Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: This is the difference between Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders

[Uncle Joe]

Ernest Hemingway once said that courage was “grace under pressure.” Two presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, have recently tested this proposition. And how each man responded revealed the type of person he is and the type of president he would make: Trump authored his own doom, and Sanders opened immense new possibilities as a compassionate person and serious candidate for president.

(snip)

Bad enough to alienate women in this way, but there’s even more insidious political crime here: attacking the First Amendment’s protection of a free press by menacing journalists. “I wouldn’t do that,” he said coyly. If you wouldn’t do it, why bring up that you could? For no other reason than to stifle other journalists who might want to ask tough but reasonable questions. If Americans learned that a leader in another country was threatening reporters, we would be outraged. Yet here it is. Right here. Right now.

(snip)

Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders faced his own challenge at a political event last month, when two African American women pushed in front of him to use the microphone to demand four and a half minutes of silence to honor the death of Michael Brown. Sanders left the stage and mingled with the crowd. Later, Trump criticized Sanders as being “weak” for allowing them to speak, but truly he showed grace under pressure by acknowledging their frustration and anger. Instead of bullying their voices into silence or ridiculing them as losers, pigs or bimbos, Sanders left. After all, it was not his event; he was a guest. Besides, his voice was not silenced, but came back booming even louder: The next day, Sanders posted a sweeping policy of reform to fight racial inequality. (The timing coincided with Michael Brown’s death and had nothing to do with the two women.)

(snip)

Two roads diverged in a political wood, and one man took the road of assaulting the Constitution and soon will be lost forever. The other will be a viable candidate who, regardless of whether he wins the nomination, will elevate the political process into something our Founding Fathers would be proud of.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/09/02/kareem-abdul-jabbar-this-is-the-difference-between-donald-trump-and-bernie-sanders/

There is much more on the link.

[Fred Sanders]

1. Truth, Kareem, truth has it's own silent majority fan club. Sanders is the anti-Trump in truth.

[Uncle Joe]

2. Trump attacks the press and 1st Amendment, while Sanders pleads for them

to cover substantive issues, that's one of the major differences that I see.

Sanders is the anti-Trump.

Peace to you, Fred Sanders.

[Warren DeMontague]

4. Meanwhile Hillary has a history of being actively hostile to the 1st Amendment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/07/opinion/senator-clinton-in-pander-mode.html

Although maybe- since this was her "marriage is between a man and a woman" era- she gets a pass on this piece of shameless political pandering, too?

[Uncle Joe]

5. That's disappointing. n/t

[beam me up scottie]

32. I forgot about that!!!

Thanks for the reminder.

[Uncle Joe]

3. ...

[jalan48]

6. I saw Kareem play in college. They outlawed the dunk for awhile because of him.

He was just that much better than the rest of the players of that era. But, he has always been more than a basketball player as can be seen by the article posted.

[Uncle Joe]

7. Yes, Kareem is also a best selling author, cultural critic and much more.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kareem_Abdul-Jabbar

Abdul-Jabbar is also a best-selling author and cultural critic. His first book, his autobiography Giant Steps, was written in 1983 with co-author Peter Knobler. (The book's title is an homage to jazz great John Coltrane, referring to his album Giant Steps.) Others include On the Shoulders of Giants: My Journey Through the Harlem Renaissance, co-written with Raymond Obstfeld, and Brothers in Arms: The Epic Story of the 761st Tank Battalion, WWII's Forgotten Heroes, co-written with Anthony Walton, which is a history of an all-black armored unit that served with distinction in Europe.

Abdul-Jabbar has also been a regular contributor to discussions about issues of race and religion, among other topics, in national magazines and on television. He has written a regular column for Time, for example, and he appeared on Meet the Press on Sunday, January 25, 2015 to talk about a recent column, which pointed out that Islam should not be blamed for the actions of violent extremists, just as Christianity has not been blamed for the actions of violent extremists who profess Christianity.[60][61] In November 2014, Abdul-Jabbar published an essay in Jacobin magazine calling for just compensation for college athletes, writing, "in the name of fairness, we must bring an end to the indentured servitude of college athletes and start paying them what they are worth."[62]

[JI7]

8. very nice article. i really hate the comparison to Trump

[Uncle Joe]

9. They have one thing and one thing only in common, both are addressing

legitimate anger of the American People.

The major difference being Trump is misdirecting the peoples' anger and scapegoating minorities, women and anyone else that proves an easy victim to low info and prejudiced Americans.

Trump is not the first demagogue to use such tactics, they've been successful in the past and I have no doubt it has led Trump to the front of the Republican pack today.

