please just stop it.

[cali]

I doubt very much that HRC is behind the BLM attacks on Bernie. And there is no evidence to support that claim. Soros funding of BLM is not evidence.

There are many possible reasons why BLM is targeting Sanders. And no, it's not just Seattle. For one thing, he's accessible. He attracts large crowds. He's a white male. Can you even imagine the shit storm that would occur if BLM reps tweeted under the hash tag "BowDownHillary"? Those activists targeting Bernie almost surely know that there is a huge reservoir of goodwill for HRC within the black community. Bernie doesn't have that. He's a new figure for most of the black community.

Do these attacks benefit HRC? Sure, but that's not her fault, nor does she have any obligation to come to his defense. Personally, I think she'd benefit from doing so and that it would be the right thing to do, but as I said, she has no obligation to do so.

[Fearless]

1. Who is saying her campaign is trying to sabotage Bernie using BLM?

[Agschmid]

3. A segment of the DU population.

[cali]

4. nah, it's not a good portion of du.

[Agschmid]

6. I edited.

[cali]

9. thanks.

[BooScout]

8. could have fooled me.....

....and I base that on the number of recs and number of posts from a lot of BS supporters.

[cali]

10. you're evidently easily fooled.

[BooScout]

16. Naaaaaaa

I caught on to BS ages ago.

[jwirr]

100. Numbers of recs and posts. That is about as reliable as political polls this early in the season.

[Duckhunter935]

5. not really

I just see the question being asked why she has never been interrupted like Bernie and O'M.

[Fuddnik]

60. Because she hasn't appeared at any public events?

[NCTraveler]

102. How they don't get that is beyond me. Nt

[Marty McGraw]

121. and 'they', being another form of 'them'

like a unwanted form of shoe goo needing to be kick aside.

[NCTraveler]

122. Sorry. Don't get what you are saying.

It's on me. Would you elaborate a little? Thanks.

[Marty McGraw]

119. is that because the Public

can't cough up enough cover charge to be at one of her events?

[hifiguy]

149. HRH diligently and studiously avoids mingling with the peasantry.

That much is unquestionably the truth. After all, there are important people - millionaires and billionaires - to meet, greet, and cut deals with. Commoners not welcome.

[sabrina 1]

12. All across Social Media Hillary IS being blamed so rightly or wrongly

that is the reality of the actions of these protesters.

What it has done is to cause great concern over Sanders' safety.

He needs security whether he wants it or not.

And yes, until proven otherwise, I am one of those who suspect this to be a dirty Rovian trick to try to undermine the only candidate who is a threat to the preferred candidates of the Status Quo.

So whatever their intentions, that is the reality and I will not be TOLD what to think by anyone.

Hillary needs to address this now IF her campaign is not responsible.

No Senator should be approached in such a threatening and hostile manner, for ANY reason.

And all candidates need to distance themselves from this kind of hostile, threatening behavior towards ANY other candidate.

As Bernie defended Hillary from the Media's attempt to get him to slam her for her use of the phrase 'all lives matter' they now need to step up and condemn this kind of threatening behavior by anyone towards a US Senator.

[Agschmid]

13. And there we have it.

[sabrina 1]

17. Yes, the reality of what these protests have done. I thought I was pretty clear

about that. Now what should be done to STOP the perception that this is a campaign tactic because just trying to dismiss it, isn't working at all.

I have offered a solution. Hillary's campaign needs to assure the public that they had nothing to do with it and condemn such behavior towards any candidate.

[1StrongBlackMan]

18. I wonder if people actually read the stuff they write? n/t

[Agschmid]

20. They don't.

See above...

"Just trying to dismiss it, isn't working"

Duh... SMH.

[sabrina 1]

25. Facts are facts. No one should ever have supported these tactics from the beginning.

But they did and now it has escalated to the point where a US Senator was threatened with 'shutting down all of your events'.

Now people are concerned for his safety.

And the fact is, whether you like it or not, since Hillary's supporters were completely on board with the last event, that this is what it is all about.

Perception is everything, and that is the growing perception. And dismissing it isn't going to change it.

Hillary can change it, by condemning such a hostile attack on a US Senator. But that's up to her.

[1StrongBlackMan]

31. The "facts"? ... Okay. n/t

[zappaman]

50. Uh huh

[sabrina 1]

153. Well at least you're honest about it!

[zappaman]

154. Honesty.

Try it sometime.
Who knows, you might like it.

[sabrina 1]

156. Normally I would ask for proof of that 'stuff' you just made up.

But there is no need. I am sure most reading this exchange don't expect it, neither do I.

It's not good to make stuff up even if you have your very own button boasting about it.

[Fred Sanders]

64. Pure speculation, innuendo and personal opinion are now "facts", did you not get the memo from Fox?

[1StrongBlackMan]

70. I remember a time when DU used to laugh at such crap ...

but, clearly and sadly, no more.

[Fred Sanders]

73. I am still laughing! And not worrying much about the nonsensical rantings, there are a few folks like you keeping it real.

[1StrongBlackMan]

76. LOL. n/t

[Marty McGraw]

125. What's with all this ganging up on one member of DU?

Like pack dogs on a blood trail. the edginess on one primary candidate's side has become much more apparent as time progresses.

it's definitely a form of bullying.

