Bernie Sanders had some awful anti-Semitic crap hurled at him.

[Aerows]

Bernie Sanders had anti-Semitic crap hurled at him.

http://observer.com/2016/04/bernie-sanders-berated-with-questions-about-zionist-jews-at-harlem-forum/

A Harlem man demanded Sen. Bernie Sanders explain his relationship “with your Jewish community” at an event at the iconic Apollo Theater today.

Mr. Sanders, the only Jew to have ever won a presidential primary, held the “community conversation” as part of his outreach effort to African-Americans, who so far have delivered most of their votes to Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton. After a panel discussion with singer Harry Belafonte, hip-hop personality Charlamagne Tha God, Erica Garner—the daughter of Eric Garner, who died at the hands of an NYPD officer in Staten Island in 2014—and former Ohio State Senator Nina Turner, the Vermont independent took two questions from the audience.

He handled it with grace.

[TheFarS1de]

1. All over the world they are stirring anti semitism

Sad to see it happening here . It will only get worse , my father was right , they use it as a political football and to hell with the fallout . I literally feel sick in my stomach watching this all unfold .

Even here there are posters using the same tactics and in all honesty it is getting well beyond time for this site owner to either put their foot down in regards to the anti semetic postings or just be honest and state that being of jewish faith/heritage is a legitimate target .

This is becoming much too common of late .

[mmonk]

5. Yep.

[Smarmie Doofus]

13. If ONLY:

>>>Even here there are posters using the same tactics and in all honesty it is getting well beyond time for this site owner to either put their foot down in regards to the anti semetic postings or just be honest and state that being of jewish faith/heritage is a legitimate target . >>>>>

It ( the "look the other way" posture) is both disgusting and *embarrassing*.

[Bluenorthwest]

14. The admins need to take action, I agree. They look culpable.

nt

[QC]

24. Once a poster gets to stay after linking to Stormfront

in an effort to discredit a Jewish candidate, there's no point in pretending that bigotry is really considered a serious issue here anymore.

[Aerows]

38. OMG

When did that happen!?

[KittyWampus]

96. Good question. I rarely visit this cesspool but haven't seen that.

But do you get all bent out of shape when same is done to Hillary?

[Aerows]

99. I would if I had evidence

that someone slandered her in this manner. Like, say, sexist rants made in 2008.

Look below at the person who told me I had no standing to discuss bigotry unless it was homophobia.

And has a link explaining why he made sexist comments in 2008 but changed his mind in 2016.

If this is the road you want to walk down, as I told that person, be my guest.

[Aerows]

152. Oh, to clarify

Yes I do.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511702649#post31

That was a shitty post and I said so.

[beam me up scottie]

106. Last year, the post was hidden and the person earned a timeout but they're still a member.

Imo linking to a neo-Nazi website should be an automatic ban.

[NWCorona]

143. That's kinda shocking

[Aerows]

148. It shocked me, too

Ugly, no matter how you look at it.

[angrychair]

193. At least once in December

I've seen others.

I challenged it and it was allowed to stand by a jury.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251941346

I made a big deal of this and got at least one other post hidden complaining about it. I took December off and came back again sometime in January.

[Aerows]

203. Holy shit.

I am at least heartened by the fact that most respectable Hillary Clinton supporters denounced it.

Have mercy.

[JudyM]

25. Or have stronger standards.

[KittyWampus]

95. There are many things I wish the Admins would take action on.

It's amazing that it takes something posted to malign Sanders to get an objection from so many Sanders supporters.

[Aerows]

110. It's amazing

that bigotry is tolerated by so many and so few object to it.

I'm not sorry that I object to bigotry, and I'm not sorry I'm a Bernie supporter that objects to bigotry.

Deal with your own beams before you start shouting about motes.

[Joob]

2. And he didn't flip out like a Clinton! nt

[Aerows]

146. That was a telling point

of who has the temperance to be the POTUS.

[Bonobo]

3. Anti-semitism is a cancer and it has penetrated everywhere. nt

[Aerows]

147. It is disgraceful. n/t

[Fairgo]

4. Watch him...

that's a leader.

[CorporatistNation]

32. zThat Is BAD... But lookAt This New Attack Based On False Accusations From Hillary! She's With...

Wall Street! #ShesWithWallStreet

[Aerows]

150. My thoughts exactly

my friend, Fairgo.

[JI7]

6. Most people who being up the Zionist crap are anti Semite

[Califonz]

7. Bernie was probably prepeared for this kind of crap...

Well...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_American%E2%80%93Jewish_relations#Anti-Semitism_among_African_Americans

[mmonk]

9. Yes. Unfortunate. I felt early on to explain some

undercurrents Bernie would be facing to my youngest son.

[JI7]

10. like jesse Jackson's comments

[runaway hero]

101. why

single out african americans.

[Aerows]

115. I agree - there are plenty

of bigoted idiots of all colors, sexes, creeds and religions that need to hush so that we can bring this world together for a better future for *ALL* of us.

[runaway hero]

123. Behind you

1000 percent !

[Aerows]

124. Stand beside me, my friend.

That is what we truly need!

[runaway hero]

164. absolutely

this has no place in the political discourse.

[Aerows]

172. Right there with you.

[grossproffit]

8. Beyond disgusted. I abhor anti-Semites.

[Aerows]

89. Thank you.

That was plain shitty, and I don't care WHO you support! It has nothing to do with Bernie vs. Hillary, either, it's just appalling bigotry directed at somebody.

I can't believe Hillary would support that crap, either, and I think she would have been just as dismissive of it.

[BeyondGeography]

11. Nicely handled...He could have also told him this

Residents of Mr. Sanders’ native neighborhood of Midwood, a conservative Jewish enclave, greeted the self-described democratic socialist with suspicion when he held a homecoming rally there yesterday.

[Bluenorthwest]

15. DU's Hillary supporters are already getting posts hidden in this thread, that's how deeply they are

into this shit. It has been going on for months and months and months. They can't help themselves.

[Trenzalore]

17. There is one hidden post nt

[Bluenorthwest]

19. One out of 18 posts in the thread about antisemitism is a Hillary supporter getting a hide.

My point stands. The comment was repulsive and inserted swiftly into the discussion. Who objects to that crap? Bernie supporters like me. Who tries to downplay and dismiss it? Hillary supporters who really should be taking up the messes on their own side and not leaving them to others to clean up for them.

You take issue not with the bigoted comment but with my mentioning that such comments get made and hidden and those who make them get to remain to make more crappy comments.

What are your metrics? How many nasty comments does it take before it 'counts'? Is 'just one' somehow a good thing to you? Would two or three be ok as well? What's the number of bigoted comments that is just too high for you to ignore?

[Trenzalore]

22. As far as comments go

It was a 4-3 decision. The poster didn't make an anti-sementic comment they inferred the person was planted to spur controversy where there is none. I don't think the post was in good taste however it wasn't what you inferring it was.

[JudyM]

27. Suggesting that antisemitism isn't real, but "planted" ... Hello!?

You think Bernie would scheme to raise his Jewishness with a planted antisemitic rant?

On the other hand we have seen Hillary outright using an "I'm a woman, quit victimizing me" and "If you criticize my record it's because I'm a woman" memes over and over and over and over... both of which demean women who are and have genuinely faced sexism.

[Trenzalore]

30. I said it wasn't in good taste

Frankly in New York I think Bernie would be very much talking about his background given demographics.

[JudyM]

34. He's not because he is running on his issues, not his demographic, as Clinton is.

Pandering is not his thing, it's hers.
And as to the antisemitism denial, sure looks like you did :
"The poster didn't make an anti-sementic comment they inferred the person was planted to spur controversy where there is none."

