A Question Hillary is Going to be Asked since her Campaign raised it in the First Place:

[sabrina 1]

Maybe before you start slamming Civil Rights activists with demeaning comments like 'who cares what he did 50 years ago' you should consider the fact that maybe a LOT OF PEOPLE care and they might then want to know what YOU were doing at that same time.

I know that was the first question that occurred to me when I saw people dismissing the Civil Rights Movement: 'Hillary was there back then too, what was she doing'?

People For Bernie ?@People4Bernie 15h15 hours ago
ReTweet @LILBTHEBASEDGOD seen here taking a 👊👊👊#FeelTheBern👊👊👊 stance. We love this human!

And yet another popular AA rapper, author, composer with over one million followers #FeelingTheBern!

I don't know, what I read here at DU sometimes seems like we are on another planet here.

Meantime, the world out there is just moving along, oblivious to all the 'concerns' here.

[Zorra]

1. Recommend. nt

[BlueStateLib]

2. :)

In 1970, Hillary Clinton secured a grant and first went to work for the Children's Defense Fund. The following summer, she first came to Washington, D.C. working on Senator Walter Mondale's (Minnesota Democrat) subcommittee on migrant workers, researching migrant problems in housing, sanitation, health and education. In the summer of 1972, she worked in the western states for the Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern's campaign. During her second year in law school, Hillary Clinton volunteered at Yale's Child Study Center, learning about new research on early childhood brain development, as well as New Haven Hospital, where she took on cases of child abuse and the city Legal Services, providing free legal service to the poor. Upon graduation from law school, she served as staff attorney for the Children’s Defense Fund in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

[peacebird]

28. This is a tad earlier

The daughter of a Republican father and a Democratic mother, in 1960 13-year-old Hillary Rodham canvassed for Richard Nixon on Chicago's South Side. She also worked as a "Goldwater girl" in the 1964 presidential election — cowgirl outfit and all — and was elected president of the Wellesley Young Republicans as a freshman the following year. "I'm a heart liberal, but a mind conservative," she wrote to a high school friend during college. By graduation, the young leader had decided to follow her heart, stepping down from her GOP post because of her views on civil rights and the Vietnam War and throwing her support behind Eugene McCarthy for President. In 1972, she campaigned for unsuccessful presidential hopeful George McGovern — with the help of her new boyfriend, Bill Clinton.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

3. I'm sorry. I don't think it is helpful to bash Hillary from the Bernie group.

The fact that the Hillary group bashes Bernie just shows how nervous we are making them. We should let her run her campaign and let Bernie run his. We don't need to stoop to their level we just need to keep getting Bernie's message out. History will be made and we don't have to go negative to make it.

[JEB]

4. Correcting the record or framing is not bashing. eom

[zeemike]

9. And if you don't correct the framing it will stand as the truth.

No it is not bashing...the truth is never bashing.

[sabrina 1]

5. I do not think that addressing an ISSUE that I believe is very important, that is being addressed

over and over again and mischaracterized wrt to our candidate, is bashing. It is making a correction, the Civil Rights Movement and everyone who participated in it, was extremely important and still is. I do not and never have 'bashed' Hillary personally, this group is for Bernie Supporters to be free to express themselves in support of their candidate, and that is what I am doing here. I am supporting him and correcting the bashing he has been subjected to so that people do not get the wrong impression.

If everyone else thinks this bashing, I will move it to the Primary forum.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

6. You don't need to move it. Just a difference of perception.

[sabrina 1]

19. No you had a point which I didn't see at first, just glad to see that the

impression being created isn't true at all which is good news, this is another person in a growing number or AA musicians and prominent people who are endorsing Bernie so it seemed that Bernie's supporters would appreciate knowing how he is clearly reaching minorities, lots of minority groups forming for him also.

Anyhow, thanks, I appreciated the comment, it helps to remember what we want this forum to be. And moving it would have been no problem at all.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

24. No problem. You say tomato, I say tomahto

but I really appreciate that we can discuss this in a civil manner. Not enough of that going on these days.

[sabrina 1]

25. Lol, made me think of Dan Quale who in a way was unfairly treated for adding that 'e' imo.

Anyhow, yes, things can be discussed civilly and it's much better when they are.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

29. Actually, I was thinking the same thing when I posted.

[daleanime]

18. No need....

indeed.