[hifiguy]

151. People who tell inconvenient truths that contradict the groupthink

are about as welcome on DU as they are any other place: not at all.

[Marty McGraw]

160. Looks so to be the Case

*rz~

[Fawke Em]

110. What did she say that wasn't factual?

1. Sanders was targeted by BLM and now some of their members say they plan to disrupt all of his events.
2. Many on social media are saying that BLM are being stalking horses for the Clinton campaign (it really is all over Twitter and Facebook - I would link to it, but I don't want to drag people I don't know and who aren't members here into this conversation by linking to them. Just do a search for "Bernie Sanders" on Twitter and read for about half a minute - you'll see it). Sabrina didn't say that she believes that to be the case and she didn't say that it's true, what she said is that many "perceive" that to be true. And they do.
3. Bernie just defended HRC's treatment in the media, saying some of it was sexist. She should return the favor.

So, yes. What Sabrina said is factual.

[1StrongBlackMan]

113. Okay. n/t

[oasis]

46. Can't see Hill getting tangled up in the middle of a half baked internet

conspiracy theory.

[sabrina 1]

49. She probably isn't tangled up in it. That's what political operatives are for.

The fact is many people are now associating this with her campaign. Last time people decided to let it go.

But when only one candidate becomes the target of this group, NOT Republicans NOT Hillary, people will think what they think. Nothing anyone can do about that.

[oasis]

54. If this incident is presented to her by the media, then and only

then, should she address it. No way will a Hillary staffer propose she hold a press conference about the incident.

[R B Garr]

63. "many people" I've seen you speak for the American people before.

"Many people" also think it's stupid to promote yet another laughable conspiracy theory.

[sabrina 1]

81. Are you speaking for the American people now?

Are you DENYING that all over social media, which is populated by millions of Americans, the perception is that this is a political tactic coming from the Clinton campaign.

The CT is to deny that reality.

[R B Garr]

93. "deny that reality" You just can't help yourself.

There is no reality that anything came from the Clinton campaign.

And Bernie supporters are certainly not "the American people". They are just Bernie supporters.

BTW, Bernie supporters are making quite a name for themselves on the internet as being hostile and out-of-touch. Input such as yours and others on this website alone certainly makes clear how the bad rep is earned. Enjoy your new-found notoriety.

[zappaman]

101. Well said.

[Fawke Em]

117. For Pete's sake, Sabrina did not say that it's true that

the BLM interruptions were planned by the Clinton campaign. What she said is that many people on social media believe that it did and that's a fact.

And not all of them are Bernie supporters. Some are just political junkies.

"Hostile" and "out-of-touch?" No.

But I do admit it makes me hostile when I ask a BLM member what their issue is with Sanders and they answer me by saying, "you don't understand." Well, duh. I wouldn't ask if I did, so why won't they tell us?

Your right, it really is hard for me and other Sanders supporters to understand how so many members of this movement don't know Sanders' history on Civil Rights. We don't understand how anyone can think Clinton's record is superior to Sanders on this issue when it's clearly not. They're right. We don't understand, but they won't tell us, either. If the goal is to talk about their issues, then they need to start talking and stop shouting over others at events.

[R B Garr]

120. Please. She's all over this thread saying that Clinton is responsible.

Clinton, Clinton's campaign, and even Clinton's supporters are all responsible. Even those who didn't supposedly speak out to protect Bernie are responsible. There are even posts implying there will be payback from Bernie supporters. All this to protect Bernie's image. Now think about how ridiculous all that sounds.

I have to shake my head at the rest of your post and just how out of touch it is. "Their concerns"...? Women and minorities are a large voting constituency of the Democratic party. "Their concerns" are OUR concerns as Democrats. See how that works?

And for cripes sake, even the GOP debate had a question about the BLM movement, calling it "the most important civil issue of our times" (I can find the exact question). If the GOP debates can address BLM even in passing, WHY can't Bernie supporters do the same?? It's really unbelievable.

That's why the anger really comes through as a concern over Bernie's image and, sorry, but his image is not a legitimate campaign issue.

[Sheepshank]

124. Actually she did say that

Hillary gets the blame, sorry. And she is, so if she doesn't like this, then she needs to

tell her supporters this is only harming HER.

. In her own words

[Marty McGraw]

128. Why?

Bernie supporters are making quite a name for themselves on the internet as being hostile and out-of-touch

Straight from the Right Wing Play Book. Accuse the other side of the 'wrong doing' of what your own side does negatively wrong first, so as your side will appear 'more' credible.

again, what's with all the edginess, and do you still think we are to remain so gullible?

[R B Garr]

132. lol, what?? What "other side" are you talking about??

I have to laugh at the arbitrary "sides" that Sander's supporters cling to. Do you mean other Democrats who don't fawn all over Bernie like he's the next Patron Saint? That side?? Who is the "we" in the gullible question?? Sigh.

And the GOP even asked a question in their debates about BLM, so it's obviously acknowledged as a political force and powerful civil rights issue. I suppose Bernie supporters can continue attacking everyone and denying reality.

[Sheepshank]

106. I'm pretty sure you are doing your part to promote that perception on social media

You certainly are doing you part here on DU. Remember your statement very recently?

