2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBREAKING: Hillary Clinton wins the Northern Mariana Islands caucus
Read more: http://democratsforever.freeforums.net/thread/5062/hillary-clinton-northern-mariana-islands
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,716 posts)Last edited Sat Mar 12, 2016, 08:23 AM - Edit history (1)
Asian (including Chinese, Filipino, Korean) 49.9%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 34.9%
Multiracial 12.7%
White 2.1%
NOTE: Black, Hispanic and Other together less than 1%
Fairgo
(1,571 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,230 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Well, we live and learn.
riversedge
(70,351 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Last edited Sat Mar 12, 2016, 09:40 AM - Edit history (1)
Thousands died preventable deaths, but Nancy told Ronnie to just let the "gay cancer" work its magic. And Clinton praises that as "silent activism".
Shows how much she cares about gay lives. But then: she never explained why she changed from supporting DADT and DOMA to being in favour of marriage equality. Except maybe some polls or focus-groups? Anyway, she changed suspiciously late (2013) and evidently, she has never become an ally of the LGBT community. She still looks down on us.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)I should alert this, but I'll give you a chance to clarify what you mean.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Why don't you ask Ron Reagan Jr. about his mother's compassion for those with AIDS. Seems as though he had several private meetings with his mother on the subject and she was a conduit in getting more funding. Google it. Or not.
Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)First, Kissinger isn't that bad.
Now, Nancy isn't that bad.
You know, Cheney said good things about Camp Weathervane Goldwater Girl former Wal-mart board member DOMA supporter. . .maybe HRC fans should rehabilitate Darth Cheney too.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)So maybe it really is only a matter of time.
Marr
(20,317 posts)is just an opportunist.
I think Hillary made it pretty clear which one she is long ago, being against same sex marriage until supporting it was politically advantageous for her, but it's helpful to see her fans doing it as well. They're 100% on your side until your side is not Hillary's side. Then you can go fuck yourself. That's not an ally.
SMC22307
(8,090 posts)They won't be rehabilitated on DU, no matter how vocal the minority. But it is fascinating to watch them spin... "Camp Weathervane" couldn't be a more perfect moniker.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Nancy and Ron Reagan were a functional team in the Presidency, wrote AIDS activist Kenneth Bunch, aka Sister Vicious Power Hungry B-, according to the Guardian. They are both responsible for the death of thousands from HIV in the LGBT community due to their inaction in the 1980s. So I understand the anger in the LGBT community toward Nancy. I feel that anger as well.
http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2016/03/hillary-clinton-sparks-outrage-by-championing-nancy-reagans-low-key-aids-activism/
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)There is no evidence Hillary is a homophobe. I remember when DADT was first implemented - it was one of those "seemed like a good idea at the time" things and was one of the "baby steps" that got the country one step closer to where we are now. Are we done yet? No! But until Hillary starts talking about gays burning in hell, need therapy to fix their sickness and insisting that teenagers be cast out of their homes, etc. like the ACTUAL HOMOPHOBIC ASSHOLES DO this line of attack needs to stop.
It is inappropriate. It is disgusting. It is NOT CREDIBLE and minimizes ACTUAL REAL HOMOPHOBIA and the consequences people experience as a result.
People pick their battles in life. Hillary is NOT a leader in the LGBT movement. That doesn't mean she isn't an ally.
I say this as a Bernie supporter. One of my dearest friends lost his partner to AIDS. I take it seriously. It was yet ANOTHER political gaffe, but accusing her of homophobia is over the top.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Because I take this serious too, being a gay man myself. I too have seen what kind of trauma AIDS has wrought in the gay communities around the world.
Here's what I would like you to consider:
Homophobia doesn't just manifest itself in Hellfire sermons, therapy endorsements, eviction enthousiasm, and so on.
Homophobia is often silent. It is when you are uncomfortable with LGBT lives and do anything to avoid them. Not wanting to talk about them. Giving them the shoulder. Making them feel like an outcast. LETTING THINGS HAPPEN, and silently thinking "just what those creeps deserved".