[Trenzalore]

35. He's a politician (I'm not sure why people seem to ignore this)

A fairly successful one in Vermont for the past 30 years.

I have seen him on my TV talk about being born in Brooklyn a lot and his family roots since the campaign pivoted there. It would almost be political malpractice not to.

[JudyM]

36. The issue is about his being Jewish, not a Brooklynite.

[Bluenorthwest]

28. I strongly disagree with you. That poster deals in classic tropes. 'I smell them, they lie'

Have you seen that poster's transparency page?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=329307&sub=trans

"Sanders is still lying. Still saying 15 mil from Wall Street. He is unravelling.
His cult following allowed for a horrible judge to win in WI. They only care about Bernie not the people."

"Maybe not enough free stuff was being given away????

Still Hillary will lose CO...pot does affect the brain."

"Well this should warm the hearts of the progressive BS supporters.
TEHRAN, Iran � Iran�s judiciary spokesman says a court has sentenced a well-known tycoon to death."



So what you are saying is this poster is of such great quality that one must assume the very best about him. I do not agree with you.

And I note that your first assertion was 'just one hidden post so it's fine' and now your new assertion is 'that hidden post was not so bad' but you have yet to answer even one question I put to you.

I get where you are coming from. Seen it and seen it.

[Trenzalore]

29. Calling someone a liar

Is a lot different than a racial slur. Last I checked there are liars in every race and religion.

The poster may say not nice things about Bernie Sanders, I don't think the poster is saying it because they have an ethnic bias against him.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

56. It takes an extremely dishonest person to create unlikely scenarios in the absence of facts.

This would be something like me claiming that even though it appears Clinton won South Carolina handily, she might have cheated. Well, she might have, but it's very unlikely, and even if true, I don't possess that information. That comment was made by a dishonest person.

[jillan]

81. That is the most insulting comment of them all to suggest that Bernie would want to be called

every single Jewish stereotype there is.

That's pretty sick.

[Trenzalore]

83. I said it was in poor taste. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

109. No that statement had at least two well known antisemitic tropes

it wasn't even a dog whistle.

[Aerows]

84. It's pretty stunning

By their fruits you shall know them.

[beam me up scottie]

87. Some people are more outraged by pointing out anti-Semitism than the actual bigotry.

We see it with other kinds of bigotry too, posts get alerted on for calling out homophobia, sexism and racism.

It's disgusting.

[Bluenorthwest]

21. What are your metrics? That post uses the 'I smell them' trope which I first heard in Vienna in 1973

This shit needs to end.

[still_one]

26. I'm Jewish. I am not a Sanders supporter. I thought Sanders handled it extremely well

Last edited Sun Apr 10, 2016, 01:02 PM - Edit history (1)

Is my post going to be hidden in this thread?

[Bluenorthwest]

33. Is that what I said? No. But I support you in speaking out because very few in Camp Clinton

Last edited Sun Apr 10, 2016, 12:43 PM - Edit history (1)

do so. More of you should and you should do so more often.

[still_one]

39. no it wasn't, and I appreciate your point. I also was being sarcastic, and didn't make that clear.

[KittyWampus]

98. Do you have a compilation of links to prove your point? Cause I think your assertion

is unfounded.

[Aerows]

100. I don't think

that commenting "bigotry is bad" warrants a shit-ton of links to prove "bigotry is bad".

Since that was all the OP, said. Bernie shut down a bigot. He did it with grace and without being a screaming asshole about it.

I'm conflating that with nothing, although if you squint, you probably could understand the correlation with another politician that WAS using racist dog-whistles when challenged.

I actually didn't make that connection until now. Thanks for helping me realize that there was a correlation there!!

[beam me up scottie]

16. Anti-Semitic bigots are outing themselves all over the place.

We knew that would happen when Bernie entered the race and they didn't disappoint.

He handled it masterfully, ignored the blatant bigotry and focused on his support for both Israelis and Palestinians.

[Sheepshank]

23. Bernie handled this well, his supporters should be proud of his handling

And while ther is much anti Semitism in this world...your continued and repetative actions on DU calling and twisting words and labelling innocent people as anti Semitic, really doesn't help and is damaging, nasty, wrong, hateful, pathetic and deranged and there are a lot of people that should be the recipient of an apology from you.

[Bluenorthwest]

31. You are very wrong, DU has seen some horrible material and those who post it are not innocent.

Your own transparency page is not a pretty thing.....you level some very horrible things at Bernie and his supporters. This suggests that you make a very poor judge of the nature and quality of such attacks.

You: " Bernie touts gang rape fantasies"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=229221&sub=trans

[beam me up scottie]

45. Yes it is, and you have to wonder why there is so much vile hatred towards Bernie.

Especially when some of the most vocal haters have been outed as bigots.

I suppose next we'll have to apologize for calling out homophobia.

[Aerows]

68. I was flat told down thread

that my "sudden concern" about bigotry was new and that my mentioning this incident was suspect.

I am "allowed" to point out homophobia, apparently, but pointing out other types of bigotry is unacceptable.

I wish I was making that shit up.

[beam me up scottie]

69. I saw that, consider the source and the reason.

Someone is still upset over a couple of hidden posts because they linked to anti-Semitic sources and is taking it out on you. He's also one of the staunchest defenders of a certain poster who was outed for using hate speech on a right wing web site - so take that into consideration as well.

I feel you, I was told in this thread that I owed people an apology for pointing out anti-Semitism.

[Aerows]

74. How dare you mention

that a person is attacked for their heritage/religion and they handled it exceptionally well.

Gosh, BMUS, I guess I should apologize, too, for posting something positive when a bigot is shut down.

[beam me up scottie]

75. How about we say we're both sorry that people are offended by pointing out bigotry?

I think that covers it, don't you?

[Aerows]

85. Pretty much.

Sad, sad day on DU.

[JackInGreen]

102. Well sheared

No wool over our eyes.

[riderinthestorm]

37. The hidden post on this thread tries to belittle anti-semitism by saying it was a plant!

By the Sanders campaign!

Trying to diminish the very real anti-semitism on display in this race should be called out and those who are doing so deserve our thanks, not denigration.

Why do you want to protect anti-semitism? That in itself is..uhm, well I'll let you think on that.

[magical thyme]

46. yup. I was shocked at the dog whistles in numerous articles about Archer

on his invitation to the Vatican.

"He initiated" to "He pushed" to "He lobbied" to "He tricked" to "He twisted arms." Closing with the snark about how "of course he will" (make it political).

Left me wondering how much she said, and how much some members of the press twisted her words.

And if she really did say any of those things, what in the world motivated a British academic to damage her relationship with the Vatican, in the middle of a 5-year employment contract, to interject herself into US politics. Was it purely hateful bigotry? Or hateful bigotry plus something else?

[jillan]

88. Completely agreed!

[Autumn]

94. This was a big WTF. I also found the questioning of how is

Bernie going to pay for his trip to the Vatican to be offensive as all get out.

[Aerows]

97. "This was a big WTF"

and "How is Bernie going to pay for his trip to the Vatican to be offensive as all get out"

Took the words right out of my mouth.

[beam me up scottie]

105. Or how he's too "cheap" to pay an accountant to do his taxes.

And how he conned the government into paying for his honeymoon to Russia, you know why *wink wink*.

[Aerows]

125. The whole thing

stuns the crap out of me, and how it is being interpreted when we don't even know which side of the camp the heckler sits on, whether they are even an R or a D.

On it's face it's anti-Semitic.

All of this supposition that it was a Hillary supporter vs. a Bernie supporter makes the entire thing destructive for everyone in the Democratic party.