Hillary gets the blame, sorry. And she is, so if she doesn't like this, then she needs to

tell her supporters this is only harming HER.

[Agschmid]

92. And I think you believe a conspiracy theory.

[MADem]

118. Couldn't POSSIBLY have anything to do with comments like these...!!!

Complex conspiracies, planned by caucasian puppet-masters, using clueless, unthinking, obedient black actors to carry out their nefarious schemes....why, that's a FAR more likely scenario! After all, what's not to LOVE....?

Heavy, heavy for the irony-impaired.
!


I thought we had to go to the right wing to get "It's Hillary's Fault" memes...! I guess not...

[R B Garr]

59. Your biased interpretations of what you read on social media aren't facts.

And let's get real: your concern for Bernie's "safety" is about his image.

And look at you saying in essence that it is Hillary's job to protect Bernie. How much more should she be doing for him? He's a grown man who can take care of himself.

[irisblue]

79. I can clearly remember a day in June 1968, so no, not just image.

Americans have a history of political assassinations; and there are a lot of armed(with all kind of weapons) crazy people in our country.

[R B Garr]

96. So BLM protestors are now armed assassins?

Really?

[irisblue]

103. I did not write that, I did not say that. You are in error if that's what you think

You are putting your words in my post. I did not imply that.
Again, Americans have a history of political assassinations, we need/recall to know that.
Your response is tells a lot about you.

[Sheepshank]

109. Of course you implied it.

..Other that attempting some sicko accusation, why else would you bring this up here.....on this thread?

If it's a completely unrelated topic to BLM, shouldn't it be on its own thread.

[R B Garr]

112. Let's put two and two together:

My post said the concern over protecting Bernie was really about his "image".

Your post said there was a history of armed political assassinations.

The people protesting Bernie were from BLM, so your implication was that Bernie was in danger from the BLM protestors. "Assassinations" was your word, even.

And pardon me if I laugh at you making this so deeply personal.

[sabrina 1]

146. If you want to talk about ME this probably isn't the place. I prefer to stick to

the issues rather than personally attack other DUers.

So to take it back to the issue, everything is 'biased' in the view of someone.

The FACT is that when Hillary was under fire by AAs all over the internet, Bernie Sanders defended her to media talking heads. Following his lead, I did not link to the attacks on Hillary from AAs, I saw no point in USING this most important issue for political purposes.

Social Media is where millions of people go to discuss issues, and yes, this event is being attributed to Hillary's campaign, right or wrong. That is a fact, whether anyone likes it or not. I think that is happening because of how SOME of her supporters JUMPED on the last such event and wrongfully joined in what looked like a mob screaming 'racist' at a Senator who for his entire life fought for the rights of those who were not getting much help anywhere else.

I have no concerns about Bernie's image whatsoever, he is constantly gaining new supporters and drawing larger and larger crowds, he is now within 4 points of Hillary in NH. He is receiving donations from hundreds of thousands of Americans enabling him to run what is a very good campaign. That's not bad for someone who was virtually unknown just two and a half months ago.

I suppose I could make an attempt to read YOUR mind, but that would be a personal attack having nothing to do with anything of importance.

[R B Garr]

148. Your (mis)interpretations are not "facts." That is the point, and when

you ascribe your own biases, motives, and misinterpretations onto others, then you are inviting people to talk about those things you that you, yourself, brought up or accused others of. That's how it works.

Here's just one little statement, but your posts are riddled with these ballooning accusations and misinterpretations:

"And the fact is, whether you like it or not, since Hillary's supporters were completely on board with the last event, that this is what it is all about." From your post #25

1) Who decided "Hillary supporters" were "completely on board with the last event"? WTF does that even mean?? For instance, I didn't even see the NetRoots event until after it occurred, but your post states that everyone is on board...Really?? Ballooning accusations like that can't possibly be true, and they are not. They are simply your misinterpretations.

Anyway, you don't provide links to your supposed social media smoking guns, so I've Googled some of your many accusations, and the results don't match what you say. More misinterpretations, I suppose.

[Skidmore]

126. Good grief.

[bbgrunt]

144. and I agree. This whole issue, if not a tactic by

some Hillary supporters, will be used to discredit both BLM and the Democrats in general. It is therefore to Hillary's advantage that she step up and help put an end to the speculation.

[Bluenorthwest]

57. So do I. I have a quote from you about heckling as a tactic and the gay people who used it:

"I would only offer that anybody who thinks the way to get ANYONE to do ANYTHING is to heckle ANYONE is a complete and utter fool."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022950725#post44

Now that seems fairly absolute, total and complete. From the same thread:
"Question: How many times have you been moved to change your mind on any matter ... by someone yelling at you.

At some point, people MUST apply the reality of life to their bullshit.

IMHO ... Now is a good time to start."



Just your words, when it was gay people interrupting a political ally. Your views have grown so much since then, it seems you would be able to address others who have a hard time with disruptive tactics as you yourself formerly rejected them entirely and completely.

[1StrongBlackMan]

71. I have evolved. n/t

[ibegurpard]

82. of course you have

Conveniently enough for this election cycle.

