2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumMs Clinton spent decades supporting Separate But Equa… er the Defense of Marriage Act...
And now we are supposed to fall all over ourselves because of her Coca-col
er campaign "Equal" video.
We are supposed to forget that those 26 years of activism for civil rights were a direct result of her husband's signing an act that pushed us to the back of the bus. We are supposed to forget that her "christian' defense of the Defense of Marriage Act. We are supposed to forget that the Defense of Marriage Act emboldened states to enact similar.
Bernie, on the other hand voted against the Defense of Marriage Act.
Because he is a leader. Not a poll driven follower.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)and have read all of Ms Clinton's two decades of support 'christian' to relegate us to the back of the bus, I will not support her.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)she was always the most well recieved.
We love her here in NY.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)and why I like my SF community better than your NY community.
Though we have been trending the rich gay way which is not okay.
But I suspect that if Hillary would s presume to show of for SF pride she would be greeted with spits and jeers.
We know and will never forget her DECADES of the Defense of Marriage At.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Cheers!
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)I have marched with her and have protested her.
I love her and have criticized her.
I am glad she has evolved.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)I am glad she evolved.
People are a work in progress.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Can you point me to any personal mea culpa to her evolution?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)I for one believe her.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)explain her evolution. Her coca-col
er campaign commercial does not do it for me.'
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)I am happy she evolved and I support her.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Did you support her she was explicitly denying your civil rights?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Did you support her then?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)There were times I was proud of her and there were times I was disappointed in her.
That should answer your question.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)6chars
(3,967 posts)but this only shows how much she has evolved
Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #26)
leftofcool This message was self-deleted by its author.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)In NYC, there's no political risk to marching in that parade at all. Hasn't been since 1986 or so, really. Giuliani marched in it when he was the most right-wing, non-gay friendly NYC mayor since Abe Freakin' Beame.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)on his behalf, I support the Candidate who stood up for him, Bernie Sanders. He supported Gay Marriage when the Clinton Admins was denying Gays their Civil Rights, one of the few.
RIP Dennis, so sorry you didn't live to enjoy the rights you were entitled to.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts).
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Great Silence, as Republicans laughed as 30,000 Americans died without any action taken by their President, not even an acknowledgement. So when I see people who defended that harp on about Hillary and LGBT rights, I know they don't really care about my rights. At all. And of course, manhy swoon for the Pope who calls gay people defective, says our rights come from Satan and that our families are not really families but a form of child abuse.
It's great to have standards, but not double standards.
Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)I'm glad she's not running. I had no idea she held positions like that.
F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)in support of civil rights?
You 're incredibly arrogant about all this. You 're an experienced activist, but you don't get to speak for the whole community. As a bisexual man, I think it's a huge problem that she refused to acknowledge my equality for so long, when it was clearly the right thing to do. I think she shifted purely for political reasons, and my rights cannot be dependent on the political fair winds.
And fuck the pope, btw.
CBGLuthier
(12,723 posts)Just because some of us always had progressive beliefs does not mean that those who evolve (follow the polls) should be discounted.
That seems to be the line we are supposed to swallow (choke on it) anyway.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)commercial.
Meanwhile, Bernie, from his voting record, is not a bigot.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)they ONLY see the light AFTER it is politically safe to do so.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Exactamundo
marble falls
(57,223 posts)azmom
(5,208 posts)In Mrs. Clinton's zeal to make the case that experience (hers) is more important than inspirational leadership (Mr. Obama's), she made some peculiar comments about the relative importance of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and President Lyndon Johnson to the civil rights cause. She complimented Dr. King's soaring rhetoric, but said: "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. ... It took a president to get it done. "
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)upaloopa
(11,417 posts)If Johnson hadn't pressured congress there would have been no civil rights act.
azmom
(5,208 posts)Black people? Black people died for the cause and you want to credit Johnson.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Hubert Humphrey and Bobby Kennedy(who was still AG at the time)deserve as much credit for it as LBJ.
And the tens of thousands of people who risked their lives(and in some cases lost them)in the cause deserve even more credit. If it wasn't for the black freedom movement, Johnson wouldn't even have tried to get a strong Civil Rights Act through.
Those who worked from below did as much, if not more, as those who worked from above.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)azmom
(5,208 posts)Vote to Obama.
Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)n/t
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)I've been told on DU to Get Over It! She's evolved already! But if you actually watch this speech, quite similar in argument structure to the IWR resolution, the mind boggles at just how much evolving had to happen.
There have been plenty of stories on DU how she was just playing, you know, for political expediency, because she really has loved the gay folks all along. And we just need to cross our fingers that maybe, if it doesn't cost her anything, she will vote the right way this time.
Lest we forget:
azmom
(5,208 posts)That one. It's going around.