Sanders is the polar opposite, he's taking on the mega-wealthy and powerful like no other candidate and I believe his strategy is the best one in neutralizing Trump's poison.

We can't half step on this hoping that the Republicans will meet us somewhere in the middle, their power base of hatred and prejudice must be neutralized by exposing the toxic swamp which is the source of these manifestations.

"Follow the money" has never held more importance in determining the future of American Society.

[JI7]

11. nope trumps followers are not being misdirected. they are just bigots

Their anger is over things like black man being president.

[Uncle Joe]

12. Their bigotry and prejudice is fed and nurtured by establishment politics and large segments

of the corporate media.

Sometimes overtly and sometime subliminally, but big money is the catalyst behind these propaganda efforts.

[JI7]

13. nope. they are not victims

They do things like bully migrant children.

[Uncle Joe]

14. Are you suggesting that people can't be brainwashed or that the less than 1%

give a rat's ass about the average American's well being and best interests?

[JI7]

15. why is it only white people ?

What is the brainwashing ? Sometimes people are just bigoted.

[Uncle Joe]

16. People aren't born bigoted their environment has tremendous influence in shaping those beliefs.

What is brainwashing?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_control

Mind control (also known as brainwashing, reeducation, coercive persuasion, thought control, or thought reform) is a theoretical indoctrination process which results in "an impairment of autonomy, an inability to think independently, and a disruption of beliefs and affiliations. In this context, brainwashing refers to the involuntary reeducation of basic beliefs and values".[1]

Theories of brainwashing and of mind control were originally developed to explain how totalitarian regimes appeared to systematically indoctrinate prisoners of war through propaganda and torture techniques. These theories were later expanded and modified by psychologists including Margaret Singer and Philip Zimbardo to explain a wider range of phenomena, especially conversions to new religious movements (NRMs). The suggestion that NRMs use mind control techniques has resulted in scientific and legal debate;[2] with Eileen Barker, James Richardson, and other scholars, as well as legal experts, rejecting at least the popular understanding of the concept.[3]

Newer theories have been proposed by scholars including: Robert Cialdini, Robert Jay Lifton, Daniel Romanovsky, Kathleen Taylor, and Benjamin Zablocki. The concept of mind control is sometimes involved in legal cases, especially regarding child custody; and is also a major theme in both science fiction and in criticism of modern corporate culture.

Why do you believe corporations spend billions of dollars on television, radio and print advertising?

They're literally buying a piece of your mind.

[JI7]

17. so its only targeted at white people ?

[Uncle Joe]

18. For the Republicans, yes, that's their primary audience but not the only one.

They use conservative religion for the same purpose, they also wave the Flag as if that were the sole determination as to whether someone is "patriotic" or not.

They create a mythic America, they're attempting and in some cases successfully so in rewriting history in the school books.

[JI7]

19. so how does 1percent do it so only white people are affected ?

[Uncle Joe]

20. How do mega-corporations sell anything to a targeted audience?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advertising

Advertising (or advertizing)[1][2][3] is a form of marketing communication used to persuade an audience to take or continue some action, usually with respect to a commercial offering, or political or ideological support.

In Latin, ad vertere means "to turn toward".[4] The purpose of advertising may also be to reassure employees or shareholders that a company is viable or successful. Advertising messages are usually paid for by sponsors and viewed via various old media; including mass media such as newspaper, magazines, television advertisement, radio advertisement, outdoor advertising or direct mail; or new media such as blogs, websites or text messages.

Commercial ads often seek to generate increased consumption of their products or services through "branding", which involves associating a product name or image with certain qualities in the minds of consumers. Non-commercial advertisers who spend money to advertise items other than a consumer product or service include political parties, interest groups, religious organizations and governmental agencies. Nonprofit organizations may rely on free modes of persuasion, such as a public service announcement (PSA).

Modern advertising was created with the innovative techniques introduced with tobacco advertising in the 1920s, most significantly with the campaigns of Edward Bernays, which is often considered the founder of modern, Madison Avenue advertising.[5][6][7]

In 2011, spending on advertising was estimated at $143 billion in the United States and $467 billion worldwide[8]



A Coca-Cola advertisement from the 1890s

[JI7]

21. but what are examples where whites are targeted and turn bigoted

[Uncle Joe]

22. Do you have a television?

[JI7]

23. yes. and what do white people watch which turns them bigoted ?

[Uncle Joe]

25. What do Americans watch that makes them wage war?

[Uncle Joe]

24. One other point, I'm sure you recall the run up to the war with Iraq, how

could 70% of the American People come to believe that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 despite, common sense, logic and overwhelming evidence to the contrary?

