2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf Clinton's vote is responsible for the Iraq War
then Bernie's votes for the crime bills are responsible for the mass incarceration of millions. You can't have it both ways.
L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)[center]Better let's not. Let's talk about the clown car instead.
Sometimes things can be summed up in just two words.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)any of the dozens of threads in GD-P skewering Hillary Clinton right now. I await your criticism in those threads.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Check's in the mail
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)If a single vote is responsible for all the victims of war, then a single vote is likewise responsible for all the incarceration that resulted from those crime bills. Clearly you have a problem with consistent standards.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Squinch
(51,053 posts)cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)First Lady, right?
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)That Bernie voted for. But we all know the Iraq War was Laura Bush's fault, not W's or Hillary's, so the crime bill is not the responsibility of the congressmen who voted for it but the First Lady.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)or advocated for it it in any way. That would include Laura Bush. The New York Times (Judy Miller), etc.
Sanders claimed that he voted for the bill to support the attached rider supporting victims of domestic violence.
Be that as it may, he voted for it, and is, by my definition, responsible for all that came with it.
The difference between him and HRC, is that he doesn't that many bad votes/decisions to atone for.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)His bad votes: 5 times voting against the Brady Bill; votes for immunity for gun corporations; voting to allow loaded guns in National Parks; other similar votes allowing guns in other federal spaces; voting against the Amber Alert; voting against Immigration reform; voting for the Minutemen; voting for the Wall; voting for and continuing to support the boondoggle of $800 billion to Lockheed-Martin for the F-35.
How many bad votes does Clinton have?
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)You are probably not going to like the results. Also, if I do give you a list that proves more death, destruction and waste of money, will it affect your view?
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)I wonder if you've even looked at them.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)I said bad decisions and vocal support. I hold people responsible for advocating for the war, not just voting for it. So, the question is do you wish me to enumerate all of her bad decisions as well as bad votes?
Also, there was my second question. Will it really matter to you if I do?
I really don't understand why HRC supporters have their knickers in a twist. HRC is the establishment candidate. The DNC and Wall Street will see to it she wins the nomination. After she is elected, she will shift back to her usual modus operandi and sacrifice those who believe she is a genuine "progressive" on the altar of "pragmatism" and "bi-partisanship". And when called on it, her supporters will claim it is all part of an elaborate 11 dimensional chess plan that is really clever and she only seems to be selling us out.
Now with the attacks in Paris we can expect her to support the next endless war that will squanders hundreds of thousands/millions of lives and another trillion dollars that's always available for killing, but never available to build schools, roads, bridges or provide needed care for the poor.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)and the 2001 Bankruptcy Bill.
She also co-sponsored an anti-flag burning law which didn't get a roll call vote.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
jfern
(5,204 posts)askew
(1,464 posts)result of her actions. Hillary "the buck stops over there somewhere" Clinton is how I think of her.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Members of congress who voted for the crime bills are responsible for the outcomes, which include (1) a whole lot more people locked up, and (2) a significant drop in crime. Members of congress who voted for the Iraq war are responsible for the outcomes, which include (1) converting Iraq into a peaceful democracy with no loss of life, and (2) drastic weight gain by our solders from eating all the candy thrown at them by grateful Iraqis. In each case, gotta take the good with the bad, I guess.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)Is that they are responsible for their part in the process, their votes that contributed to it. That is not the same is it being entirely their fault, as many have insisted is the case for Clinton and the war, while likewise holding her responsible for the crime bills that Bernie voted for.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Certainly draconian policies filled out prisons. However demographics dropped the crime rate, as evidenced by similar stats from countries that did not go down the lock em up and throw away the key route.
askew
(1,464 posts)drop in crime is the decrease in lead paint in poor neighborhoods. Lead intake as a child changes the way the brain develops and can lead to impulse control issues, etc.
There are a lot of theories as to why the crime rate dropped but none of them have been proven to be the sole reason.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)they can't demonstrate that it was effective.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)It was contained in those evil, terrible, no good crime bills.
The vote for the Iraq war was only about one thing: Invading Iraq.
The vote on the crime bill was about everything in the omnibus legislation. Some of it sucked, some of it was good.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)You got going on there...
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)How does the analogy not hold up?
treestar
(82,383 posts)not the rest of Congress, Bush, or the voters of that time. It is judging people's action in 2002-3 by the situation now.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)Clinton is responsible for the mass incarceration from the crime bills too, even though Bernie voted for them. But somehow he didn't really mean his two votes, so that's okay. Or something similarly incomprehensible.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)does not make others not part of what they were part of. That includes the entire country. Anyone who remembers the couple of years after 911 knows it was a different time and judging people then by what the situation is now is wrong.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)demanding it.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)was responsible.
