Have we considered that maybe Sanders attack on PP and the HRC

[Thenewire]

Is a strategy conceived by his campaign to attract right wingers? He is using the opportunity to criticize two organizations that many republicans see as behind the number one problem, whether it be abortions or marriage equality. Regardless the reason it speaks volume how split Sanders has made the democratic party when some of us justify his attack against these organizations.

[dlwickham]

1. no

[INdemo]

2. This is a lie. Bernie Sanders did not attack Planned Parenthood.

I saw this over on Hillary's campaign site and she says Bernie made this attack but doesnt say how.
Now What exactly did Bernie Sanders say?

You are obviously following this woman's Rhetoric and she can't say how he attacked Planned Parenthood because he didn't.
You say he sided with GOP but he didn't

Hillary is____________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________.

____________________________________nervous and she will say anything do anything to keep her 23 old
dream alive.

[murielm99]

5. Yes he did attack them.

It was his rhetoric, not hers:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/01/20/sanders-draws-criticism-after-calling-planned-parenthood-and-other-groups-part-of-the-establishment/

You people throw the words "lie" and "liar" around with such fact-free abandon.

[Fawke Em]

7. How is calling someone "establishment" an attack by Hillary fans' standards?

Y'all like establishment, so you'd think you'd welcome the comparison.

[Thenewire]

10. It's an attack when his actions

Either directly or indirectly lead to some of his supporters withdrawing their membership from these organizations.

[Armstead]

22. The organization and those supporters did that

[artislife]

51. They are individuals with freedom to do as they please. nt

[merrily]

55. You measure an "attack" by what may or may not happen later--and by others? LOL!

Stretching a lot before a work out is a necessity.

[pinebox]

16. "You people"

Really?

[tularetom]

28. LOL, I missed that

Ms Rmoney is posting here!

[riversedge]

30. You really need to get out of your bubble.

[artislife]

52. Saw on CNN, Bernie officially ahead of h in Iowa. nt

[azmom]

3. Fuck this noise.

[HassleCat]

4. I had not thought of it that way.

And I don't think I will.

[ejbr]

13. !

[Punkingal]

6. No, he doesn't play games.

[riversedge]

31. ha ha. You made me laugh. thanks. I needed a good laugh.

[Punkingal]

33. No doubt you do with that candidate you support.

[artislife]

53. Now that made me laugh! Thx nt

[Punkingal]

61. YW...

[Motown_Johnny]

8. No. Because he only attacked their leadership

not the organization itself.

Your post is based on a falsed premise.

[avaistheone1]

9. Absurd.

[jkbRN]

11. Omg, your logic (if I can even call it that)

Is outrageous and pathetic. You should watch the video where Bernie calls the. "Establishment"--because he also notes that he has supporters and friends in both of those entities. So how would that play with the right wing? I would assume not well.

Understand that Bernie attracts republican votes because he is HONEST about what he is going to do, and some republicans would rather vote his way (even though they may not agree with him on every issue) because they know what he stands for--and some of those his policy positions are quite popular among republican working people, such as, SSI and Medicare. Just because they may not agree on social issues does not mean that the republicans who do vote for him are doing so because he was red-bating. Give people more credit, it doesn't take much to see through a politicians rhetoric.

[Thenewire]

14. Right, honesty from the candidate

who said that he would not run a negative campaign and focus on the issues instead of attacking. Sanders is a politician like any other, he knows what works and what doesn't and if you honestly believe that in a general election people will pick Sanders over Trump you are very wrong. Only Trump can make the claim that he was never involved with the establishment and he wouldn't be lying for the first time.

[pinebox]

18. Ummm you may want to re-think that some

because you know.....





Badda bing, badda BOOM!

[Thenewire]

21. I'm not making an argument in favor of any candidate

My point still stands, Sanders resorted to negativity and he doesn't have a chance against Trump. That is why he shouldn't be the nominee.

[pinebox]

23. I disagree

and so does everybody else basically. But you can keep keep thinking that when Republicans helped elect Bernie.