People should know what the candidate stands for.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)In fact she "took umbrage" at those who might doubt her resolve at defending the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman.
Tsk, tsk...
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)Marriage sanctimony
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)This, from Ms Clinton is a Coca-cola commercial.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)to be liberal "champions" don't use their power to discriminate. I have seen heartfelt apologies that I believe, but I have not seen one from her that makes me feel like it's anything more than pandering. The country changed. If it had not, both Obama and Hillary would be saying marriage is between a man and a woman as both did. She's trying to lock up "groups" for votes. That's all. We need leaders who don't use people's lives as pawns for power.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)and heaven for the politician who has always known what was right.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)We are in the age of social media. A politician wants to run on her record can't pretend that record didn't exist. It's not just that she voted for it, she gave a heartfelt speech in order to help continue discrimination, FOR YEARS. That is not something that should be easily forgotten.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)on the off chance that I may need to evolve.
additional note....never tell anyone that I "take umbrage" at their suggestion that I am less committed to whatever bedrock principle momentarily captures my fancy.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)I guess we'll see how much people buy it.
Grilled Charlie
(57 posts)That's what it feels like every time I see Hillary embracing her current pet issues.
Step right up- The Hillary Travelling Circus parading her Minority Freak Show across the country. Taking every opportunity to capitalise politically off our struggles.
That's why I prefer Bernie. I'm not part of his freak show. I'm just another supporter. I may not get an honourable mention but I'll get real equality in the end.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)who has been assured repeatedly that 99.999% of all black and brown people support her, *just what has she actually done for us?* there is no answer. Nothing more than, "A speech!" "A tweet!" "She said she will fight for us!" Yet, she also was a great champion for three strikes laws and mass incarceration. So I know how you feel. She's just trying to get check marks on the list. Hell, beyond voting rights, I have no idea what she is promising now. It's all just theatre. And if anyone doesn't understand that, well, I wouldn't put them with the sharp knives.
Grilled Charlie
(57 posts)It's all just feel-good talk and that suffices for some people. What a shame!
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)I think some people are so used to the current election system, they can't believe when they are confronted with a politician who doesn't lie. It's like whaaaaaaaa? We'll see if it works against a Mt. Everest of cash. I'm cynical and have little hope, but maybe Americans will surprise me.
Glad you've come to DU. We need more people willing to discuss issues over personality!
I have wondered the same thing.
Clinton (and Hillary supported it) expanded the war on drugs. It has been devastating to minority communities. Mass incarceration ramped up during the 1990's under the Clinton administration.
For me, it is just more Madison Avenue marketing bullshit. She saw how well it worked for Obama with "Hope and Change" so she hopes it will change her from a loser to a winner.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)To the Champion! of all the people she's stepped on on the way up. But for some reason, she's the embodiment of Harriet Tubman on DU. Strange days.
azmom
(5,208 posts)It is a sick game. No more politics as usual.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)WAS NOT politically 'safe' to do so. THAT is the kind of leader this country needs, courage, integrity, foresight, good judgement.
Politicians who get it wrong so often on so many important issues that directly affect people's lives, should not be given the power to get it wrong again. Same thing with any job, it's just common sense.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)If a very powerful politician, as then Senator Clinton was, does not have the courage to stand up for what it right and be willing to take the hits, then she cannot be trusted to lead this country. Same with IWR. Many want to give her a pass, but that kind of craven political cowardice is dangerous. She is willing to sell out people's rights, people's lives, to score political points. I think she has many good points, but this lack of integrity is a real problem.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Grilled Charlie
(57 posts)especially on an issue as important LGBT rights. I'm gay too. I know what it's like to go through life facing socially sanctioned hate every single day. I'm glad things are changing and I'm glad that Hillary has had a change of heart.
I don't like the video. I feel like I'm being used as a campaign tool and that my lifelong struggle has been reduced to several cliche skits of Hillary parading gay people in front of us to make us feel grateful that she's on our side.
I don't feel grateful. It's the right thing to do. I'm glad she's changed her mind but she was content to speak out against us for a long time.
She'd be less odious if she would at least apologize.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Yep. This video pretends that she was always on our side.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)AFTER it is safe to do so, is I wonder, what if it became UNSAFE politically again. What would they do?
Bernie Sanders is my choice for POTUS, because he got it right on so many issues, voted AGAINST DOMA, insisted that Gays were entitled to the same Civil Rights as every other American, BEFORE it was politically safe to do so. He supported it because it was the right thing to do.
Same thing with Iraq and so many other issues. Iow, I trust him. Even if it was no longer politically safe I know we can trust him.
Sorry, I do not trust people who do things only for political reasons.