Your op is nonsense. However Clinton should at least make it clear that her vote was a terrible mistake and that she bears some responsibility for the disaster that ensued. And no, blaming her vote on bad information doesn't cut it.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)They post pictures of the fallen in Iraq and say she killed them. Seriously.
I'm not defending her vote. I haven't, and I won't. What I am doing is demonstrating the double standard that reigns around here.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)And again her failure to own that responsibility is appalling.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)since she didn't literally"kill them". However, to borrow a Biblical metaphor, "the blood is on her hands", i.e. she bears responsibility for their deaths,
99Forever
(14,524 posts)...in front of the Senate in support of those crime bills?
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)And the fund he war in Iraq.
There is plenty of blame to pin in sanders too.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)I expected as much.
All shit stirrer, no real substance.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Good to see.
And what was Hillary supporting at the time Bernie voted for that crime bill? It was Bill Clinton's bill, so i would guess she was supporting the mass incarceration as well.
Your support of HRC makes no sense, but thank you for playing.
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)free card forever.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)When a Rep has to decide on a large bill with things he like and things he dislikes, it may be difficult to choose. Sanders chose wrong that time. He shares responsibility for mass incarceration.
Looking to the future however, Bernie Sanders is advocating the biggest criminal justice reform: making marijuana legal under federal law.
He's also promised that when he's president, the US won't have the most prisoners in the world. None of the other candidates have promised that.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)but doesn't Hill get contributions from the private prison corporations? I thought I saw that before.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)riversedge
(70,350 posts)jkbRN
(850 posts)and if you want to be commander in chief, that IS a BIG problem that many people take issue with. GET. OVER. IT.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)Is that your claim?
The point is intellectual consistency, and you refuse to as much as engage with the question.
William769
(55,148 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)Can you name ANY good outcomes from the Iraq War?
askew
(1,464 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)It gave sane voters yet another not to vote for her in 2008 and 2016.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)I don't like Bernie's votes on the crime bill but I can see why he voted for it. These bills are always more complex and a vote for or against it is never a simple matter.
But the same is true of Hillary's vote for the war. I don't like her vote, but if you listen to what she said then as well as later, it becomes clear that she did not actually want to go to war. She was assured by people like Chuck Hagel that the administration would first let the UN inspectors do their job and only go to war as last resort. Here is a nice summary from an old Dailykos article"
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/5/22/1386838/-Hillary-Clinton-Never-Supported-the-Bush-Cheney-Invasion-of-Iraq
bvar22
(39,909 posts)There was a handful of laughably fabricated "evidence",
and cartoon drawings used by Powell at the UN to "Prove" Saddam had WMD...
Cartoon Drawings of (beat war drum here) MOBILE WEAPONS LABS!!!!!
Not photographs...but real cartoon drawings!!!
I laughed so hard snot came out my nose.
I couldn't wait to get on DU so we could all laugh together,
but instead, I found a steady stream of, "Well. He convinced me" posts,
copied from the Talking Heads who were "IN" on the deal.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)No?
Huh....almost like the Iraq war vote was only about invading Iraq, whereas those evil, terrible crime bills contained a lot more than one issue.
Btw, if Sanders had voted "No", we'd have a dozen posts from you about how Sanders hates women for voting against the VAWA.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)He's only responsible for the good stuff, not the bad. All the bad stuff is Clinton's fault anyway.
Either a candidate is responsible for the outcome of his votes or not. You all don't even make an effort to apply any kind of consistent standard.
Violence against women. I'm touched that people suddenly decide that's important, albeit retrospectively. It would have been nice if folks were thinking about justifying Bernie's votes when I was being attacked for having the nerve to post out the issue because to even discuss it in public, I was told, was sexist and man-hating. And when I pointed out that victim blaming of battered women was hurtful, I got a hide for "bullying." I then got a subsequent hide for posting the jury results. I learned I was not allowed to discuss such issues since they violate community standards, but now I'm told it's so important that it justifies the rise of the carceral state. My, how times do change. I guess I need to learn that if I am to raise concerns about women's lives, it needs to be in the context of promoting the career of a great man.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)No, he's responsible for deciding that the good stuff outweighed the bad.
Go ahead and cite the "good stuff" from the Iraq war vote. Then we can decide if it outweighs the bad.
"Sanders voters demand purity" is a talking point from Clinton supporters. We're well aware that legislative "sausage making" is far from ideal. So instead we have to base our evaluations on what the candidates based their votes on - what did they say at the time for why they voted a particular way. Sanders cited the positive elements in those bills, such as the VAWA.
Clinton obviously couldn't vote on the bills, but her public statements from the time and "It Takes a Village" praise the "tough on crime" aspects, as well as things like the VAWA.