[Bluenorthwest]

135. As apparently many formerly strident critics haved. And what I say to them I say to you, which is

that you should be able to strongly relate to the white people who find disruptive actions to be foolish, because you have been just like them. You should be a skilled communicator in this context because you have been in both camps yourself.

[Indepatriot]

114. OUCH! That's gonna leave a mark. Seems this "evolution" thing is like a "Free Pass" on any issue....

Maybe it's time for BLM to "evolve" as well, and realize Sanders is the candidate most likely to actually DO SOMETHING about the deplorable state of racial "justice" in America. I still support their cause but unless they start showing up at GOP events and using the same tactics they'll lose my support of their organization. Right now, they're just screwing themselves by acting like children. Personally, I think they (or anyone else trying to get action from DC) would do well to get 500,000 or so supporters to surround the White House and camp there until they get some results. I believe this tactic would work for Single Payer/Campaign Finance Reform/Police Brutality/etc... "Occupy" didn't invent this tactic, it's been used before and was quite effective. If done with President Obama still in office I'd bet some very real results would be forthcoming.

[Sheepshank]

15. Wrongly so...you blame Hillary

Remember this from the other thread?

Hillary gets the blame, sorry. And she is, so if she doesn't like this, then she needs to

tell her supporters this is only harming HER.

I find it super hillarious that you put yourself in a position of making demands of her after you point fingers at her and lay blame without any facts whatsoever. But such is your wont.

[sabrina 1]

21. I thought it was hilarious that you and others were making demands of Sen. Sanders

after pointing fingers at him and insinuating he was a racist. How did you feel about the demands of these protesters towards only ONE candidate, that he 'bow down'? Really? No condemnation from those who supported this initially, now that it has gotten so out of hand?

Sorry if you don't like the reality of what you supported has now become.

The reality is that people are now thinking that this is a campaign tactic. You may want to deny it, but that is a fact.

[Sheepshank]

28. Sad that you attempt to make me responsible for other's statements....

How about you take credit for your own statement instead of deflecting?

How about you find and evidence that I have made any demands of Bernie. Go ahead.

Again, you make statements that are void of fact.

But then again, I don't blame Bernie for what many of his supporters have become.

[Agschmid]

42. I mostly agree with this.

Did you know that if you just repeat something over and over again it becomes a fact apparently?

[zappaman]

43. The poster evidently believes that is how you define "fact"

And has for quite some time.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

62. Well...

She IS inspired by the "great liberal" Dr. Oz.

[zappaman]

83. Living in ones own world can be fun

[sabrina 1]

90. Well, if you say so. Nice button, enjoy that world, though frankly I would

imagine it is a lonely world for you, no?

[Vattel]

162. Sneering bullies are generally not happy people.

I am glad you stick to the issues and don't let them get to you.

[sabrina 1]

164. Thank you, and I agree, about how unhappy sneering bullies are.

[jwirr]

108. The poster said "Hillary gets the blame. Sorry" By 8 o'clock last night anyone who was watching

social media knew that was true. The poster did not say Hillary did it. She said the she is getting the blame.

Hillary is well aware that she shoulders the blame for things she really did and many other things she did not. She now needs to deflect the blame - which is what the poster is saying.

Early yesterday I posted a statement that Hillary needs to protect Bernie's back on this issue so that she is so busy protecting him that no one can think she had time to do anything like this.

Plus IMO if anyone is pulling this kind of dirty trick it is much more likely to be the corporations and banksters who stand to lose if Bernie wins or even if he is able to build a coalition that will fight for his issues win or lose.

[sabrina 1]

155. Thank you, stating a fact creates quite stir it seems. Bernie Sanders defended Hillary

when she made her 'all lives matter' statement in a Black Church and was being fiercely criticized by AAs for doing so. When one of the Corporate Media 'journalists' tried to get Bernie to join in the attacks, he actually became ANGRY and stated very forcefully that he would NOT be attacking Hillary based on this, he was so adamant that the talking head let it go.

He didn't need to do that, he could have taken the political advantage that was being to him on a plate, and made some passive aggressive statement like 'well, Hillary I'm sure will educate herself about this issue' but because he has integrity, he refused to do that.

[bettyellen]

158. "take credit for your own statement instead of deflecting? " I read that as defecating, lol.

And why does everyone forget they went after O Malley too? I have met people who say this and didn't even know O Malley is running. Sheesh.

[Sheepshank]

159. That too lol

And yes in some other threads I was sure to mention O'Malley and that I felt he took the brunt of the actions by BLM

[bettyellen]

161. It broke the tension of this thread for me, ha ha

[George II]

38. Why should her campaign say they're NOT involved?

Should her campaign have to address every protest, every demonstration, every crime and every attack on anyone to say they're not involved?

It's ludicrous.

[ibegurpard]

45. Because her campaign and surrogates

Including her most ardent supporters right here on DU were the ones who started pushing the message that Bernie wasn't addressing the issues of people of color. And now it's grown out of her control but it's too late to distance herself from it.

[Fawke Em]

97. Thank you for your reasoned and accurate assessment.

When only one candidate is targeted for these protests and said candidate is certainly not the one who should be targeted in that he's addressed civil rights issues for longer than many of us have been alive, the reasoning behind the targeting begins to smell. That smell leads many to consider dirty politics.