Grilled Charlie
(57 posts)But it's always good to acknowledge when people are doing the right thing
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Grilled Charlie
(57 posts)Last edited Fri Jun 26, 2015, 04:32 AM - Edit history (1)
What truth lies there, I cannot say
but at least her rhetoric has changed.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I do, I have, and that is why I am a Bernie supporter. I watch what he did and on almost every important issue over the decades, he DID the right thing. That is what we need in a leader.
It's okay to be wrong on an issue that can cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of human beings, if you have no power to make it happen.
But when someone is wrong so often on issues that affect so many people's lives, not once, but many times, that shows a lack of good judgement. And logic says, they might be wrong again when people's lives are at stake. Such a background does not qualify someone for a powerful position.
So whether her evolvement is genuine or not, she has shown a pattern of getting things wrong, and waiting a long, long time to admit it.
We have to hire someone to whom we are giving awesome powers. We need someone with a record of good judgement, foresight and integrity. No employer is going to hire someone with a terrible record wrt to decisions made relevant to the job. Yet we do it all the time with the top job in this country. And we see the results.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Fearless
(18,421 posts)Truth hurts I guess.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Fearless
(18,421 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)You're gonna get some major blowback from the corporate/Beltway wing of the LGBTQ leadership.
You've shown real courage here.
wyldwolf
(43,870 posts)LOL
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And you don't really care about LGBTQ issues...if you did, you'd be on the left instead of being a corporate centrist. Centrists aren't involved in anti-oppression work.
wyldwolf
(43,870 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)The constant McCarthist verbiage you offer up is not attractive in the least.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)My comments about Warren(which were months ago)were about Clinton supporters raising the issue of her past Republicanism, not LGBTQ people in general. And Warren isn't running. Why are you still mad about the Warren thread when it wasn't intended to be aimed at the LGBTQ community(and I apologize if confused wording on my part created that impression-my bad-not my intent, but my bad. And I wish I'd never written the Warren thread now at all.)
You should read Luminous Animal's posts here. I'm talking about what she's talking about.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)Nice try but no prize for you.
Got anything real or got anything new to say about Saint Bernie?
patricia92243
(12,601 posts)Thanks mostly to the internet, people are now informed and have changed their whole philosophy.
Don't vilify people who have changed their minds. They would be stuck in the old mind-set if they had not changed.
IMHO
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I am extremely happy to have her speaking on this issue today. I welcome all voices. She is a great voice and is leading on the issue today. I'm just not into throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I get that some are simply looking for purity and will talk negatively about anyone not pure enough for them. She is doing what is right. Sorry her history is so offensive to you that you want her put in the back of the bus forever. I for one am more than happy to welcome any voice of reason to the debate. Specially at the national level. People deserve chances in life. Zero tolerance thought processes suck. I truly am sorry she has angered you so much. You have a right to be angry. I hope she can make it up to you. If she becomes President, I will constantly write her about this issue. That is how people in society make things right.
William769
(55,147 posts)Does not matter ho many times Sanders Supporters post a thread about Hillary (and there had been oh so many to make one want to throw up). It's not going to change that fact.
Have a nice day.
askew
(1,464 posts)The idea that you are crediting with anything is mind-boggling. But, Hillary and her supporters have been taking credit for other people's hard work for years now. Nothing new.
In fact, during her book tour she said that marriage was a state issue. But, all of a sudden she evolved.
Bernie's had the same view for decades.
O'Malley risked his political career by signing same-sex marriage into law and campaigning all over the state to help Maryland keep SSM legal through referendum.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Most politicians wait and follow public opinion, taking a "bold stand" on issues when the polls tell them it's safe to do so. Sanders does not follow that pattern, which is why he should be elected president. Clinton has chosen to follow, while speaking of leadership, which is why she will probably be elected president.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)polls show Hillary with overwhelming support from the LGBT demographic.
William769
(55,147 posts)And don't forget there are two Gay guy's that are Hosts of the Hillary Clinton Group.
frylock
(34,825 posts)JI7
(89,269 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Bernie's supporters don't think that way.
All that's been said is that, by any independent metric, HRC has never been there for those groups. She gets that support, at this point, because Bernie has simply not been introduced to those groups and she's been known to them for decades.
Saying that is totally different than saying voters in those groups don't know what's good for them. Voters in any demographic usually start supporting the better-known candidate over the lesser-known. That's not a comment on anyone's intelligence, it's simply the process of political awareness.
Bernie would have done a major speech on bigotry this last Sunday, in fact, but the Charleston Massacre made it inappropriate to bring that up in a political speech at that time. If Bernie had given the speech at that time and in those circumstances, those who've unjustly attacked him on this issue would have blasted him for "pandering" and "insensitivity".
Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)follow the pattern of black voters in the 2008 primaries? I don't know but hope you do.
JI7
(89,269 posts)Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)n/t