[beam me up scottie]

54. Well said! Especially the last part.

[beam me up scottie]

44. I should apologize for calling out rabid anti-Semitic bigotry? Not on your life.

How about you start calling it out as well instead of pretending it doesn't exist?

Like calling Bernie Israel's #1 shill, an "old crusty Jew", a pro-Israel Marxist, accusing him of disloyalty to his country, of being funded by Israel, etc, then there is the bigotry and outright hate speech that's posted elsewhere.

Nah, that would be too much to ask since it's coming from other Hillary supporters. I've seen ops that contain vile anti-Semitic bigotry applauded and even REC'D, and posts that were eventually hidden go unchallenged by your associates, I've seen threads mocking my op about anti-Semitism get posted on other sites where anti-Semitic trolls post with impunity and I've seen those same trolls get high fived and treated like heroes after they're outed.

Apologize? Gmafb.

[Sheepshank]

48. I've seen you do it and I've been the recipient of your labelling

Lots and lots of people who have done nothing to deserve you slimy labelling...didn't stop you though. You can pretend all you want that you are being honorable in calling it out, but you and I and many, many DUers have seen your dirty work in action. It's filthy disgusting and yes, you hurt many people and should be apologizing.

[beam me up scottie]

49. Stop pretending you've been injured, I'm familiar with your posting history.

Lots and lots of people who have done nothing to deserve you slimy labelling...

If they feel like I'm targeting them when I call out bigotry they should ask themselves why, not blame me for it.

And if they let openly anti-Semitic posts stand without challenging them then they're equally complicit.

[Sheepshank]

50. Yup...you did. I shall never ever forgive you for it.

And I will remind people often. You are tainted fruit.

And you are doing it again in this post. Justifying your ugliness.

[beam me up scottie]

51. Calling out anti-Semitic bigotry isn't ugliness, posting it and pretending it doesn't exist is.

Those posts at Bill's site might be hidden now but most of us have seen them and we know where it's coming from.

[Sheepshank]

52. Whe you apply it to innocent people it's ugly, slimy and bullying nt

[beam me up scottie]

53. I cited specific instances, if you feel included that's on you.

People who come into a thread about bigotry to declare that they're OUTRAGED by those calling it out after repeatedly ignoring actual bigotry should ask themselves why. As for how it looks to the rest of us, well it's our right to form an opinion about their motivation.

I'm sorry you felt included when I pointed out anti-Semitism. That's the only apology you'll ever get from me so you might as well stop complaining.

Have a nice day now.

[TM99]

108. Name one innocent

that BMUS has called out on anti-Semitism.

I have not seen a damned one. All were deserving of the call-out. It is a pity many simply double-down on it. Why are you defending them?

[Sheepshank]

112. Me

[TM99]

113. Provide links

please.

[Aerows]

118. Exactly.

BMUS isn't a loose cannon.

She documents her assertions with evidence.

Although the look in the mirror test by that particular poster might be what is pissing them off.

[TM99]

119. That is one of BMUS

strongest traits here are her meticulously researched and evidential posts.

We all know that except those with their heads in the sand!

[Aerows]

153. Indeed.

She doesn't just pop off with horse crap. I admire that about her.

[angrychair]

194. Have you seen your Transparency page?!?!?

It's disgusting and shameful.

[Sheepshank]

196. oh...apparently thin skinned BS adorables dislike the truth about Bernie n/t

[angrychair]

197. Yes, you caught him

Sanders thinks orgasms cure cancer.
That has got to be in the top 10 of the most ridiculous and spurious things I have ever seen on DU and most definitely right-wing batshit crazy nonsense.

[840high]

103. .that^ X100

[beam me up scottie]

104. All this outrage over calling out anti-Semitism, it's almost like some nerves were struck.

You could see the same thing in my thread about anti-Semitic dog whistles, it's unreal.

[haikugal]

132. Gee that sounds like a personal attack to me. I'd remove that post if I were you.

[Sheepshank]

138. No

[Nanjeanne]

18. Not only did he handle it with grace -- the audience was incredibly

Supportive and helped diffuse the situation beautifully. I watched this live and was so impressed.

[Codeine]

20. I'm not a Bernie supporter in this primary season

but that kind of shit is unacceptable on the face of it. Sanders handled it with grace and aplomb.

[still_one]

40. yes he did

[Aerows]

130. Thank you, Codeine

We might be on different sides of the political fence during the primary, but I will gladly stand side by side with you in the GE.

[tralala]

42. Anti-semitism is a form of cannibalism

I'm sorry Sanders had to deal with that. What a disgrace.

[Joob]

43. I just hope no media tries to spin it then I'll never forgive

[Aerows]

55. Oh my word

I hope not. That would be the death knell of their reputation.

I'm surprised that saying something positive when bigotry is hurled at a fellow human being would inspire rancor.

Heated primaries bring out the worst in some.

[magical thyme]

47. he handled that beautifully...

I tried to watch yesterday, but for some reason youtube was a mess (maybe too many people watching that one video at the same time?) so couldn't make out a single word.

Glad to watch today and see what really happened there....

[Aerows]

58. He really did.

That could have been an ugly moment, but instead, he turned it into a moment of clarity for more than a few people, I'm sure!

[magical thyme]

63. heh!heh! just saw your little birdie

[stevenleser]

57. What's telling is that no fellow Jews from the Jewish group have responded that they agree.

There is no question that antisemitism and insensitive statements along those lines have come up here against Sanders.

But the same folks lamenting it have stood by and done nothing for years on DU while insensitive and borderline or over the borderline antisemitism has come up time and time again on DU.

I was accused of supporting antisemitic comments after I posted links to 6 twitter posters that complained of bullying at a caucus and one of those posters had insensitive comments in their feed. Thats right, I am Jewish and the son of a holocaust survivor. And I like other Jews here have watched hundreds of insensitive comments about Jews go unhidden and in some cases supported for years. Now because you guys want to support a Jewish candidate, you are hypervigilant about insensitive statements about Jews.

You will no doubt excuse me if I do not accept your sudden concern as genuine.

[Aerows]

59. Oh my.

My "sudden concern" is now being questioned. Just great. I guess if I have "sudden concern" when I see homophobic posts, you will question that, too. Maybe I shouldn't have "sudden concern" when I see racist or sexist posts, either.

You really expressed your positions with this post.

[stevenleser]

60. Nope.

You have expressed prior concern about LGBT equality so no that wouldn't be questioned as being a convenient new concern.

[Aerows]

61. I didn't realize

that recognizing and denouncing bigotry had a statute of limitations.

[stevenleser]

62. Oh sure you did. And if the situation were reversed you would be saying the same things I'm saying.

Hey, I'm happy so many folks are suddenly concerned about antisemitism.

But I also know once this campaign is over it will be back to the same it was before and me and the rest of DU's Jews and the folks who participate in the Jewish group will be watching as insensitive comments about Jews go unhidden. From that perspective, this new concern is a bit insulting.

[Aerows]

65. For someone that made exceptionally strong statements in 2008

and then has to post a link to their explanation of why they changed their mind in 2016 - statements that in 2008 were just as sexist then as they are now - I suggest to you that this probably isn't the road you want to go down.

It says a lot more about you than it does about me. I won't even bother unearthing your statements that you made in 2008, because most people are already familiar with them, not to mention other statements that you have had to walk back, as well.

But hey, please proceed! I certainly don't want to interrupt anyone who disparages my character while they are busy making a mistake.

[melman]

71. And yet

you are one of the biggest defenders of the poster who shall not be named. Everybody knows which one.

Which makes you look more than a little full of shit here.