Not a big leap if you ask me.

[sabrina 1]

98. Thank you, that is exactly what people are saying. Wnen something makes no sense

people do begin to wonder and when it becomes a mission, as this appears to be, to go after only one candidate, the only one who has actually done anything about Civil Rights in this campaign, reasonable people will come to their conclusions.

[Sheepshank]

123. So it must be Hillary and not a Republican?

Why in the world is anyone pinning this on Hillary with absolutely no evidence but poor linear conspiracy theories? There are at leat 15 other candidates that would benefit from Bernie being hurt and secondarily hurting Hillary by poorly reasoned implication.

[zeemike]

116. And I am with you on that.

And I guess that makes me a terrible person...becaise I don't blindly trust politics.
But I have seen too much to do that...my rose colored glasses got broken long ago.

[hifiguy]

150. I LOVE this post

[George II]

26. I didn't bookmark or copy/paste them, but...

....there were TOO many posts around here last night making that accusation.

[Adrahil]

27. Have you actually read this forum this morning? nt

[George II]

33. Here is one of the more blatantly obvious ones....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251504529

[George II]

40. Here is another one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=502198

"begs the question"???

[jwirr]

99. Mostly twitter and facebook. They went wild last night.

[Agschmid]

2. Kick.

I think she probably should and certainly could come to his defense...

But she absolutely isn't behind this.

That's tin foil hat crap.

[aspirant]

139. "absolutely isn't behind this"

Now show your absolute Proof

[Agschmid]

141. Not my job.

[aspirant]

142. Then demanding Proof from anyone else

is not their job either

[Agschmid]

143. Yah I wasn't making demands...

So...

Your point?

[NCTraveler]

157. The proof is in the abosute lack of evidence.

Think about it please. What you are attempting to do is one hundred percent "Do you beat your wife? No. Prove it." We use to mock this thought process.

[HereSince1628]

7. No one is ever obligated to do the right thing. That's why it's a matter of -honor-

[Marty McGraw]

133. Nailed it

[GoneFishin]

11. Regardless, it's a campaign tactic. We are in the middle of a campaign. As to her connection to

the actions, lack of proof is not proof of no connection. Time will tell.

He is her biggest threat and he is building momentum. To suggest that campaign strategists exist and are employed by the HRC campaign is not tinfoil hat shit. It is a fact.

A movement which attacks it's greatest potential ally is suspect. The details will come out in time either way.

[A Simple Game]

41. And it could also be someone else that is hoping for a twofer. What better way could you use to

damage the one candidate that threatens the status quo and also damage the BLM movement at the same time.

This doesn't have to be Hillary but her silence is suspect but not surprising as she isn't in a habit of clearly stating her positions and objectives.

[Moonwalk]

87. Lack of proof is no proof of no connection?!? Argue from ignorance much....?

Do you really want us to start judging everyone guilty until they prove themselves innocent? Because that's what you're saying. I don't know about you, but I would hope that here on DU, the person has to be proven guilty by their accusers first, with solid facts, not have to prove themselves innocent to anyone who accuses.

Because in the end, there is no way to prove one's innocence to someone is intent on believing you are guilty. You can show them pictures and video that you weren't at the scene of the crime and they'll still say, "You sent someone to do it for you." If you want to believe this connection is there, you will. But don't try and convince me or anyone else that the connection exists simply because there is no proof that it doesn't exists. It is up to the accuser to prove it true, not up to the accused to prove it false. And a good thing, too. If you were accused of this...how would you feel about someone insisting that no proof doesn't excuse you of the crime?

[GoneFishin]

91. I was not the one who asserted that there was not a connection. No. And you ... ?

[sabrina 1]

14. Stop what?? Thinking for ourselves? YOU are entitled to YOUR opinion.

If the hostile behavior of these protesters causes people to think it is a campaign tactic against the only real threat to the front runner, coming from her campaign, then SHE can fix that by condemning it.

Meantime I will think for myself.

Not sure why you are so concerned that many people now believe these threats against Bernie Sanders, to shut down all of his events, ARe coming from Hillary's campaign. That is a fact and you cannot control what people think.

[Agschmid]

23. Because this division isn't good for the party...

Some of us get that, you of course are entitled to your opinion but you aren't entitled to pushing pure conspiracy theory nonsense.

And when you do it don't expect not to get called on it.

Some of us actually do still support the party.

[sabrina 1]

29. Yes, from the beginning ti was intended to divide the party. And people here

supported it, now they don't like the result of what they supported.

Don't expect not get called on NOT condemning these tactics from the beginning.

This is OUR party, not YOURS and we will continue to fight to ensure it is the party of the people, because good Democrats, life long Democrats, will not be driven from this party they have supported all their lives. They are not going anywhere.

[Hortensis]

39. This "division" is not within our party. BLM is not a Democratic Party-affiliated group. Please

don't assume all black people are sympathetic to liberal and progressive goals -- except those that happen to coincide with their own. Some are conservatives every bit as opposed to our candidates' positions as their soulmates in the GOP base, and every bit as resentful and hostile.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

66. "Good Democrats, lifelong Democrats"

Like Dr. Oz?