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nearly seven in 10 Americans believe it is likely that ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, says a poll out almost two years after the terrorists' strike against this country.

Sixty-nine percent in a Washington Post poll published Saturday said they believe it is likely the Iraqi leader was personally involved in the attacks carried out by al-Qaeda. A majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents believe it's likely Saddam was involved.

The belief in the connection persists even though there has been no proof of a link between the two.

President Bush and members of his administration suggested a link between the two in the months before the war in Iraq. Claims of possible links have never been proven, however.

Veteran pollsters say the persistent belief of a link between the attacks and Saddam could help explain why public support for the decision to go to war in Iraq has been so resilient despite problems establishing a peaceful country.


http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm

The answer is simple, the majority of the American People were brainwashed because the Bush Administration and the corporate media used the words Saddam and 9/11 continuously in the same paragraphs for weeks and months on end, even when they didn't make a direct connection ie: "Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11" all they had to do was use those two words in the same paragraph or sentence just creating an association, whether on television or in print.

[JI7]

28. so why don't you give similar example of turning white people bigoted

[Uncle Joe]

29. The war against Iraq was bigoted and you would be hard pressed to get 70% of the population

without including whites.

[7962]

35. Being lied to and being brainwashed are two entirely different things

Thats how you get so many Democrats to vote FOR the Iraq war. Lies. Thats how you get 70% of the people to think Saddam was in on 9/11. Lies. Not brainwashing. LIES.

[Uncle Joe]

36. The Bush cabal lied about many things in the run up and long after the war started but they also

used brainwashing techniques, while lying and brainwashing are different things, lying is also intricately connected to brain washing.

They never came out and said Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11, certainly not to the degree that 70% of the American People would believe that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, what they did do was tie Saddam's name to that word by continuously using it in the same breath, paragraph and sentence as 9/11 and on some occasions Al Qaueda, whether on television or in print.

The American People were in great emotional pain and the Bush cabal magnified that pain, increased the fear and used association techniques to seal the deal.

As object relations theory came to place more emphasis on the patient/analysts relationship, and less of the reconstruction of the past, so too the criticism emerged that 'Freud never quite freed himself from some use of pressure: he still advocated the "fundamental rule" of free association...[which] could have the effect of bullying the patient, as if to say: "If you do not associate freely - we have ways of making you"'.[23]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_association_(psychology)

[Uncle Joe]

37. Here's a little more. "Television - Mass Hypnotic Indoctrination"

[7962]

38. Of course. Look how many watch the Kardashians every week!

[Uncle Joe]

39. And it didn't start with the Kardashians, the American People have been conditioned for 35+ years.

Back in the 70s after the turbulent yet idealistic 60s MASH and The Waltons were top programs, they were either anti-war, liberal or a at least a form of decent conservative. The characters despite their flaws were relate-able to many Americans, coincidently both were canceled before Reagan's first term ended.

Dallas made its debut in 78 and ran through the 80s, about a fabulously wealthy family in the oil business and the biggest asshole J.R. Ewing was if not a hero the prime protagonist, J.R. was the most popular character on television for years, he had little if any redeeming qualities of a virtuous nature. Good or virtuous characters in the 80s and for most television programming since was and is considered "boring."

Dynasty competed with Dallas and the biggest asshole Alexis was the main draw, it ran through the 80s as well.

The vast majority of the American People weren't and aren't nearly so wealthy as the families in those programs but it was something to fantasize about. But along with the fantasy if you kept viewing the programs people identified with the various characters.

There have been a slew of programs in between in different forms, reality programs and such but the Kardashians are just the latest incarnation of the corporate media's message to America.

Programming isn't just for television, it's for people as well.

[appalachiablue]

59. Fantasize is right. As in living like JR, the Kardashians and other wealthy celebrities. $$$$$

"Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" also debuted in the 80s I believe. When it all started. Prior to that the majority of television programs were geared to the large US middle class. No more-

[hifiguy]

43. Just how goddam obtuse ARE you?

[Uncle Joe]

44. J17 isn't obtuse, he/she was just fishing. n/t

[KoKo]

56. Recommend! "Follow the Money"....For Sure

:kick:

[lame54]

10. more of a contrast

[randys1]

26. And the teaparty thinks what Trump does, expressing hate, is what we need to make America great

again.