[beam me up scottie]

72. ^^^THIS^^^

[Ned_Devine]

78. Exactamundo. Like we ought to listen to the guy that reports for Newsmax

[stevenleser]

79. Bernie appears anywhere and you guys dont question that at all. The double standard is glaring.

Either I have a point or I don't. Whether someone reports from perdition doesnt matter.

[Ned_Devine]

86. It's definitely the messenger

I may have my differences with many of the HRC supporters here, but in the end I feel as though I can have a normal person to person conversation with them. You, on the other hand seem totally disingenuous, smug, smarmy and fake and I take whatever you say and put it in the circular file.

[Aerows]

151. Agreed.

That pretty much sums it up.

I put it in file 13, but I think we have a similar filing system for bullshit.

[Bonobo]

156. But his flag lapel pin is divine! nt

[stevenleser]

186. Which discredits your opinion. nt

[Ned_Devine]

195. ...

[stevenleser]

199. Yep, when you have two standards for the same behavior it discredits you. Period.

[Ned_Devine]

202. ...

Last edited Tue Apr 12, 2016, 10:33 PM - Edit history (1)

[Bonobo]

204. Like when you blamed Jews for Anti-Semitism in Copenhagen?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1223466#post5

Let's say right after the Iraq invasion in 2003, I go to Liberia in Africa. Lets say there are people there that are angry at the US policy with regards to Iraq. They see me, a white person (I'm mixed, but I know from experience, Africans view me as white) speaking English with an American accent and they assume I am American and in favor of the Iraq war and they attack me.

Are they attacking me because I am white? Is it ethnocentrism that is causing the attack?

No, but the whiteness and other indicators are leading them to believe I am a member of a country engaging in policies they abhor.
Edited to add: When I traveled after the invasion of Iraq.

If someone is anti-semitic, they are against Jews because they believe being Jewish is intrinsically bad or evil. That is not what is the case in the article you cite. The 'Jewishness' is leading someone to believe that the person in question is Israeli and the Israeli part is the source of the anger because of specific policies the people have problems with.

[Aerows]

155. You are not the arbiter of who can and cannot

denounce bigotry, Steven, and it the height of arrogance to pretend that you are.

[stevenleser]

187. Sure I am. And so is everyone else. And I call BS

[Aerows]

219. I'd really like to know

where you got certified in barking up the wrong tree, Steve, because you are doing it all over the place in this thread.

[Joe the Revelator]

117. You are out of line.

Way Way out of line.

[TM99]

120. When has that ever stopped him?

[Bluenorthwest]

64. Back up you claims. 'Same folks' you say. Which folks are those?

I've consistently spoken out against antisemitism on DU and all over the fucking world since I was a child. I see many others on DU do the same. I do not see you do that. But there are others.

All of this 'same folks' and 'you guys' is a crappy, furtive tactic. What your post here says is 'Yes it is obvious bigotry but I blame the victims not those who speak hate and filthy bigotry'.

This McCarthy crap of generalizations and collective guilt and 'you guys' is part of the same fabric that the antisemitism comes from. You should know better.

If you want to accuse people do so. 'It's all the same people' is a load of horse shit evasion. Doubt that would even fly at Fox News.

[stevenleser]

80. You can see for yourself the hosts and the folks who post there.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1223

[Aerows]

162. I like elleng

and I am pissed off that you are trying to drag nice DUers into your own private meltdown.

Leave her alone and accept that you are just being ugly for ugliness's sake.

I won't tolerate that for one minute. You are attacking people that aren't even involved in this for no reason other than your precious ego was damaged.

Settle the hell down.

[Bluenorthwest]

165. My point is that you are smearing me and doing so without any fucking reason but your own bias.

'It's all the same people'. You deal in generalities. Preset notions about groups of people.

I could give you a shit ton of links to 'Hillary supporters' saying horrific things about LGBT, and yet I do not claim that you all do that or that you yourself do that. I have some ethics. So I do not credit you with the works of kelliekat44 or DU's other hate mongers for Hillary. You are super friendly with some of that crowd and frankly they are not really for Hillary.

You hated Hillary in 08, now you love her and yet no matter what stance you take you affect that you simply can't understand the other stance. Which was your stance moments ago. That's bullshit. That's cloying and self serving. It's the reformed smoker who smokes for 30 years, quits for a week and says 'i don't understand smokers'. It's a joke.

[stevenleser]

177. Nope, there is plenty of reason for my opinion. See BtA's #154. In particular...

"Are there Sanders supporters who are ginormus hypocrites in regards to their new found 'concern' for anti-Semitism? Fuck yeah there are!"

Which was my point

[Aerows]

131. Pardon me for cursing

But you don't have a *DAMN* thing to apologize to anyone with regards to your well-documented statements on LGBT rights, human rights, racial justice, and economic justice.

You are truly a person that "Takes a backseat to no one" and you do it well, my friend.

This thread is devolving into deep idiocy of disparaging people's character that have been Democrats all of their lives.

[beam me up scottie]

67. LOL! And we're supposed to believe that you speak for them?

My those hidden posts really stung, didn't they?

Maybe next time you'll check your sources before posting on DU, a true journalist would know better.

[Warren DeMontague]

107. I'm a Jew, Steve.

And I agree with the message in the OP.

[Bjorn Against]

114. As usual you are wrong

Even before you made this post Bonobo had posted in this thread, he also posts in the Jewish group on DU. You claim to be a journalist yet you repeatedly get basic facts wrong.

[Aerows]

159. Indeed

We are friends for a reason

Thank you for speaking up.

[stevenleser]

175. Oh I am not the one proven wrong in our recent interactions.

You tried to accuse me of racism and everyone in the AA group says your accusation was bullshit.

[Bjorn Against]

178. Just because you get a few black people to defend you does not mean all black people feel the same

I stand by what I said, your words were extremely racist. I will post them again so people can see just how racist they are...

If I were a criminal, knowing about the no snitch code, I would immediately change my operations so that all my criminal activities took place in black neighborhoods. In other words, this belief system is an open invitation to criminals of all stripes to prey on members of the black community. That is what this philosophy is. It’s the entire black community standing up with arms outstretched and saying at the top of their lungs, “Come rob, rape or kill me, (or all of the above) please!”.

After the 60 minutes expose, I would expect to see Burglars, Robbers, Rapists, Child Molesters, Drug Dealers, Con Artists, Organized Crime syndicates and any other kind of criminals move their operations into black neighborhoods. I am sure we will see this happen and see it reflected in the crime statistics over the next few years. A law enforcement official in the 60 minutes segment quoted a statistic that in some African American communities, ‘No Snitching’ has contributed to reduce the rate of murders being solved to less than 10%. It is a shame that only a few years after African Americans mostly rid their communities of gangs, they are extending an open invitation for criminals to take up residence there.

At the same time, now that this is known, law abiding people are going to start avoiding the black community. I certainly don’t want anyone I care about to go to a place where criminals know they are getting a free pass to rob, rape or kill them. This is going to translate into a measurable economic loss for businesses of the black community. All the work that many people are doing to create new businesses owned by African Americans along with other efforts to build up the economic power of the black community is going to be destroyed by “No snitching”.

http://www.opednews.com/populum/pagem.php?f=opedne_steven_l_070422_no_snitching_creed_a.htm

You literally claim the ENTIRE black race is calling on people to rob, rape, or murder them. I know many black people who would disagree with you on that as much as you may want to pretend they don't exist.

[stevenleser]

179. First of all, your title is racist. Second of all, you got no person of color to agree with you

Third, I did not "literally claim the ENTIRE black race is calling on people to rob, rape or murder them".

That is your straw man that you built for no other reason than to attack a political opponent. Which is exactly what I am also saying far too many Sanders supporters are doing with antisemitism.