And when you make excuses for the worst of the homophobes... Yeah, excusing homophobes makes you a homophobe. It may not be a vociferous, aggressive kind of homophobia, but it is just as real and just as actual and just as wrong as the kinds of homophobia you mentioned.
"I don't mind gays, but they shouldn't, like, push it in our face" is the little brother of "Hey faggot, get out of my face!"
An ally never says: "It's a good thing that she let your boyfriend die, because now we can talk about it."
Nor would an ally say: "When she consciously didn't encourage research into the cause of the epidemic, causing you to live in fear for a decade and a half, that was silent support".
Clinton clearly never was an ally. She just pretended to be one, so she wouldn't lose her electability. That ploy fell through today. Her true face is that of a silent homophobe who is willing to excuse the woman who perpetrated (as First Lady, with her husband) a genocide by not doing anything against the "gay cancer".
Nancy was a true, actual homophobe by your definition. She will rot in Hell for her indifference/hate.
If Clinton is not a homophobe, as you claim, than she needs to do WAY MORE than tweeting two standard excuse lines on Twitter about "misspeaking". This is the kind of mistake no-one who cares about gay lives would ever make.
Raster
(20,998 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Love you right back.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)And I see what you are trying to communicate. I just don't 100% agree, but that may be because of fighting with the overt homophobia to the point where just getting them to not make obnoxious remarks felt like a victory, if that makes sense. (I am an ally; people I love are gay and I want them treated like the normal human beings they are - this seems like a very reasonable request to me.)
I am and remain offended by Hillary's remarks with a large part of it being outrage over the revisionist history - this stuff was in Time Magazine, and anyone who paid two seconds of attention knew how the Reagan's were handling things. How on earth could she have made such a DUMB statement that was THE OPPOSITE of reality?
Again, I react to the word homophobia/accusations of being okay with people dying as over the top hyperbole, but I can see why you are saying it also includes the nuances of being "uncomfortable" with the idea.
Hmm. I can also see why "super outrage" can be dramatized to demand future concessions in exchange for support. Are you sure that isn't what is happening here?
And yes, as a woman, I was not pleased with that dog whistle of a walk back on abortion rights, so I feel your pain about "wait-a-minute, what the bleep did you just say because that looks like a bus you are trying to throw me under!"
There are some things that are NOT NEGOTIABLE.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Because if you have battled with the worst to the point where silent homophobia felt like a victory, you have probably withstood a lot of inequities. Thank you for standing with us in that fight, and thank you for keeping hope alive. You are a true ally, and may God bless you with the richest of Her/His rewards.
As for my super outrage, as you call it: there may be some who make such a calculated move. Myself, I was a like a bull seeing a red cloth. Except the cloth was pink in my case. I was, and still am, furious. You know that saying about "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"? - Just wait until I have my dress on, then try to piss me off.
Some things, as you so eloquently put it, are not negotiable. Some people are gay, and it is entirely reasonable to expect our leaders to treat them like the human beings they are. And the same goes for People of Colour, women, Latinos, and every other group that the right habitually paves the road with when there is a bus to be driven.
And if those groups are thrown under a bus, their outrage isn't all "drama". It may be the expression of a feeling of utter betrayal. At this point, I only want one concession from Clinton: for her to concede the race. If the Democratic Party nominates her, it will feel like it has left me for good.
(How fitting that I should feel like the party could leave me, just when we are talking about the Reagans.)
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)Imagine if George Junior had said that!
I really think it was pure political gaffe, maybe talking with Nancy's son about "behind the scenes family stuff" - remember, Nancy was also dealing with his recovery from being shot/trying to keep quiet about that stuff while fending off former CIA VP salivating for power. (Not an excuse - just different crisis stuff in her life.)
But I am good with Hillary making some serious amends on this one! If it was an accident, it was some serious foot-in-mouth. If it was prepared remarks, someone needs a new job!
In the meantime, "Trash & Ignore" is truly helping my blood pressure levels. I am also glad we were able to actually DISCUSS this because I feel like you gave me more to think about (even if I am not 100% in agreement/just 90%).
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)And I promiss you an open mind on my side, throughout the entire discussion.