Oh, if you wondered why we arent great now



this is why





at least according to the racists

[Uncle Joe]

27. The Billionaires That Funded Them.

The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party

ANOTHER weekend, another grass-roots demonstration starring Real Americans who are mad as hell and want to take back their country from you-know-who. Last Sunday the site was Lower Manhattan, where they jeered the “ground zero mosque.” This weekend, the scene shifted to Washington, where the avatars of oppressed white Tea Party America, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, were slated to “reclaim the civil rights movement” (Beck’s words) on the same spot where the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. had his dream exactly 47 years earlier.

Vive la révolution!

There’s just one element missing from these snapshots of America’s ostensibly spontaneous and leaderless populist uprising: the sugar daddies who are bankrolling it, and have been doing so since well before the “death panel” warm-up acts of last summer. Three heavy hitters rule. You’ve heard of one of them, Rupert Murdoch. The other two, the brothers David and Charles Koch, are even richer, with a combined wealth exceeded only by that of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett among Americans. But even those carrying the Kochs’ banner may not know who these brothers are.

(snip)

All three tycoons are the latest incarnation of what the historian Kim Phillips-Fein labeled “Invisible Hands” in her prescient 2009 book of that title: those corporate players who have financed the far right ever since the du Pont brothers spawned the American Liberty League in 1934 to bring down F.D.R. You can draw a straight line from the Liberty League’s crusade against the New Deal “socialism” of Social Security, the Securities and Exchange Commission and child labor laws to the John Birch Society-Barry Goldwater assault on J.F.K. and Medicare to the Koch-Murdoch-backed juggernaut against our “socialist” president.

Only the fat cats change — not their methods and not their pet bugaboos (taxes, corporate regulation, organized labor, and government “handouts” to the poor, unemployed, ill and elderly). Even the sources of their fortunes remain fairly constant. Koch Industries began with oil in the 1930s and now also spews an array of industrial products, from Dixie cups to Lycra, not unlike DuPont’s portfolio of paint and plastics. Sometimes the biological DNA persists as well. The Koch brothers’ father, Fred, was among the select group chosen to serve on the Birch Society’s top governing body. In a recorded 1963 speech that survives in a University of Michigan archive, he can be heard warning of “a takeover” of America in which Communists would “infiltrate the highest offices of government in the U.S. until the president is a Communist, unknown to the rest of us.” That rant could be delivered as is at any Tea Party rally today.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/opinion/29rich.html

[Zorra]

30. Back in late '86 or '87 I walked into an enclosed palapa bar on a small beach near

Todos Santos, in SW Baja, Mexico, with my girlfriend at the time, and to my great delight, saw that Bill Walton was the only person in the bar besides the bartender. He was watching a Lakers game on TV, and one leg was in a cast. My girlfriend knew nothing about basketball so I whispered to her who Bill Walton was. Hard to miss a guy who is 6'11 and looks like a redheaded Dr. Who (Tom Baker version).

So I ordered some beers and we sat shyly nearby. I didn't want to bug him, but, well, ya know? I knew he'd played against Jabbar up close and personal, and Jabbar was on screen, so I asked him who was the toughest center he'd played against, and he pointed to the screen and said "Jabbar, by far. He's brutal". I also asked him who he thought was the best player in the NBA, and he said Larry Bird, that Bird was incredible. We drank more beer, watched the game until the end, and we went back to my old conversion van, and Bill went back to his Airstream. We were the only people camping on the beach that night.

Anyway, that's my little Bill Walton/Kareem Abdul Jabbar story, for what it's worth.
(:

[Enthusiast]

40. That was cool as hell!

[Duppers]

31. Sorry I'm late to the thread, Uncle Joe.

Big K & R.

Also bookmarking for a reference to your NYT's Frank Rich article comment.

[Uncle Joe]

34. That was an enlightening article.

Peace to you, Duppers.

[magical thyme]

33. and Trump strikes back!

What a fathead arse (Trump, that is)

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=&w=1484

[Enthusiast]

41. Kicked and recommended to the Max!

Thanks, Uncle Joe!

[Uncle Joe]

42. It was my pleasure, Enthusiast, here's another difference between Sanders and Trump.

Bernie Sanders on Payday Lender Loans

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128046524

Apparently this distinction also holds true for Bernie and Debbie Schultz.

Obama-Elizabeth Warren payday lender rules slammed by Florida Democrats

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027139215

[sabrina 1]

45. And then Donald Trump attacked him! This was Trump, the reality show star's response to Kareem:

Here's How Donald Trump Responded to my Essay about the Difference between him and Bernie Sanders

Dear Kareem,

Now I know why the press always treated you so badly — they couldn’t stand you. The fact is that you don’t have a clue about life and what has to be done to make America great again!