You further reinforce my point once again.

And how serious has your concern for issues of race been? I checked, you have participated in exactly four threads in the AA group in the last five years.

I've been talking about issues of race and discrimination in articles and my radio show for over a decade now.

[Bjorn Against]

180. No, no, and no

First of all my subject line is merely stating that black people are not a monolith, I don't think there is anything racist or even controversial about noting that not all black people agree on everything.

Second how the hell do you know that no black people agree with me? The thread was locked and only a tiny number of people were able to respond.

And third yes you did literally claim that the entire black race was calling on people to rape rob or murder them.

Here are your exact words as I linked above...

It’s the entire black community standing up with arms outstretched and saying at the top of their lungs, “Come rob, rape or kill me, (or all of the above) please!”.

So no, my words were not a straw man, you actually typed that racist crap.

[stevenleser]

182. Yes, yes and yes.

and your quote is hilarious. Do you understand what imagery, sarcasm and metaphor is?

[Bjorn Against]

183. Sorry but I don't find racist imagery and sarcasm aimed at an entire race hilarious like you do

[stevenleser]

184. #1 none of the group in question found it racist. #2 it wasn't funny. So you got that part

Now you just need on working to understand the rest.

Once again, as a mixed race person who is genuinely concerned about issues of racial and religious discrimination, your attempt to attack me on both grounds would be laughable if it wasn't so insulting.

In fact with the title of your last comment, you have proved that you are the racist. Dismissing members of the African American group as "a few black people". That is the racism here.

[Bjorn Against]

189. I did not dismiss anyone

I just noted that not all black people share the same opinion. We literally only heard from a few black people not the entire race yet you seem to want to pretend that all black people think the same way you do.

People in the African American group are entitled to their opinion and I am not dismissing their opinion but I am also not going to pretend that all black people agree with them because I personally know several who hold different opinions.

[stevenleser]

190. Once again, I've sent PMs to folks in the AA group and I will let them decide if you dismissed them

you completely outed yourself here.

[Bjorn Against]

191. See Steve this is what you don't understand...

I have no doubt that you have black friends who will back you up, it is their decision to do so and that is fine if they do.

Black people do not all think the same way however, I could call in black friends who agree with me as well but I choose not to do so because I know that black thought is not a monolith. I know my black friends do not represent all black people any more than my white friends represent all white people.

[stevenleser]

198. The funniest part is you were racist in your failed attempt to couch me as racist

Nothing you write is backed up. It's all Hackery of the worst kind. In fact the nonsense you have tried to push in support of your candidate is worse Hackery than the worst pundit on the right or left on their worst day.

And you were racist in your failed attempt to characterize me as racist. You can't unrung that bell.

[Bjorn Against]

201. Steve it has nothing to do with my candidate

It has to do with your own words it has nothing to do with Bernie. I will let people read your words and decide for themselves whether the words you wrote are racist. I am quite comfortable in believing that the large majority of people on this site know that I am not a racist. Your reputation on the other hand, well let's just say I am pretty sure you have read the long threads that demonstrate just what kind of reputation you have here.

[stevenleser]

210. Upon reflection, your comments are actually twice as racist as I originally thought.

To the contrary re: your protestations otherwise, your accusation is only about support for Bernie. That is your only concern here. To derail discussions where I and others are criticizing Bernie. That is the point of you and other Sanders supporters data-mining comments from hundreds of folks to derail discussion.

That makes your comments twice as racist. It trivializes real issues of racism and at the same time you are discounting what African Americans are telling you regarding your comments. That is what you have done here in your support of Bernie.

[Bjorn Against]

211. You are now accusing me of data mining? Seriously?

What evidence do you have to back up that charge? When you make allegations with no basis in fact that shows just how little credibility you have.

Sorry but linking to your own words is not data mining nor does it make me a racist.

[stevenleser]

214. What is it that you don't get?

I talked about a topic regarding Sanders supporters bullying folks at a caucus and you responded by researching my articles, finding one from 6 years ago and accusing me of being racist. You datamined my posts and derailed instead of addressing the topic regarding Sanders.

[Bjorn Against]

216. What the hell are you talking about?

Since when was this conversation about bullying at a caucus? Sorry but posting a link that is publicly available on the internet and has been linked to several times before is not data mining.

[stevenleser]

221. I was very clear. If you don't understand, read it again until you do. nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

192. The voices that you "know" (to the extent that anyone "knows" anyone, on-line) ...

and heard don't matter ... because he/she says he/she knows someone (presumably, a or some, PoC) that hold differing opinions? I'm sure those (again, presumably) PoC's holding the same opinion as he/she holds, has nothing to do with the value he/she assigns to their opinion.

To me ... It's problematic for white people to discount/disregard the opinions of Black people (on matters of race) because that white person knows people that agree with him/her.

But that's just the opinion of a Black man ... struggling to be heard by white folks, because they know some Black person that agrees with them!

[Joe the Revelator]

116. You speak for no one but yourself.

I'll measure Jewish street cred with anybody (which is what you're doing in your 2nd paragraph. Stay classy Steve.)

If you really cared, you wouldn't let shit like this stand.You would not be sitting here on your imaginary high horse making the unteniable point that we should ignore blatent antisemitism when it rears its head, if someone may have ignored it in the past. That is seriously one of the silliest stances I've ever heard.

To everyone else: I accept your 'sudden' concern and appreciate it. Antisemitism should be fought whenever and wherever it shows up in all its cowardice.

[Aerows]

160. "If you really cared, you wouldn't let shit like this stand"

Indeed.

I'm not "concerned" that someone thinks that my concern was "sudden" since I have been speaking out against bigotry for years here on DU.

[stevenleser]

176. Nope, see #154. Despite the tone, BtA and I agree on virtually everything. nt

[Bonobo]

126. Here's a Jew that agrees, Steve.

So your father was a holocaust survivor? I would love to hear more about that. My grandmother was a Holocuast survivor as well.

She was born in 1906, the first of her family to be born in America in this family. All of her cousins were killed.

But I am 50 years old. The youngest of my own family, my parents were born in 1932 and 1936 respectively.

Your father must be pretty old. Had he moved to the US when he was a baby? I must imagine so. Where did he come from?

Anyway, as for Bernie's statement, I support it fully.

And as far as people with Jewish backgrounds being anti-Semitic? Well that happens, you know. Did you imagine that it was impossible when there are Black people racist against Blacks, Indians racist against Indians, etc, etc.

[Aerows]

139. It was a moment

when a good person took the narrative from a bigoted person, and turned it into a complete description of who they are without being an idiot in kind.

He doesn't want to be something, he wants to DO something.

[Bonobo]

140. To say "I am proud to be a Jew" and then to criticize Israel as he did...

THAT is the essence of being a Jew.

[Behind the Aegis]

154. Why is it telling?

I got your PM, but honestly, I was more concerned with the upcoming medical procedure my husband is facing later today (Monday), so I was spending my time with him today (Sunday). I did mark the thread to address it later, but it wasn't high priority for me; I can't speak for anyone else in the Jewish group.

I agree the remarks made to Sanders were anti-Semitic. I also commented on the thread where another Jew decided what Sanders "shoulda done." IMO, he handled the situation quite well.

As for your other comments, I have complained about people who are "suddenly" concerned about anti-Semitism, but I have also complained about those who are "concerned" about anti-Semitism, but fall silent when it suits their needs. I can't speak for any other Jews here, but personally, I don't give two shits if you are a Clinton supporter or a Sanders supporter...I will still address anti-Semitism if I see it and am so moved to do it. I don't care if the poster is white, black, mixed, Latino, Asian; GLBT or straight; male or female; nor do I care if the poster is Christian, Muslim, atheist, or....a JEW! If I see anti-Semitism, I will address it as I see fit. I do not give passes because someone falls into a certain group.