As an example of the inverse, the people attacking Sanders for voting against Brady - his decision to vote against it had specific reasons behind it. That is instead characterized as being "a gun nut".
The AUMF for Iraq did not have any other issues attached. So one can't claim there was "good" in the bill that outweighed the "bad".
Considering this is the first time you and I have talked about VAWA or domestic violence in general, as far as I know, you have no clue what I think about it. But thanks for the attack! I really appreciate being held responsible for everything you don't like.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)but my experience talking about violence against women on this site. Suddenly everyone is eager to champion that issue because it helps them explain away Sanders votes on the crime bills.
We have talked about prostitution, which is accompanied by a great deal of violence and enslavement of women. We did not agree on the issue. I don't recall enough specifics about our conversation, but I do know that the general response by members here is that the consumer's rights and desires came first. Human trafficking and battery, I was told, were already illegal, so there was no need to consider it in the equation that dictated the male bourgeoisie's desire to purchase sex took priority. Yet now, a rider to a bill that dealt with violence against women is more important that the crime bill and the resulting carceral state (except when it can be blamed on the evil First Lady). You'll have to forgive me for suffering from vertigo from all the changes.
Clinton has her justifications for her war vote as well. She insists the vote was to enable the Bush administration to exert greater influence with Iraq through the UN and avoid war. I will not justify it, however. I protested that war and continue to object to it and votes that enabled it, including Sanders many subsequent votes funding that war effort. However, it is clear that you are more than willing to consider Sanders reasons for his bad votes and not at all interested in Clinton's.
Then of course we have his vote for immunity for gun corporations, for which there is no good, unless of course one takes the view that moar guns and unfettered profits for the multi-billion dollar gun industry is good.
Then there are his votes for the Minutemen, the Wall, and against Immigration reform. Against the Amber Alert and his votes and continued and ongoing support for $800billion in corporate welfare for Lockheed Martin for the F-35.
Then of course we have his efforts to point to the mentally ill as responsible for gun violence, despite the fact that CDC data shows that the mentally ill are in fact less likely to commit violence than the general population. But if we have to create a second-class rank of citizenship to protect the gun lobby, that's all okay. Those are good corporations. Like Lockheed-Martin they profit from murder, which makes them so much better than Wall Street.
But Bernie is not responsible for the results of any of his votes. Instead, a woman who was First Lady at the time was responsible because Bernie is never responsible for anything that is bad, including his own votes. The story gets tiresome and it becomes clear that issues are the least of what matters.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Her vote for war cannot be defended, this is just another attempt to deflect.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)"All over the industrialized world now, countries are saying, let us put an end to state murder, let us stop capital punishment," Sanders said in a 1991 speech on the House floor. "But here what were talking about is more and more capital punishment."
The bill, which included provisions to authorize the death penalty as appropriate punishment for crimes involving the murder of a law enforcement officer, terrorism and drug trafficking, never reached the desk of President George H.W. Bush.
In 1994, however, Sanders voted in favor of the final version of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, a bill that expanded the federal death penalty. Sanders had voted for an amendment to the bill that would have replaced all federal death sentences with life in prison. Even though the amendment failed, Sanders still voted for the larger crime bill.
A spokesman for Sanders said he voted for the bill "because it included the Violence Against Women Act and the ban on certain assault weapons."
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/sep/02/viral-image/where-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-stand-/
And Bernie didn't lie about anything to get the bill passed like Hillary did when she claimed that Saddam was harboring al Qaeda:
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well, effects American security.
This is a very difficult vote, this is probably the hardest decision I've ever had to make. Any vote that might lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction."
Trying to defend her vote by claiming a vote for Clinton's crime bill is comparable to an illegal war that killed thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis is despicable.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Here we have Bernie Sanders, voting with the Majority of Democrats, supporting a Democratic President's Agenda, and taking flack from supposed DEMOCRATS on a DEMOCRATIC site.
OTOH, we have Hillary voting AGAINST the Majority of Democrats to support a Republican President's Bill (possibly the WORST Bill in American History), but some here want to make Bernie the bad guy.
Not Working.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Aka Pretzel logic.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)asjr
(10,479 posts)would blame Hillary Clinton for the Iraq war than those who caused it. Her Iraq vote comes up all the time as if no one else voted for it. That is stretching it when she was a senator.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)which one voted AGAINST the Democratic MAJORITY to support a REPUBLICAN President's WAR?
The optional Cheer Leading for the Republican WAR and Shock & Awe are inexcusable.
THAT makes it significant.
She hasn't gotten any smarter.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Whether intentional or not, that is what they are really doing.
Congress gave Bush the authority to go to war, if necessary. The goal was to get Saddam to allow the inspectors back in. That worked. Saddam let the inspectors back in a month later. Bush meanwhile, abuse the power he was given.
