posts)Thank you for posting this.
senz
(11,945 posts)It reminded me of Hillary's condescending grins at the audience while Bernie was talking during the first two debates. When Sellers started dishonestly pounding on Bernie for Bernie's reluctant yet necessary vote for Bill Clinton's '94 Crime Bill, I knew Sellers was just as compromised and expedient as the candidate he supports.
And I have no problem with Cornel West, who has been thrown under the bus on DU ever since he endorsed Bernie. You don't have to be smooth and slick to be honorable, intelligent and honest.
I'll take the rough, real person over the slick shyster anytime.
BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)Like "one issue" Bernie, I can't take anything else they say seriously. I have to assume they're just spinning. What is this "one issue" supposed to be? Single payer health care, raising the minimum wage, tuition free in state universities, reducing the incarceration rate, overturning Citizens United, or one of the other major issues he talks about every day?
ReallyIAmAnOptimist
(357 posts)This is the audio of Bernie railing against the crime bill, but an amazing video to go with it.
senz
(11,945 posts)So many reasons to support this most excellent candidate.
Chicago1980
(1,968 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)One could do far, far worse.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)I think a lot of people.get used to the thin air up there and forget how hard it is to catch your breath sometimes down here at ground level
noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)Or you work to enrich yourself. MLK was a black elite.
tokenlib
(4,186 posts)BigBearJohn
(11,410 posts)Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)Man can turn a phrase. I like him a lot!
He made mincemeat of Mr. Slick. That zinger--and the private prison industry donations to Clinton. Yeah, she's going to undo mass incarceration. Ha-ha-ha!
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)I think Cornel West is up there as one of the last people on earth I'd want to go one on one with in an intellectual debate. He has an incredibly ability to transition almost instantly in a debate and deliver incisive blows. The fact that he can weave in such memorable and powerful lines as well is just the icing on the cake. If he has one flaw, I think it's just that sometimes he gets caught up in the moment and runs on too long when it'd be better to stop and put the emphasis on the opponent, but he's still an incredible debater.
It blows me away when people talk about how he harms the Sanders campaign. He's a lifelong advocate for racial and social justice and equality and I'm extremely glad to have him in our corner.