Are there Sanders supporters who are ginormus hypocrites in regards to their new found 'concern' for anti-Semitism? Fuck yeah there are! But I call them out when they engage in anti-Semitism and point out their hypocrisy when they make excuses. Are there Clinton supporters who "ignore" anti-Semitism? Hell to the yes! They are keeping their mouths shut when their compatriots use anti-Semitic sources rather than rebuking them. However, unless posters are using their "defending" against Anti-Semitism as a political tool, then I don't care if they speak out.

You know what, though? I really appreciate those who have always defended against anti-Semitism, no matter who was speaking/posting or what the target is (Israel, Zionism, Jews...hell, even bagels)! They don't use their attacking anti-Semitism as a "you scratch my back, I scratch yours" type of weapon. Posters like Bluenorthwest, beam me up scottie, one_voice, ismnowasm, Bonobo, Codeine, and Warren DeMontague (to name a few) have always stood against anti-Semitism, even when it is not popular.

If Sanders were to become our democratic candidate, then there a number of people who will really have to come to understand anti-Semitism and what it really is.

[beam me up scottie]

157. Righteous! You totally rock, BtA!

You have always been a fearless fighter against ALL bigotry on DU, you never hesitate and you don't back down. I consider you a friend and an ally, and I can't think of anyone I'd rather stand beside.

[Aerows]

163. Thank you for being an amazing voice

here on DU, BtA.

[Joe the Revelator]

166. You, you can speak for me.

[stevenleser]

185. Good, because he said the same thing I did. nt

[Joe the Revelator]

200. No. He did not. Not even close. Not even kind of close.

[Bonobo]

205. Steve has a habit of saying he knows what people think. On Judaism, he is no BtA. nt

[Joe the Revelator]

206. I very very rarely get 'really' mad online. This entire exchange made me feel like the guy in your

signature.

[stevenleser]

209. Yes he did and he confirmed that in a followup. nt

[stevenleser]

169. We are in violent agreement.

Last edited Tue Apr 12, 2016, 11:26 AM - Edit history (1)

As for your other comments, I have complained about people who are "suddenly" concerned about anti-Semitism, but I have also complained about those who are "concerned" about anti-Semitism, but fall silent when it suits their needs.

And I agree with that 100%. But lets review what we are talking about here.

I posted a post a week or so ago with quotes from six twitter posters about issues they experienced at a caucus. Sanders supporters here datamined the posts of one of the twitter users to find insensitive tweets about Jews and dismissed my entire post because of "Antisemitism" when only one of the six twitter posters with the experience had that history of tweets. Moreover the accusations came from folks I have never seen concern before regarding insensitive statements about Jews.

I know you will agree with me that this type of "concern" about antisemitism is bullshit. That is the kind of stuff I have been dealing with here.

Are there Sanders supporters who are ginormus hypocrites in regards to their new found 'concern' for anti-Semitism? Fuck yeah there are!

And that was my point. And let me be even more clear. Its one thing for you and I and some of the other folks you listed and folks from the Jewish group to discuss issues like this. But being lectured to about antisemitism by Sanders supporters who have never shown any such concerns before is something I will not stand for. I am sure if it were happening to you, you would not stand for it either.

Edited to add: And further note my first sentence from my first post in this thread:

There is no question that antisemitism and insensitive statements along those lines have come up here against Sanders.

I'm not "falling silent when it meets my needs" by any stretch of the imagination.

[Bonobo]

173. You're sure of a lot of things. Maybe you should actually listen instead of telling people

what you are "sure" that they think.

Maybe that'll work for ya!

[Behind the Aegis]

207. I will freely admit I am utterly confused.

I have read and re-read your post and I am uncertain the point you are trying to make. I am also not fully understanding what "violent agreement" is. So, I am going to state my peace, as I see it and hopefully, it will align with this mini-thread.

You brought up the twitter situation. I got your PM then too, but I was pre-occupied, by the time I got back you had been "flagged for review" and the thread had sank. I am going to be completely honest, I don't understand twitter, so unless I can see something directly, it is nothing but a "word salad" to me. All I could understand was that one of the twitter users you highlighted had used anti-Semitic rhetoric in previous tweets. If true, then it probably was not wise to use that source, or upon discovering the information, distancing yourself from it. But that is completely up to you. Like I confessed, Twitter is not something I fully understand, and I don't have a twitter account, I don't follow tweets, and usually only address the ones which are overtly bigoted.

I know you will agree with me that this type of "concern" about antisemitism is bullshit. That is the kind of stuff I have been dealing with here.

Yes, it has been an issue since I arrived here. I see you quoted me, but left out the comment I made about Clinton supporters. Did you notice a rise in Celtic Cross avatars? I sure did. I even asked someone about it because generally the only people who use it are deeply Irish people, pagans, and neo-Nazis. For me, at this site, I usually associate it with paganism, but I was seeing people using it who I knew weren't pagans and noticed there were now a large handful of people using it. As I understand it, someone said the symbol was used by neo-Nazis in response to a poster (not at DU) using the symbol, then others (at DU), in a show of "solidarity" started using it as an avatar. Personally, I find that REALLY suspicious. It was a way of thumbing their noses at the concerns people had about possible anti-Semitic imagery.

Yes, I have addressed Sanders supporters who have used anti-Semitism, and scoffed at some who are now "indignant" about anti-Semitism. But, I also see the rank hypocrisy of certain Clinton supporters who have complained about anti-Semitism in the past, while using it or excusing it now. I just read a thread complaining about it in regards to the upcoming NY primaries and saw someone whining about how Jews were called names by other Jews for supporting the Iran deal, but what that person left out was his repeated anti-Semitic remarks about any Jew who didn't support the deal, calling them traitors and "congress people - Tel Aviv" implying their loyalty was to Israel, not the US. So the hypocrisy is coming from both directions. What I was trying to get across is, if the person is defending against something that is clearly anti-Semitic and not making it a "political tool" then I don't' care, but if they are using it to "score points", then I have an issue.

If you don't want to be lectured by Sanders supporters you deem "hypocrites", that's fine. Personally, I don't like being lectured to by either group, especially when they aren't Jews. So, if you want to confront those individuals, have at it. It is unlikely I will have much to say against your position, unless it is also pointing out inconsistencies or bringing the topic back to the topic of anti-Semitism.

I have less issues when it is "Jew on Jew" battles, in most cases. I see it in the same way I see issues of homophobia, I don't need those who aren't GBLT to fight my battles, and most of the real GBLT allies here understand that and know when to intervene and when to step back, which is why they are good allies.

Edited to add: And further note my first sentence from my first post in this thread:

There is no question that antisemitism and insensitive statements along those lines have come up here against Sanders.

I'm not "falling silent when it meets my needs" by any stretch of the imagination.

Good. And when that "antisemitism and insensitive statements along those lines have come up here against Sanders" are you responding to them? Mentioning it happens isn't 'not being silent' it simply means you know it is happening. If you are addressing it, no matter the poster's allegiance...fantastic! Then I wouldn't see an issue and you wouldn't be one of the ones I was mentioning, which, BTW, wasn't an implied attack; so we are clear.

[stevenleser]

208. I think we agree on 99.9999% of stuff, but here is the thing...

...regarding that twitter source, that is the whole problem with Sanders supporters here. You cannot use any source ever. Because they data-mine every single thing that everyone has ever written, find the slightest thing to attack and then use that to derail the discussion and point that was being made. And that is what they are doing with antisemitism and you can see another poster under this OP doing it with racism and who persists despite everyone from the AA group responding that my article wasnt racist.