[sabrina 1]

74. Stalking again?

It's pretty creepy behavior. I know asking someone to stop stalking a woman they disagree with doesn't work, so I will simply note the behavior each time it happens, publicly.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

78. Nope, reading a thread

I can't help that you made that idiotic statement and then doubled down on it. You treat others who disagree with you as not being "real Democrats", while in reality, you've passionately claimed a staunch conservative was a "good liberal". Calling out your blatant hypocrisy is not stalking. It's not my fault you talk down to everyone on threads you don't agree with.

[sabrina 1]

84. More stalking behavior, which has gone on for a very long time now.

Typical stalking behavior, obsessing over what someone wrote months or years ago and stalking them constantly dragging around old comments that the stalker was angry over. My support for the labeling of GMOs.

I am now asking you, only the second person I have to do this with so far, to please do not address me, I find it creepy and disturbing when someone on the internet becomes obsessed with me this way.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

89. Keep playing the victim, Sabrina.

You constantly insult people on this board. Tell them they're not "real Democrats", it's not "their" party. You can dish it, but you can't take it. I can't help that you comment vitriol on most of the threads here. When I see someone post the shit you do, I call them out. If you posted facts (ie, actual facts, not your made up "facts&quot , you probably would never hear from me (aside from an occasional K&R).

[zappaman]

94. And why not?

If you're good at something, why not stick with it.
Ask any good Democrat...they'll tell ya!

[Dr Hobbitstein]

104. Ha!

[sabrina 1]

115. And when you're not good at something?

Since people generatlly prefer those who are DIRECT, who say what they have to say honestly, who address ISSUES rather than obsess over other DUers, without the need to lie or to use the now familiar 'sneaky' method of using the 'third person' tactic, see the comment from you to which I am responding?

All that causes me to wonder why you continue to 'stick' with something, you know, the 'me too' routine, that has so utterly failed for you consistently?

Here's what I think, if tagging along is all someone chooses to do, the least they should aim for is to tag along with someone who has credibility of some sort, don't you think?

[sabrina 1]

95. I will repeat this as politely as I can, I support the Labeling of our Food and I oppose

Monsanto's control over our food supply. You have stalked me for months obsessively because of that, to the point where it is very disturbing.

So once again, I am asking you, do not address me, do not lie about me, I will correct all lies as I always have. I want no dialogue with you because I find your behavior to be disturbing.

Since you cannot focus on ISSUES, but appear to be so obsessed with my position on food labeling that you are following me around for months, there is nothing you have to say that enhances this forum in any way.

It is a simple request.

[sabrina 1]

111. Again repeating a request that this poster refrain from addressing me, due to

stalking behavior and repeated personal attacks.

[Sheepshank]

127. Good lord, you are all over DU posting several dozen posts

And don't expect to get responses on your baloney? As for personal attack, well I know I've been on the receiving end of that from you also on quite a few occassions. That any one person ( well 2 if you count me,..... Ok maybe more like 6 or 7 if you count your other "regulars&quot recalls your typical mo and calls you on it, isn't stalking. You are inviting public critism on a public bb when you post conspiracies and make up facts.

[Purveyor]

131. Results of your Jury Service

Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
On Sun Aug 9, 2015, 12:46 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

When the majority of what you say are lies,
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=504959

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

this is over the top and libelous


JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Aug 9, 2015, 01:55 PM, and the Jury voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: The post should be hidden for its labeling of a DU member as a liar. The allegations of stalking should be examined and addressed if necessary.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: don't agree
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Major personal attack on a great DUer. This is what makes DU suck.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Marty McGraw]

137. Project Much?

[Marty McGraw]

136. You said 'hypocrisy' first

so that makes you more credible. Straight from the playbook. keep it going. it's gotta' work sometime...

[LittleBlue]

85. Exactly

Why do we all have to shut up and think a certain way? Fuck that.

[Lunabell]

19. Not Hillary at all.

https://outsideagitators206.org/blog/seattle-says-bowdownbernie/

[1StrongBlackMan]

22. +1 ... I agree. n/t

[cali]

24. that may be a first.

[ibegurpard]

30. Is she behind this?

I highly doubt it. However she WAS behind the initial trial balloons like the Joan Walsh concern trolling articles and the "Not Good Enough Bernie" stuff. And the people that were pushing it vociferously right here on DU? Ardent Hillary supporters. So now it's spun out of her control she will be getting the blowback.

[tazkcmo]

32. I agree.

I also agree she would score some points by defending him but as you point out, she's under no such obligation especially considering that currently they are in competition with each other.

Obviously I'm a Sanders supporter but I can certainly see why Sec. Clinton would remain silent on this. Anything bad for the Sanders campaign is good for the Clinton campaign and with this she need do nothing at all but reap the benefits. Doesn't mean her campaign is in cahoots with BLM.

[MoonRiver]

44. This is sheer nonsense.

Do you really think HRC is the puppetmesiter over BLM, a national activist group, stemming from the murders of unarmed PoC by cops?? Hey maybe she paid the cops to kill those young men to get the plot started! And since those acts began long before Bernie announced, she must have been psychic to boot! SHE'S a FIEND!