[YOHABLO]

8. This is the reason Bernie is running as a Dem. and not an Independent.

[pandr32]

26. Hillary Clinton was in high school...

She was 17 when she graduated in '65. How involved do you think she should have been? Bernie is 6 years older than her...a huge difference at that particular time in history.

[aspirant]

7. Truth,

setting the record straight is definitely helping elect Bernie

[Moonwalk]

15. Getting Bernie "elected" in the Primary is not the same as getting him elected President....

Imagine: Bernie gets the primary. Hooray. He's the democratic candidate. But for nearly a year you've been "setting the record straight" on Hilary. Saying not-nice things about her. Saying not-nice things about her supporters. So. Now it's time to get Bernie elected. All the Bernie folk are fired up and ready to work 24/7 to do it. Wouldn't it be nice if the Hilary people were on board helping you do that?

After all these months of you telling them, repeatedly, that they need to be straightened out...why should they? Have you given them a reason to help get Bernie elected? To work as tirelessly for him as they did for Hilary?

If Bernie is best for the job, setting HIS record straight and making the differences obvious in emphasizing his positives will do that. There is no reason to undermine Hilary—and there is most especially no reason for some of the posts I'm seeing here like "shame on Hilary" and "Hilary needs to answer this," and "I'll cut off my hands before voting for Hilary," and "How could any liberal vote for Hilary," etc. as if Bernie's a saint and she's a devil. When you phrase things that way, you're not "setting the record straight" and you know it. Or would you tell a friend, "I'd don't know how a fat cow like you can wear something like that!" rather than, "I don't think that dress flatters your curves?" Both are setting the record straight, but one is mean-spirited and going to lose you that friend.

If you show respect for Hilary and her supporters (and, yes, her supporters must do as much for Bernie and his supporters in turn), then if he gets the nomination, you will have all that many more working to get him elected. Isn't that worth playing nice and polite rather than being mean spirited? "Setting the record straight" should never be used as an excuse to spit venom—and spitting venom, even in the name of truth, is short-sighted at best.

[sabrina 1]

20. Could you go to the Hillary forum and tell them this? Personally I talk only about issues

wrt Hillary. Do not post anything other than material that is documented. That has not stopped her supporters from attacking me personally, or any other Bernie supporter. Records DO need to be corrected, I'm sure Hillary's supporters will make sure to correct any inaccurate information that is posted about her.

Frankly I believe that many who are supporting Hillary will support whoever the nominee is, but there are some who will not, and no amount of being nice to them is going to change that.


In this forum when people are being led to believe false impressions created about their candidate, we are free to let them know the good news, that most of it is simply political tactics, when that turns out to be the case.

[aspirant]

30. Does the word PUMA come to mind?

Do the words "loyalty oath" ring a bell?

Go post in the HRC room and convince them of "nice and polite"

[artislife]

31. pumas

Those women in the feminist sites I went to really knew how to scorch the earth. Very big reason I am weary of a H supporters in general. The things they threatened to do. Made me convinced they were one issue only.

[Moonwalk]

33. Are we back to two wrongs make a right?

You boast about how much better Bernie is than Hilary. Well, prove how much better his supporters are than Hilary's by being as civil about them and their candidate as he is--in spite of what they say or Hilary says. Or are you saying it's right for you to do wrong against the other side because they're doing wrong against you?

As for me telling them to shape up--certainly I will. When Hilary posts appear on the home page. I don't know if you've noticed, but Bernie threads dominate the home page, including those that bash Hilary. You may see yourselves as underdogs, but HERE on the DU, you're the biggest kids on the playground. Hilary posts don't make it to the home page to be seen by any and all who pass through. If/when Hilary posts dominate, then Hilary supporters will be the big kids and I'll most certainly tell them to play nice. Because I want Bernie supporters to help Hilary win if she gets the candidacy. In point of fact, I want all democrats to help our chosen candidate to win whoever it is--Biden, Bernie, Hilary.

Because whatever their faults and imperfections, I think they all could be good presidents. And keep us from digging ourselves deeper into the pit the GOP dropped us into nearly 15 years ago. Isn't that what we all want in the end? And isn't that goal more important than one upmanship now?