As for those amends you suggested, they may never come. It's been over a month, and she has yet to release even one Goldman Sachs transcript. And as I said: she probably is a silent homophobe, which is the kind that usually doesn't want to admit its homophobia - and making amends is as good as admitting...
Love,
Betty.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)And keep in mind that the transcripts probably contain some snide and inappropriate comments that were tailored for the audience/won't play well out of context. She's a lawyer and was speaking to her "client" (aka the people footing the bill) and she still has that lawyer mentality. I am not hung up on that - lots of other reasons to support Bernie!
Look forward to more discussion about ways to improve life for everyone!
pinebox
(5,761 posts)does make someone a homophobe.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)And I am 90% convinced/still have some disagreement about levels and the power of the word homophobe.
I think the exchange is going to go down as one of my all time favorite experiences on DU: two people started with completely different viewpoints, shared information in a positive and respectful fashion, and both walked away having communicated and (in my case) grown from the experience.
Makes me feel good about the day!
Ally
pinebox
(5,761 posts)I look back at it all and it's like wow....what the heck were we doing?
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)And may I say that I thoroughly enjoyed our discussion, and really hope to resume our exchange of views some other time. (- Might even try to write an OP to encourage your participation...)
treestar
(82,383 posts)look into Hillary's entire record on the subject, rather than reducing it to yesterday's statement about Nancy Reagan.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)"Marriage is a sacred bond between man and woman" (2004)
"Why have we changed the form for new parents to say parent one and parent two instead of father and mother? I want it changed back." (2012)
Yes, let's bring on the entire record. Any time.
treestar
(82,383 posts)and once again you are distilling out the worst you can find rather than look at the entire record.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)She's almost like Jesse Helms: only helping when heterosexuals are affected too.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Praising Nancy Reagan at her funeral defines her entire stance? Now you're getting absurd. Also Bernie said nice things about Nancy Reagan on the day of her funeral, so I guess he should go under that bus too. Doesn't that mean he adopts all Reagan policies? That's the stand you are giving Hillary.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/29/health/us-clinton-aids/
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Those are demonstrable.
Clinton chose to praise their efforts for AIDS victims. Those efforts can be summarised as: just let the queers die. The day of the funeral doesn't change that ugly history.
treestar
(82,383 posts)look at the link.
And the right wingers are against government interference anyway, so it wouldn't have mattered even if they sympathized. Hillary had nothing to gain here, so it's just a mistake.
Can't wait until Bernie makes some such mistake next.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Clinton causes a lot of pain in a community, and her supporters just hope and pray that Sanders may do something remotely comparable so they can say: "See, everybody hurts you! Now you must vote for Clinton again."
How about this alternative hope: Clinton stops hurting people?
treestar
(82,383 posts)I don't spend time trying to be offended by Bernie. If I did, I'd make much of his pointing his finger at Hillary and saying "I'm talking" as I hate it when men do that to me. Why did Bernie "hurt" me like that? See how absurd it is?
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Being gay, it is so confusing to know when I should feel hurt by a politician's words and when I should just give them a pass. Thank goodness there are people like you who are kind enough to set me "straight" about any mistakes I make.
treestar
(82,383 posts)I am a woman offended by misogyny and sexism so I guess you will respect how hurt Bernie's actions made me? I doubt that. I have an oppressed status in being a woman, so I get to feel hurt too, even go out of my way to make that case. Yet it never does seem to help me convince anyone. Bernie oppresses me with his waving fingers and not letting women interrupt and if you weren't using a double standard, he should get thrown under the bus too.
Marr
(20,317 posts)relates to your darling politician's poll numbers.
treestar
(82,383 posts)or, not so well, that we can't see that your posts are completely non responsive and have nothing to do with the point.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Please note the eagerness to hide weak arguments behind a pair of Ovaries. As attested by multiple articles quoted on DU, the Clinton campaign is ever desperate to make any discussion about sexism.
"Did Hillary hurt your feelings by praising Nancy Reagan's silent activism for the AIDS victims she wanted to just let die? Well then Bernie must be sexist, or you wouldn't attack Clinton."