[ibegurpard]

48. her campaign was the one that began floating

The "Bernie is not addressing the issues of people of color" message. Others have taken it and run with it. Unfortunately for her she's getting the blowback.

[MoonRiver]

55. Total B.S.

And are BLM so malleable that they would target one politician to pump another one, both of whom are white Democrats?

[ibegurpard]

67. BLM is not a cohesive organization

It's a loosely knit coalition of activists who share a common concern. I have no idea whether "they" are malleable or not. And the messages being floated about Bernie not addressing the issues of people of color were being put out there (mainly by white liberal HRC supporters) long before the Netroots Nation protests. Hillary is not going to be able to disassociate herself from this.

[MoonRiver]

130. Exactly what evidence do you have of any association?

And I'm not talking about innuendos, rumors and conspiracy theories.

[tazkcmo]

51. Did you read my post?

Especially the Title and last sentence? The part where I agree that Sec. Clinton isn't behind this?

[MoonRiver]

61. Sorry, I think I responded to the wrong post.

[tazkcmo]

65. That makes sense.

No problem. I appreciate your response.

[MoonRiver]

69. Same here. :-)

[jberryhill]

35. Which is why it is simpler to take people at their word

It's like the question of whether Trump is genuinely nuts, or the world's greatest troll intent on exposing the GOP's large obnoxious underbelly.

It doesn't matter. The result is the same.

[Doctor_J]

36. I don't really care any more whether she's directly involved or not

Her candidacy has attracted too many people and issues, and involved many tactics, that I want no part of. In 2008 I stuck with Obama for many of the same reasons (and people and tactics, for that matter). Enough already.

[DonViejo]

37. "Soros funding of BLM is not evidence."...

So what if it is evident?

Claim: George Soros donated $33 million to fund rioting Ferguson protest groups - Snopes

-snip-

According to various alarmist reports, Soros himself virtually single-handedly enabled and promoted protests connected with the Ferguson shooting because some of the groups involved (tangentially or otherwise) with activism-related events received some portion of their funding from the OSF network:

In all, Mr. Soros gave at least $33 million in one year to support already-established groups that emboldened the grass-roots, on-the-ground activists in Ferguson, according to the most recent tax filings of his nonprofit Open Society Foundations.

The financial tether from Mr. Soros to the activist groups gave rise to a combustible protest movement that transformed a one-day criminal event in Missouri into a 24-hour-a-day national cause celebre.

Soros-sponsored organizations helped mobilize protests in Ferguson, building grass-roots coalitions on the ground backed by a nationwide online and social media campaign.

Other Soros-funded groups made it their job to remotely monitor and exploit anything related to the incident that they could portray as a conservative misstep, and to develop academic research and editorials to disseminate to the news media to keep the story alive.

But taking that information and converting it into the assertion Soros himself funded Ferguson-related protests and riots is problematic for a number of reasons. Although George Soros is the founder and chairman of OSF, he quite obviously does not personally oversee and approve every single grant made by the OSF network to the multitude of
organizations and programs that the network helps to fund. As well, the $33 million figure includes just about every organization with any connection to Ferguson-related activism that received monies from the OSF network, even if their involvement was tangential (such as publishing, writing, or promoting hashtags about the issue). And that such groups may have received part of their funding from the OSF network doesn't mean those funds were given for the specific purpose of organizing Ferguson-related protests, or with the knowledge or intent they would be used thusly.

As Kenneth Zimmerman, director of OSF's U.S. Programs observed, some of the groups involved have been receiving OSF funding since long before the Ferguson shooting was a political issue, and the OSF itself did not promote or direct Ferguson-related protests:

-snip-

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251503072

[jalan48]

47. Most people tend not to respond in the best manner when they are insulted. It's human nature.

It is a reaction that has nothing to do with race.

[Bobbie Jo]

52. Sorry

Too little, too late...

You guys have officially reached the point of no return on this front.

I've seen things posted here in the last 24 hrs that would make freepers cringe.

You just can't un-see this nastiness. Congratulations and good luck.

[ibegurpard]

53. And you passed it a long time ago

Pushing the not so subtle "Bernie isn't addressing the issues of people of color" message. Now it's coming back to bite her in the ass.

[Bobbie Jo]

58. Keep it up

You're definitely on a roll here.

Lots of luck, really.

[ibegurpard]

75. Hillary is not behind the Black Lives Matter protests

But some of the activists for Black Lives Matter are running with her message that Bernie Sanders is not addressing the issues of people of color. She IS going to be blamed for that. It's already happening and there's nothing that can be done about it.

[Bobbie Jo]

86. See...

I'm not even talking about blaming Hillary at this point.

It's the complete package, and it's ugly.

Keep it going, sounds like a winning strategy, really.

[Marty McGraw]

138. and here we thought

you were going to let it go, after the first post.
Guess not

[Bobbie Jo]

140. Who the hell

is "we" and what does that even mean?

Welcome to DU.

[Ichingcarpenter]

56. Nixon didn't have clue on who Donald Segretti was

even though he worked for Creep but I met him in 71 when he tried to get our anti Nixon anti war group to protest against Nixon.......... He wanted us to give them drugs to make them obnoxious as possible so the media would notice and then promised us the NFL contract for our small silk screening company we were trying to start if we did.....we said we wanted a written contract.....
that ended the conversation

I might post the whole story later

I've seen too much of this shit going on for too long.

they are idiots but are they useful idiots? We don't know.