As for "PUMA" or Loyalty oaths...no they don't ring a bell. Are you using name calling to dismiss me? That's a nasty tactic. Remember when the GOP tried to shut up Obama supporters by calling them Kool-aid drinkers and fans? I thought you were all about setting there record straight. Well, I'm being straight with you. As I'll be with Hilary supporters if I ever see a single thread about Hilary, like this one, on the home page. You Bernie supporters have the floor and you're dominating it. Won't you use that opportunity to show your (and Bernie's) best side? The decent, courteous side? Because if he does become president, he's going to have to be president of everyone. Not just his supporters.

[Autumn]

32. That sounds like a perfect post for GDP, the HRC group or elsewhere

but not here.

[JDPriestly]

10. This is actually a media problem. The media does not highlight the candidates'

records on civil rights and Black Lives Matter issues.

Imagine what that would do to the prospects of Republicans in terms of attracting minority votes? The media can't allow that to happen.

But now we have the internet, and as long as we can maintain net neutrality (and I understand that issue is being jeopardized in Congress once again), we can find out what the media refuses to focus on.

So it is good to ask all candidates to tell us what they did during the 1960s and 1970s on human rights issues -- and what they have been doing in recent decades too. All of them. Republicans too.

[sabrina 1]

21. It' being threatened by the TPP.

[Jeb Bartlet]

11. In 1965

Hillary was 19 and just in college, Bernie was 24 and protesting. In what world is it legitimate to point fingers at Clinton for not protesting civil rights when she was a kid?

Good on Bernie for being on the right side of history but trying to make some slight on Clinton is just stupid.

[840high]

14. 19 is not a kid. I was at

Hunter College and protesting.

[Moonwalk]

34. So...everyone during the same year has to have been fighting the same good fight (if they were old enough)..

...or they're disqualified?

Does that mean we should tell all former republicans who come here, saying they realize the GOP is stupid and they're now democrats, that we can't take them? That they're disqualified for not having realized this earlier? I'm sorry, but all this one-upsmanship seems really silly to me. Just because one person saw the "light" at 19 and another did not doesn't mean that the other person never saw it or should be doubted in their sincerity whenever they embraced it.

I'm sure there were marchers in the civil rights movement who were in the 30's, 40's, and 50's who never thought about it till then. Would we say they were less sincere than Bernie because they came late? Even if they put their lives, reputations and good names on they line?

Some of us come to the "right fight" quick. Some at a slightly slower pace. And some come very late. But none of that matters so long as they genuinely embrace it when they do come to it. If you don't believe that, then you might as well shut your doors to all those who've lately been saying, "I was for X but now I'm a Bernie supporter...." because they became such later than you.

[DirtyHippyBastard]

17. She was a Goldwater girl. eom

[sabrina 1]

22. I know 17 year olds and even younger who were out protesting for Ferguson, and with OWS

and now with BLM. 19 is an adult. But if Bernie's several years long involvement in the Civil Rights Movement, is to be mocked and dismissed, then it is going to raise the question, like it or not, as is obvious, as to what any other candidate was doing durng those years. Don't mock the actions of any candidate that contributed to the fight for Civil Rights and the question won't be asked. Or claim that it 'doesn't matter to anyone' when it clearly does.

[tazkcmo]

23. No, I was a kid of 3 years.

She was a legal adult of 19. Compare and contrast. If it makes one candidate look better than another should we not do it? Isn't that the whole point of this primary process? Really. Every time we bring up an issue that Sec. Clinton was on the wrong side of and later "evolved" (or not as in with welfare "reform&quot it's "Hillary bashing". There are real differences between these two candidates and they should be the focal point of our discussions. I would agree that personal attacks are counter productive. Sec. Clinton has done positive things for people and continues to. I personally don't agree with her past actions or many of her present positions or more accurately, lack of position. Doesn't make her a bad person just makes her not my choice for President. That's not an attack, it's a decision based on past performance.

[marble falls]

12. Clintonistas are starting to run out of fine whines.

[840high]

13. k/r

[Jack Rabbit]

16. Let's see, fifty years ago, Hillary Clinton was a Goldwater Girl

[RoccoR5955]

27. Mrs. Secretary Clinton was...

campaigning for Barry Goldwater!