Best wishes,

Donald Trump

He's like an internet troll. And he doesn't have a chance of winning anything, he's in this so the Media can use him as entertainment and avoid talking about serious issues.

[Uncle Joe]

46. Trump makes Kareem's case, he doesn't rebut the substance of the essay, he just hurls schoolyard

taunts.

This morning, an essay of mine was published titled, “This is the Difference Between Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.” Trump’s response to my piece is the best, though inelegant, support for my claims. Here again, he attacks a journalist who disagrees with him, not by disputing the points made but by hurling schoolyard insults such as “nobody likes you.” Look behind the nasty invective and you find an assault on the Constitution in the effort to silence the press through intimidation. The full text is below.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/09/02/heres-how-donald-trump-responded-to-my-essay-about-him/

I have no doubt if Trump were President, he would yank whatever strings he could to get journalists that criticized him fired or silenced.

On the other hand Bernie pleads with them to actually cover the substantive critical issues that affect so many American Lives and too much of the corporate media seems to be loathe to do that.

[sabrina 1]

49. Trump is a first class idiot, always was and it's no surprise that he is attracting the fringe

elements to his campaign, but all he is, is a distraction who the media is using to distract from the issues.

Every society has its fringe elements, but they don't elevate them as we appear to be doing here.

We so need to regulate media ownership again so we get real news, rather than corporate propaganda.

[Uncle Joe]

50. In this regard the corporate media is working to divide the people by giving credence or legitimacy

to Trump's poison.

Division works towards Republican advantage, they will work it as long as they can with the hopes of Trump imploding and thus making whatever Republican is left standing, probably Bush; looking "moderate" or enlightened by comparison, it's a game of relativity with them.

The corporate media is certainly not advocating, furthering or promoting critical, substantive policies or issues that most affect the American People, it's all about personalities and soap operas with them.

[sabrina 1]

53. Fortunately the power of the Corporate Media has shrunk to the point where they become less relevant

every day.

The New Media is where the people now get their news, tired of the same old non-issues based infotainment that passes for news, with the same old propagandists spewing the same old inside the beltway propaganda people have come to detest.

The rise of Bernie Sanders is proof of the power of the New Media, because if he were dependent on the Old Media, no one would even know he was in this race.

But he is, and latest polls show him to be narrowing the gap in Iowa to just 11 points between him and Clinton, she down to 38% he at 27% in just a few months.

Let them cater to the fringes, the people have moved on from the old media.

And in a few months hopefully, we will see just how irrelevant they have made themselves.

[Uncle Joe]

55. I agree on all counts, sabrina the only question is, what kind of legacy will the corporate media

leave behind, will they go down as nothing but propaganda villains determined to protect the status quo despite its multitude of shortcomings or will they have a mass epiphany, a surge of journalistic consciousness and try to redeem themselves to the American People?

[RoccoR5955]

47. The next time they tell me that Bernie acted like a coward I shall use this:

"Instead of bullying their voices into silence or ridiculing them as losers, pigs or bimbos, Sanders left. After all, it was not his event; he was a guest. Besides, his voice was not silenced, but came back booming even louder: The next day, Sanders posted a sweeping policy of reform to fight racial inequality. (The timing coincided with Michael Brown’s death and had nothing to do with the two women.)"
That is a very good statement!

[Uncle Joe]

48. Bernie has the courage of his convictions and the grace of a person that respects the truth.

[RandySF]

51. Never in a million years would I try to compare Bernie and Trump.

[Uncle Joe]

54. I'm glad to hear that Randy, but it's a contrast not a comparison, having said that, they do

have one thing in common, both are addressing very real anger within the American People, but this is the difference and it's a big one.

Trump is trying to misdirect his supporters' righteous anger toward racism, misogyny and xenophobia, in doing so, he's masking the true culprits behind so much of the American Peoples' misery.

Bernie is taking the fight directly toward the villains, he's speaking truth to power and in doing so Bernie has the best chance of redirecting or correcting many of Trump supporters' misdirected anger and in the process creating a national epiphany that could change American Society for the better.

[orpupilofnature57]

52. Diametrically opposed by every fiber of their being .

[KoKo]

57. Recommend Read for whole article!

and This from your OP:

Two roads diverged in a political wood, and one man took the road of assaulting the Constitution and soon will be lost forever. The other will be a viable candidate who, regardless of whether he wins the nomination, will elevate the political process into something our Founding Fathers would be proud of.

[Uncle Joe]

58. Thanks, KoKo for reemphasizing that point.