Its a terrible tactic on several fronts. First of all, derailing a discussion with false concerns is a logical fallacy (red herring) and a tactic we should never see on DU. Second of all, it trivializes the issues of equality for those groups involved.

Imagine if we have an LGBT candidate one day that you don't support but person B does. You quote a whole bunch of people regarding an issue that you have concern with the LGBT candidate about. Person B datamines everything that every one of those people ever said and found that one of them was against gay marriage 10 years ago. And they derail the entire discussion about the point you wanted to discuss and accuse you of being insensitive on LGBT issues. That is what is going on here.

I've never seen that on DU before. Its actually beyond DU. Sanders supporters all over the internet are doing those kinds of things. Yes, we see accusations of racism and sexism back in 2008. But the data-mining we are seeing from Sanders supporters this go around is taking it all to another level of silliness.

On Edit to discuss the Celtic imagery:
I have actually been a frequent visitor to the ADL and SPLC websites going back to almost when those sites first came into being. I am very vigilant against racist and antisemitic imagery that they point out.

What ADL is very careful to note about the Celtic cross is that it is used by many folks of Irish heritage as a non-racist non-antisemitic symbol. It is available here on DU as a symbol for that reason. This whole kerfuffle about the celtic cross is yet ANOTHER example of Sanders supporters trying to throw things at Clinton supporters to discredit and derail their discussions rather than addressing other concerns about Sanders and his campaign that they raise. A number of Clinton supporters have thus decided to display it in solidarity to push back against the tactic.

http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/hate-on-display/c/celtic-cross.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/

The Celtic Cross, as typically depicted, is a traditional Christian symbol used for religious purposes as well as to symbolize concepts like Irish pride. As such, it is a very common symbol and primarily used by non-extremists. Most renditions of the traditional Celtic Cross feature an elongated vertical axis (often accompanied by Celtic knotwork) that resembles that of other Christian crosses. Although white supremacists will occasionally use this version of the Celtic Cross, the overwhelming use of this version of the Celtic Cross is non-extremist and, in the absence of other hate symbols, does not denote white supremacy or racism.

It is the short "sun cross" version of the Celtic Cross, surrounded by a circle, that is more commonly used by white supremacists, although even here care must be taken always to judge it in context.

Sanders supporters here don't even know enough about the issue to understand this and frankly it doesnt seem they care. The point isnt to try to combat racism, its to attack Clinton supporters and stop them from discussing whatever it is they want to discuss.

Additional Edit to add:

Violent agreement is when two people are having a heated discussion and upon review of their points, it turns out they were in agreement on the vast majority if not all of the points involved.

[Behind the Aegis]

212. I think you are reaching.

You cannot use any source ever.

Hyperbole, yes, but still an overreach. Were that the case, Sanders' supporters wouldn't be able to source anything. Quite frankly, I see the same when it comes to Clinton supporters, and often, the opposing group of any issue. This isn't a new thing, and certainly not unique to Sanders' supporters. Try posting something in I/P. Anything! It can be "pro"-Israel or "anti"-Israel and there will be those who will search out the origins of the source and/or author. Sometimes, it is nothing more than a distraction, a red herring as you said, but other times it can produce some very disturbing facts. Recently a Clinton supporter posted a "hit piece" on Sanders which linked to an anti-Semitic site, others have linked to Holocaust revisionist sites. I am sorry (well, not really), but linking to sites which indulge in anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial/revisionism are not legitimate sites to criticize a Jew, Judaism, or Israel, any more than linking to a Fred Phelps site would be "legitimate" criticism for someone who doesn't support a candidate who happens to be LGBT.

I can easily find anti-Semitic sources used here which were not hidden, but were sent to a jury, never mind those which never saw a jury, and a few which were hidden, but the poster still remains. I know you don't think they are legitimate sources, even if what they say is 100% true.

"The sky is blue. The earth is oblong and revolves around the sun. All dogs are canines. Washington, D.C. is the current capital of the US."

The above is all true. Pretend, for a moment, all those facts are actually a factual article which makes sense. Would linking to that 'article' be acceptable if the source was "godhatesfags.com" or "thejewreport.com" or "davidduke.com"? I, personally, don't think it is legitimate, and certainly should not be used as source material at DU. However, there are those who do, and that Steven, IMO, is problematic and where "data mining" and discussing the source is not a red herring and is germane to the discussion.

You are correct we are in agreement on the majority of issues surrounding anti-Semitism, however, we differ in that it is one side who is the dragon and the other side is the white knight. Both sides are playing both roles, but at various times and to varying degrees. Also, it has been the Clinton supporters, especially of late, who have been downplaying, mocking, or even excusing anti-Semitism, and I find that very troubling.

[stevenleser]

213. I'm not overreaching. Look what is happening to what I write. I am Jewish and mixed race.

I've been accused of being insensitive on antisemitism and of being racist. That has to start setting off red flags with you. It has to, its insane.

From what I have seen, the vast majority of instances I have seen where Sanders supporters have claimed antisemitism has not been legitimate and has merely been an attempt to derail, the Celtic cross kerfuffle being a prime example.

That's not to say that there hasn't been antisemitism or things posted from the kinds sources you note. There has. And yes, I would object if something had been sourced from "godhatesfags.com" or "thejewreport.com" or "davidduke.com"?

And yes, Clinton supporters here literally cannot source anything here. Take a look at pro Clinton posts on GDP.

In virtually every one there is an attack on source rather than substance. Try taking a look. That is the tactic of Sanders supporters. It's not always that a source is antisemitic or racist or discriminatory. The more common attack is that the author is coopted in some way. But the tactic is to datamine every source and find a way to derail the discussion.

And I am not sure I would use I/P as an example. I/P discussions are relegated to that dungeon-group and prohibited from GD expressly because it tends to produce undesireable behavior in folks debating the topics.

This behavior is what caused folks like geek tragedy to switch from Sanders to Clinton. Its what has other decent Sanders supporters like JI7 to be sick of the behavior after trying to call it out several times.

[Behind the Aegis]

215. Yes, you are overreaching and reacting emotionally.

It is understandable because you are personally being "vetted", and, in some cases, it is OTT.

From what I have seen, the vast majority of instances I have seen where Sanders supporters have claimed antisemitism has not been legitimate and has merely been an attempt to derail, the Celtic cross kerfuffle being a prime example.

This is where we part ways. I don't see the Celtic Cross "kerfuffle" as being a distraction. It is a prime example of people using anti-Semitism, or mocking it, and getting away with it. To me, it is no different than given a pass to someone who refers to Lindsey Graham, as "Lady Lindsey." It is homophobic! It should be called as such. PERIOD! I feel the same when it is anti-Semitism. It may not rise to the level of calling us "kikes", but when the little transgressions get a pass, the bigger ones become more challenging to battle because the smaller ones are trotted out as examples of "see, you didn't complain then!"

And yes, Clinton supporters here literally cannot source anything here. Take a look at pro Clinton posts on GDP.

No. That simply is not true. It is hyperbole at best, but see, this is a distraction and moving away from the discussion of anti-Semitism. I know this isn't even remotely accurate, but it also doesn't relate to the discussion of anti-Semitism, so we will have to agree to disagree and not use it as a conflation of attacks being anti-Semitic or not.

And I am not sure I would use I/P as an example. I/P discussions are relegated to that dungeon-group and prohibited from GD expressly because it tends to produce undesireable behavior in folks debating the topics.

It's location is irrelevant to the discussion which you changed to "data-mining". It is exactly what happens there, but not all the time and not by every pro-Israel poster, nor by every one who isn't.