Some on the left hate Hillary so much, they'd rather give Bush cover, and blame Hillary.
I don't trust them. They are either intentionally helping to rewrite the history, or they aren't sharp enough to know that's what they're doing.
asjr
(10,479 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)It's big part of her considerable baggage train and people are going to talk about it.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)That vote against the Democratic Majority to align herself with the Republicans to help a Republican President start and illegal and immoral WAR the killed near a MILLION INNOCENTS will follow her FOREVER.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Vattel
(9,289 posts)askew
(1,464 posts)She also wanted to make it more draconian by putting in harsher sentencing, etc.
And yes, Hillary owns the Iraq War. She had an opportunity to stand up and lead with principle to do the right thing. And instead, she chose to support an unjust and unnecessary war that destabilized an entire region and created the chaos that ISIS needed to rise.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)or what results from them. Those too are Clinton's fault.
askew
(1,464 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)but instead she was a coward and caved.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)She voted to give Bush unlimited powers of war.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)The ever shrinking number of people who support Sanders? She has an enormous lead in the polls. It is pretty astounding that you feel your own views should take precedence over the democratic choices of the vast majority of Americans, but then that is what self-entitlement is all about.
It would be nice if you bothered to figure out what the term neocon actually means. I won't hold my breath.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)Of course you can't. You merely assume your own views are universal and absolute.
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)On Sat Nov 14, 2015, 03:10 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
It Is Increasingly Clear That HRC Must Withdraw From The 2016 Election For Her Role As A Neocon
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=806619
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Calling a Democrat a "Neocon" is entirely inappropriate.
This member has been posting this same thing in several threads on DU today. The one below was hidden by a 6-1 vote. Please hide this one too.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027345320#post1
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Nov 14, 2015, 03:13 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Personal opinions are still allowed on DU
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I wouldn't say she's a neocon but a kissing cousin neolib.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: You're kidding, right?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
riversedge
(70,350 posts)Divernan
(15,480 posts)REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Calling a Democrat a "Neocon" is entirely inappropriate.
This member has been posting this same thing in several threads on DU today. The one below was hidden by a 6-1 vote. Please hide this one too.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027345320#post1
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Nov 14, 2015, 03:13 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Personal opinions are still allowed on DU
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I wouldn't say she's a neocon but a kissing cousin neolib.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: You're kidding, right?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)The rest were enablers.
Any that assign blame to HRC are stretching, to say the least.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)for his Brady Bill vote(s).
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Obviously her vote alone wasn't responsible for the Iraq War, derp.
It is still a stain on her record. The largest foreign policy clusterfuck since Vietnam.
Sanders should be called to account for bad votes, too, however unlike HRC he is directly addressing a major component of mass incarceration by calling the War on Drugs a failure and standing up for the descheduling of marijuana, a long-overdue step towards ending the filling of prisons with non-violent drug offenders.
Dems to Win
(2,161 posts)Hillary is not solely responsible for the Iraq War, but she is the only Democrat who voted for the war who is asking for my vote to be president.
Hillary was 'co-president' from 1993-2000, when the US bombed Iraq weekly or monthly to enforce the no-fly zones enacted after the first Iraq War. The Clinton White House enforced crippling sanctions on Iraq the whole time. It made not a bit of sense that Iraq had an active weapons of mass destruction program when the country couldn't even get spare parts to repair their sewage treatment plants. Never for an instant did I, and the millions marching against the war, believe Iraq could possibly be a danger to the US after the destruction of the First Iraq War and subsequent bombings and sanctions.
It never made a bit of sense that secular Saddam, known for brutally repressing the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood, had anything to do with Al Qeada and 9/11. Not for a single moment did I, or the millions of others marching in the streets, believe Saddam had anything to do with 9/11. Hillary should have known this, too.
If she is smart and competent and the co-president during her husband's term, she would have been leading the charge for NO votes on the IWR. Instead, she voted yes and authorized the epic travesty of the Iraq War and all that followed, the biggest mistake the US has made during my lifetime.
Without the Iraq War, there would have been no Al Queda in Iraq, no ISIS, no Paris attacks.
I hope Bernie and Martin bluntly point out her poor judgement and the tragic consequences of that poor decision tonight.
Bernie's responsible for some votes I disagree with, too. I wish Rep. Barbara Lee was running for president. She was right to vote NO on the Afghanistan War, too, which has had no good results, either. But at least Bernie voted NO on one of the 2 biggest manmade disasters of my lifetime, one that I and many others KNEW would be an epic disaster AT THE TIME.
Hillary's IWR vote is inexcusable and unforgivable, imho. And the consequences have been unquestionably horrific.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Hit that one right on the head