So not buying that. Misogyny is a real problem, but the Clinton campaign is blurring the definition to the detriment of actual victims of misogyny. But hey: anything to win right?
riversedge
(70,351 posts)such silly 'logic"
Loki
(3,825 posts)your post is personally offensive and disgusting to me.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)I guess we might as well agree to disagree, because I don't think either of us is going to change positions in the slightest.
But please accept my assurance that my despising of Clinton and her ilk are in no way intended to diminish the memory of your brother, who was one of the many victims of the Reagans' indifference. His life was in no way inferior, and should not be inferred even in retrospect. I'm sorry your family had to suffer that loss. My condoleances.
Loki
(3,825 posts)I was on the front lines, taking care of AIDS patients in the 80's and 90's when nurses would not even touch them because they thought they could catch this disease. My brother was diagnosed in 1985 and died in 1993, my granddaughter is gay, that derogatory term is used for the scum of the earth and that shows me just how you don't represent the gay community nor their relatives or survivors. I use that term for the people who have personally contributed to the death and destruction and the holocaust committed against these people. If you would direct that term towards Mrs. Clinton, then you will have to direct it toward my mother who is 98 years old now. She was against gays because she came from that era, but you paint with a very broad brush and she is now an avid supporter, and would probably knock you on your ass for saying that slander. You would call her a flip flopper, a homophobe, and I call you an unforgiving and grossly ill-informed person who is unable to consider change a positive outcome. I pity you.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Unforgiving?
Refusing to consider change a positive outcome?
If that is the "change" Obama brought by jumping back on the fence (2009) I refuse to see it as a positive outcome. I will forgive those who can explain what changed their minds. Those who's minds are unchanged and who just say somthing different because of a poll or a focus group: they aren't really sorry, so I can't really forgive them. Forgiveness requires contrition.
One word of advice: as a gay man, I would rather not be referred to as "these people".
There are homophobes of every kind: some silent, like my great-grandfather and your mother, some more outspokenly so. Reserving the term for the worst excesses is to accept and excuse the lesser inequities. I cannot do so in good conscience.
If Clinton is an avid supporter, could she please:
a)tell us what changed her mind three years ago?
b) do more than issue two flimsy twitter-lines about "misspeaking"?
c) denounce the Reagans for what they did to the gay community? Yes I know it is the day of the funeral. She can do it tomorrow.
-----
As for that righteous anger that you say you feel for me (reply # 25), I'm afraid the feeling is quite mutual.
Loki
(3,825 posts)You just called my 98 year old mother a homophobe? Good bye!
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)I feel your pain. I still miss him today.
Loki
(3,825 posts)If I could only say "I love you" one more time. To the poster above who used that slander "homophobe" I have a righteous anger inside me for I don't throw that term around lightly in my family. I send you love and understanding. We belong to a group of people that I wish didn't ever have to exist.
riversedge
(70,351 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)ebayfool
(3,411 posts)Barack_America
(28,876 posts)Or does it matter because it's a caucus that actually went for Hillary? I have a hard time keeping the spin straight.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Is that what you think of for POC?
Loki
(3,825 posts)what we already know about them.
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)After watching what happened in Chicago at a Trump rally yesterday, if BS is the candidate come November, I really doubt that he will survive the onslaught of vitriol, hatred and accusations of being a communist sympathizer coming from the right. He's never had to endure anything like that in his entire political life, unlike the Clintons who have been vilified since he became President in 1993. BS will fold like a cheap suit, and that's what scares the shit out of me. Can you even imagine what this country will look like with a Trump presidency? I hope you think about it, because I think that any honest American right now, would have to have serious thoughts about it.
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)Loki
(3,825 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Congrats!
Loki
(3,825 posts)n/t
krawhitham
(4,648 posts)4 for Hillary
2 for Bernie
5 Super
that makes it 16.7 voters per delegate
Using that ratio and 2008 total votes, the Democratic party would have 2,122,287 delegates
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)More delegates more votes. Every week. I like the direction.
mcar
(42,403 posts)6chars
(3,967 posts)TheFarseer
(9,326 posts)Why do they get to vote? They aren't voting in the general.
DesertRat
(27,995 posts)For a small chain of islands?