If your concerns are about anti-Semitism being misused, abused, or trotted out for political gains, then we are in agreement, but may vary on degree of its happening. If, you are trying to secure an agreement about the Clinton supporters getting "beat up" by the mean, ole Sanders supporters, then that ain't happening.

The very simple fact is the OP is correct and what was said to Sanders was anti-Semitic. She is also correct in that he handled it well. Everything else, is nothing more than "dressing" in regards to DU as a site. So to circle back to the original concern...

...if the expression of concern in regards to something being anti-Semitic is real and legitimate, then I have no issue with whomever chooses to point it out (I may scoff, chortle, or roll my eyes, though). If, however, it is being used in a duplicitous manner, then I have a huge problem with it, and may be moved to point out the hypocrisy of the poster, the author, the site, or what have you.

[stevenleser]

218. How many examples do you want? Pick a number. I will show you that many ridiculous

data-mining examples.

[JudyM]

66. What does the guy say after Bernie talks... He calls out something and then everyone's boos him...

[bettyellen]

70. that's some messed up shit, and SBS handled it very well. the crowd loved him for that.

[Aerows]

128. Thank you for saying so, bettyellen

I'd like to think every human being would applaud him stating facts without rancor.

Nice moment. I know you support Hillary Clinton, and let all of us not forget that we are all in this together.

I think we all do the best we can if we have kindness in our hearts, beauty in our souls, and the brain we were given.

I know I went off on a tangent, but anyway, thank you for your response.

[bettyellen]

129. every big crowd will have an asshole or two- especially if they do a Q+A. It was heartening to see

his skewed ideas go over so poorly with the crowd. I hope ugly shit like that stays to a minimum for both candidates, and when it does we can all denounce it. We will see more anti-semitiim and sexism undoubtably, and we can't let any of it slide because we are all of us in this together.

[Aerows]

133. We are all in this together.

That is a fact!

I don't think his ideas are skewed, but I do think he slammed the door on anti-Semiticism directed at his campaign with grace when someone attacked him for being Jewish.

It was unsettling, and I am pissed that I was told I am not "allowed" to express disgust at anti-Semitism, though I am "allowed" to express disgust at homophobia.

Think about that for a minute.

[bettyellen]

167. I meant the questioner's messed up ideas. It wasn't even a question as much as it was an accusation

that Jews are bad, so like- what's your relationship with them. WTF? Of course we should all express disgust.
I get tired of people here being mad at people for NOT posting whatever, or demanding you prove you feel something. Trust me, I get it all the time here. Like both candidates, I think we all get attacked here for things that are actually good.
People have been such jerks, shit gets twisted.
I saw what you are referring to, and understand the general phenomenon they were referring to- all of people all of a sudden caring deeply about issues so they can bludgeon others with them. And I think we've both seen people fake that. Unfortunately it's pretty common here these days. Some people are poisoning this place with rancor and ignorance trying to prove themselves more progressive than thou, and it is a load of crap. Sorry they busted your chops over that.

[Armstead]

73. Question about all that at the end

Apart from the questioner, the crowd was very raucus. I could tell that some were applauding and defending Bernie (and the shouts of Bernie!) ....But there was a lot of otehr yelling going on.I heard a reference to "gentrification"

Can anyone decipher or know what the rest of it was and the overall mood of the room?

[MFM008]

76. really sad.

His religion or lack of it or whatever has nothing to do with why i am an HRC supporter.
some people are just racist bigoted asses.

[Ken Burch]

77. In the link, the guy asking those questions is identified as "John Prince".

That name ring a bell to any NYC DU'ers?

[Aerows]

91. I'm not a New Yorker by any means

so I don't know. If there is some significance, I hope some New Yorkers could speak up.

[Skwmom]

82. A person on one of the propaganda channels the other day referred to Bernie as the Jew.

I think some of the people on the panel were even a little surprised.

The twit on Morning Joe emphasized a Jewish President. And Mathews, the ultimate corp whore, looked like the cat that swallowed the canary when he brought up the fact that Bernie is Jewish. It's a line they have really been trying to use against him.

[jillan]

92. You know who else did that? Stephanie Miller. Yes, that one. She would refer to Bernie as the

Jewish man from Vermont.

She did that on more than one occasion. I kept tweeting her show asking why his religion was being brought up.
To me it sounded like she was trying to paint him as the "other" just like what people tried to do to our President. But with Stephanie, you never know for sure if it's the wine talking or her.

I can't say if she still does it. I don't listen to her anymore in the mornings.
This was not the only reason why I stopped.

[Skwmom]

93. They say we should be inclusive and then they pull this crap.

It is disgusting.

[Aerows]

161. I was schooled that there was only

one type of bigotry that I was "allowed" to comment on.

[nadinbrzezinski]

90. I would be lying if I said I was surprised

and we have very tolerated and in the open antisemitic code here as well. Which again, I would be lying if I said I was surprised.

[Aerows]

121. Hell, Nadin, we all *SHOULD* be!

If anti-Semitic tripe gets batted around on a site that purports to be Democratic, we are doing it wrong.

[nadinbrzezinski]

122. Funny about that photo, that fox is doing it right

it comes from "Nature," and how these critters hunt in the winter. They literally dive into the snow.

It just stuck me as a funny meme.

[haikugal]

149. My first thought too Nadin...the fox as doing it right!

[Aerows]

168. Okay. LOL

[Attorney in Texas]

111. Some of it from Hillary supporters here.

[grossproffit]

127. Anti-Semitism isn't limited to one group here.

I've seen it quite often on this forum. It's a form of bigotry that's still acceptable and excused.

[Aerows]

135. None of it is acceptable

Gaybaiting isn't acceptable, either, but it still goes on.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

134. The guy who insulted Bernie sounded weird

probably a Trump supporter?

[oberliner]

136. Probably a Trump supporter?

You can't be serious.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

137. who the hell was he?

[oberliner]

142. John Prince

You can hear more of his rantings here:

https://twitter.com/Yamiche/status/718967350092046336

[Rosa Luxemburg]

144. Thanks!

[jwirr]

141. My God, the KKK must be rolling on the floor laughing.

[Aerows]

170. I have no words.

and I was told I had no business pointing the bigotry out.

[jwirr]

181. Well what I see is that the KKK has the two groups they

target the most fighting each other. Divide and conquer. I am very sorry to see it. And it does not help any of us. And by that I mean my mixed family and others.

[dr60omg]

145. I thought he handled it brilliantly I wish I could have been that cool

And he was ... amazing

[Aerows]

158. Me too, cher!

He laid it on the line, and was both humble, but forceful.

Amazing moment in American politics.

[Aerows]

171. I'm a tad upset

when denouncing bigotry is turned into a game of "holier than thou".

Okay. Nobody is going to be shocked if I yell about homophobia or trans rights.

But why in the heck is it wrong to mention bigotry outside of your particular stream?

It ISN'T

If someone gets upset about this post, which was a highly positive demonstration of how to deal with bigotry in a kind, but pointed fashion, I suggest they need to re-evaluate their view of the human beings in their lives.

[Bonobo]

174. Aerows, you do not need to have established any "bona fides" in my book to call our anti-semitism.

The irony of that person attacking you above (for supposedly only calling out anti-semitism for partisan purposes) is that he is only attacking you for partisan purposes.

In normal conditions, no one would complain or claim that a person must first establish a past history of calling out racism or anti-semitism. Such a position is absurd in my opinion.

[stevenleser]

188. I would point back to BtA's post above which you selectively read apparently.

Because it basically said all the same things that I said.

[Jefferson23]

220. Bernie's handling of that idiot, perfect as usual for him...thanks for posting. n/t