[cherokeeprogressive]

12. What you mean, WE, Kimosabe?

[Autumn]

15. Sanders has not split the democratic party. n/t

[riversedge]

48. He is on his way by his nasty attack on PP and Human rights group.

[Bill USA]

17. BS in engaging in contemptible political manuevering with this PP attack.

[99Forever]

19. There was no attack.

It was a statement of a simple fact. The brass of two establishment organizations that decided to endorse the establishment candidate. If that is what you consider an "attack" you must live in a totally different world than most of us.

[riversedge]

50. oh, Bernie did indeed shamefuly attack PP and the Human Rights Campaign

[TM99]

60. Criticisms are not attacks.

Say again with me riversedge, criticisms are not attacks.

[RedCappedBandit]

20. Acknowledging that some of the largest nonprofit corporations in America

are part of the establishment is not an attack. Ridiculous. Nonprofits do indeed tend to be part and parcel of the establishment. Look at who controls the boards and who the top execs are. Just a simple acknowledgement of fact. In no way a criticism of the good work that they do.

[Live and Learn]

24. Why of course, Bernie is an evil genius who has been keeping his real agenda underwraps for 70+

years.

[azurnoir]

25. polls really aren't looking good for Hillary are they?

oh and no I haven't nor will I

[artislife]

54. CNN said today that Bernie was officially ahead of h in Iowa. nt

[Ken Burch]

26. No...because it isn't.

And there was no Sanders attack on either group.

[Agnosticsherbet]

27. So is he lying to Republicans about PP?

I won't support Republicans who sttack planned Parenthood, ever.. I will not support a Democrat who does the same thing

[Le Taz Hot]

29. These have to to be sock puppets

I thought I had all you guys flushed and this is #3 in the last 5 minutes.

[DefenseLawyer]

32. Planned Parenthood isn't "establishment"?

Really? It's some radical fringe group now?

It was probably politically stupid to even comment on the endorsement, but calling Planned Parenthood part of the Democratic Party "establishment" isn't an attack. It isn't even an insult. It isn't even a bad thing. It's just true.

[Thenewire]

35. quote

“I would love to have the endorsement of every progressive organization in America. We’re very proud to have received recently the endorsement of MoveOn.org. We’ve received the endorsement Democracy for America. These are grassroots organizations representing millions of workers. What we are doing in this campaign, it just blows my mind every day because I see it clearly, we’re taking on not only Wall Street and economic establishment, we’re taking on the political establishment. So, I have friends and supporters in the Human Rights Fund and Planned Parenthood. But, you know what? Hillary Clinton has been around there for a very, very long time. Some of these groups are, in fact, part of the establishment.”


Todd: Do you believe that Planned Parenthood and Human Rights Campaign—that these are part of the Democratic establishment that's trying to defeat you?

Devine: I do, Chuck. I think the leadership of Washington-based groups—and it's not just those two—are part of a political establishment here in Washington.

Sounds a lot like garbage Trump or a teabag republican would say.

[DefenseLawyer]

58. I'm sure it does

You are a partisan. We are all partisans. When you are looking for something to freak out about, you'll find it. I'm sure there are things that Secretary Clinton says that make me roll my eyes that at the same time make you cheer. From my perspective as someone that leans the other way, it's a pretty innocuous statement.

[Thenewire]

63. Make of it what you will.

It doesn't matter to me who wins the nomination as long as Trump or any republican loses but I have no doubt that Sanders will lose against any of them. Sanders is a political extremist in the US, he might not be elsewhere in other parts of the world but he is one here.

[Vinca]

34. For starters, it wasn't an "attack." It was a comment.

If anyone should be considered the victim in all of this it's Sanders. He's supported both organizations forever and having them choose one over the other is a slap in the face. Having the Clinton campaign stir it up into a faux issue is even worse. It's the same kind of desperation Hillary showed in 2008 and we know how that ended.

[Thenewire]

36. It was an attack.

“I would love to have the endorsement of every progressive organization in America. We’re very proud to have received recently the endorsement of MoveOn.org. We’ve received the endorsement Democracy for America. These are grassroots organizations representing millions of workers. What we are doing in this campaign, it just blows my mind every day because I see it clearly, we’re taking on not only Wall Street and economic establishment, we’re taking on the political establishment. So, I have friends and supporters in the Human Rights Fund and Planned Parenthood. But, you know what? Hillary Clinton has been around there for a very, very long time. Some of these groups are, in fact, part of the establishment.”


Todd: Do you believe that Planned Parenthood and Human Rights Campaign—that these are part of the Democratic establishment that's trying to defeat you?

Devine: I do, Chuck. I think the leadership of Washington-based groups—and it's not just those two—are part of a political establishment here in Washington.

[Vinca]

65. Did Bernie say "they're horrible organizations and I won't support them anymore?"

No. He didn't. It wasn't an attack. Apparently what he said didn't come out as he intended, according to follow-up. It's not as bad as saying you came under attack in Bosnia, of course, but people do misspeak.

[SheenaR]

37. Please show us

Where he attacked the institution of PP and what it stands for and the services it provides to millions of Americans.

Or did he comment on his disagreement with their peculiar endorsement

[Thenewire]

38. Here

“I would love to have the endorsement of every progressive organization in America. We’re very proud to have received recently the endorsement of MoveOn.org. We’ve received the endorsement Democracy for America. These are grassroots organizations representing millions of workers. What we are doing in this campaign, it just blows my mind every day because I see it clearly, we’re taking on not only Wall Street and economic establishment, we’re taking on the political establishment. So, I have friends and supporters in the Human Rights Fund and Planned Parenthood. But, you know what? Hillary Clinton has been around there for a very, very long time. Some of these groups are, in fact, part of the establishment.”


Todd: Do you believe that Planned Parenthood and Human Rights Campaign—that these are part of the Democratic establishment that's trying to defeat you?

Devine: I do, Chuck. I think the leadership of Washington-based groups—and it's not just those two—are part of a political establishment here in Washington.

Sanders made a distinct comparison between wall street and planned parenthood by labeling them part of a system he would like to see eradicated.

[SheenaR]

41. We aren't reading the same thing. Eradicate? Come on. N/t

[FlatBaroque]

42. boom

!

[TM99]

62. You can spam the quotes until next Christmas

but it still doesn't make your point valid.

He made a comment -- a criticism if you will of the leadership of these and other groups which yes is demonstrating establishment status quo like behavior.

They are not polling their membership. Only 32 people at HRC determined for the entire organization that Clinton was the one to endorse even though she has a lifetime 88% rating versus Sanders 100%. The current head of HRC is a long-term friend of the Clintons who has been a part of their inner circle since the 1990's.

PP broke a 100 year old consistent tradition of NOT endorsing any candidate in the primary to do so this year. The head of PP's political action wing which did this has her daughter on the Clinton team in Iowa.

He also never used the word 'eradicated'. That is your hyperbole. He said we are taking them on. We want to remove money from politics. We want to see an end to cronyism. He doesn't want to do away with PP or HRC. FFS, he was supporting LGBT marriage rights while Clinton was still pandering to the religious right with marriage being a sacred bond between a man and a woman. He has a stellar legislative history with regards to women's reproductive health and pro choice.

You are ignoring facts and simply pushing bullshit.

[Bluenorthwest]

39. Straight Hillary supporters need to comprehend that HRC is in fact the political establishment in

LGBT politics, to claim that to call them such is an attack is nothing but a demonstration that you are utterly clueless about LGBT organizations, politics or the history of the HRC which is contentious. It is by no means synonymous with the LGBT community. Most of their chief critics over the years are in the LGBT community. Some reasons for this follow:
HRC has in the past supported Republican candidates with no history of LGBT support over Democrats with a strong history. I do not approve of that, I am a Democrat.
They have supported anti choice candidates and people who oppose affirmative action and I do not like those things at all.
Worst of all considering the alleged nature of their work, HRC supported the non inclusive ENDA which would not have provided protection from discrimination to the transgender community. To many of us that is a great betrayal of our very own.

These are things the Hillary people thus far can not respond to. I think the transgender community in particular should take both note and action around that fact.

[Thenewire]

43. Frankly, I don't care if they are the establishment

That word has no meaning to me after being overused by republicans and now Sanders. But the fact is that Sanders labeled PP and HRC in the same category as Wall Street.

[Bluenorthwest]

47. I don't give a flying fuck what any straight agenda merchant has to say about it. I note that you

did not have the respect to address the points I made to you, you declared that you don't care. And that's my point as well-you don't care about the issues you are just exploiting this for your own agenda and that is shitty behavior in my book. You don't care? Then stop pushing a line about it. Actually be apathetic don't just use the claim of apathy as some frightened deflection when faced with a lot of facts you did not know and can't counter. You don't care, stop blowing your horn about it.

[Thenewire]

64. Lets just agree

that neither one of us knows what either one of us is saying. If an organization upholds liberal values and has a positive effect I don't care who they are with.

[m-lekktor]

45. thank you. exactly! nt

[Bluenorthwest]

49. The OP can't respond to that set of facts so now the OP says he does not care about the issue he

started an OP about!

[hobbit709]

40. What a load of taurine metabolic byproducts.

[Bluenorthwest]

44. Chad Grifin CEO of HRC was compensated $429,411 in 2013. I offer a link to Not The Establishment

in the form of Back2Stonewall, from 2010 to demonstrate that HRC is considered to be the fattened establishment by many in the LGBT community:
Top 13 Human Rights Campaign Salaries Topped $2.1 Million Last Year And All We Got Was A Lousey Tee Shirt!
Oh, thats right we didn’t even get a tee shirt. Just some lame cocktail parties at the White House and a few crumbs.

AIDS and Human Rights Activist and Blogger Michael Petrelis of the Petrelis Files has a posting that reminds us just how worthless, pampered, greedy, and over-paid the HRC’s Top “Executives” and Little Joey Solmonsleaze truly are.

Michael rminds us, via Washington Blade, longtime reporter Lou Chibbaro’s story last year that had a salary survey of our gay and AIDS orgs’ executive directors that Joe Solmonese “took a voluntary pay cut of 10 percent, lowering his total compensation from $338,400 to $302,200 a year. That was mighty BIG of LITTLE Joe especially since he is essentially worthless. And this year when HRC released its most recent IRS 990 filing on August 14, HRC estimate for his pay was adjusted slightly, up to $307, 050. Whats an extra 4 Grand after all for an organization that CONSTANTLY begs the Community for money while doing jack shit.
http://www.back2stonewall.com/2010/03/top-14-human-rights-campaign-salaries.html


Hillary supporters need to dig that HRC is the Establishment. Get over it.

[bigtree]

46. at the very least

...opens his politics to charges of triangulation.

It's definitely a form of wedge politics, but the larger picture points to the real-time effects of the party cleansing that's envisioned by a 'revolutionary' political campaign.

[Bluenorthwest]

56. Actually with HRC, it's a case of Bernie understanding the facts far better than those yapping about

it on Hillary's side. I've already posted some of the reasons HRC has many very strong critics in the LGBT community in this thread. He's stating facts as I see them. On DU lots of straights against Bernie are very upset about it. I hope they dig that I see them as the establishment for supporting some Republicans, betraying the transgender community and endorsing anti choice and anti affirmative action candidates. Those of you going off about this are in my view siding with those choices. I don't side with those choices.

[bigtree]

57. I think Sanders would have have accepted HRC's endorsement, if offered

...with out a word about all of the concerns you raised about the organization and it's leaders.

Has Sen. Sanders ever spoken out before this election about any of that concern about the HRC?

[Bluenorthwest]

59. I think that is beside the point I am making, which is that they are establishment LGBT politics

which is what was said that is being yapped about. By straight people who consistently refuse to actually discuss what is being said to them.
If you donated to a group and they backed anti affirmative action candidates and favored a law excluding some of your own community from the new protections would you strongly support all of that or maybe think it is a bit too conservative?

No one suggests Hillary should reject their endorsement nor even that they are a horrible organization, just that it they are the established corporate sponsored political end of the community's politics, lavish salaries, first class air fare, risk adverse. Establishment.
It's not that bad a thing, but it is a true thing. It's arguably their job and one that needs doing which is simply different from my own.
But-and this is important- when HRC and I are different we are still far more alike than the straight people who are trying to make LGBT react to criticism of HRC as if it was criticism of our selves. Exploitation is not a good habit to pick up.

[Warren DeMontague]

66. It's not an attack, it never was an attack. But keep trying. Know why?

Because obviously, Hillary cannot run on the issues.