Useful idiots is an intelligence term that goes way back.

[ancianita]

68. If Hillary gains anything from Bernie's engagement with BLM, it should be that she learns

from his framing of their issues; and they will forge a better national modeling of how to be their ally in a way that will bring more black voters to the polls. If she learns to frame America's difficult challenges with racial and gender differences, she will show herself to be a fine future president on the domestic front, for all her corporatism. That's something I look forward to seeing.

Women of all races and people of color worldwide will be watching them both.

[Zoonart]

72. Problem with BLM

- as it is currently presenting itself, is that they are only interested in attacking low risk targets at events they can easily access and can be relatively assured that they will be allowed to take the stage. Sure- it is getting them clicks and likes, but it is also dividing their community base.

To really soar they have to attack the real enemy of the people and right now that is the Republican racist clown car. There is risk here. They will have to risk being arrested and harassed. As a veteran of many civil and global rights movements, I can advise that you can either get your face on TV or you can effect real change. Real change involves risk for the planners and the activists of this movement.

All of what they are demanding is righteous. However, it will have to be achieved politically, therefore they cannot continue to divide the base or they will loose.

[starroute]

77. I'd like to draw a parallel that some may find annoying

The BLM #ShutItDown campaigns are intended to make the white middle class aware that their comfortable way of life is made possible by the exploitation, impoverishment, and suppression of black lives and black aspirations. It doesn't matter if the individual white person can sincerely say, "I'm not a racist. I don't hate anybody. I've never knowingly harmed a person of color." What matters is that they are personally benefiting, both through the unrecognized perks of white privilege and through the economic advantages of having a black underclass.

In the same way, Hillary is benefiting from any protest that targets Sanders while leaving her untouched. She benefits from having the perception that the Clintons are allies of the black community go unquestioned. She benefits from the Secret Service protection that as a former first lady surrounds her with an iron wall of security. She benefits from her high level of name recognition that enables her to slip in and out of cities to appear at $2700-a-plate fundraisers rather than doing wide-open public events.

She has her own very special version of white privilege, and rather than sitting back and letting it work in her favor, she has a moral obligation to, at the very least, acknowledge the unfair advantages she receives on every side.

[bbgrunt]

145. I like that.

[Babel_17]

147. I'd hate to have you working against me!

I wonder if somebody with a byline will hit on this train of thought as well.

[jalan48]

80. I agree Cali.

I also think it's important that Bernie supporters stay on message about income inequality and the dangers of the oligarchy that currently governs our country. This is not to say the issues raised by BLM are not important, but rather they are occurring within a system, both social, political and economic which has been corrupted by the influence of money.

[Yallow]

88. I Smell A Rat

I really doubt the HRC campaign had anything directly to do with what I witnessed yesterday at Westlake Center.

I was there, and I was pissed off by BLM. I am not a racist, and don't appreciate being called a racist because
I haven't fought hard enough to remedy 500 years of the oppression of African Americans.

Even though I agree cops should stop killing unarmed black/white/hispanic men, and it is a real problem, BLM
doesn't have much to say about the thousand murders of blacks by blacks for every Eric Garner, Michael Brown etc.
I'm not the only one to notice that. Economic justice is the real answer regardless how pissed off people get about
what cell phone videos they watch. When gang banging is the only job that pays, there is gonna be a lot of corpses.

That said, I smell a rat.

Pure Rove is attacking an opponent where you are weakest, like the purple band aids at the GOP convention in 2004.

Bush was a deserter, and Kerry was a war hero. Rove and his minions attacked Kerry's service record.

I smell a rat here.

Where Hillary is weakest, is her ties to Wall Street. Not the 5 million lunatic conspiracies.

It would be pure Rove to attack with her (or the billionaire's) minions Senator Sanders record for fighting
full throttle for social justice, and economic justice his whole entire career.

I can't see where Hillary is ordering BLM to attack Sanders, but something sure smells like a rat here.

Usually when you smell a rat, there is a dead rat somewhere......

Been doing this way too long.....

[EEO]

105. Nice straw man you have there.

[Prism]

129. Sanders is about to be sunk by SJWs

And if I didn't like the guy so much, I'd think what was going on is one of the most hilarious depictions of what is wrong with these people.

"This candidate has done the most for our issues by far. Let's shut him down. For reasons!"

Jesus H. Sometimes I just wonder about the Left.

No, do go on. Be a total, complete, utterly mindless idiot for your own cause. It will be wonderful.

We're getting Hillary. I think she'll lose in the general. And then I wonder what these people will have to say. I'm guessing not too much.

[MisterP]

134. a lot of the suspicion is also from the similar language to the Clinton side: if you're not

Black/Latin@/GLBT you have to STFU (though of course actually BEING of the appropriate group never seems to matter)

and it wasn't O'Malley's side saying "Sanders supporters have a Black problem" (and "a Latino problem" and "a gay problem" and whatever but that didn't stick)

oddly I agree that there's no need for money or orders to change hands--that's always been the Clintons' M.O. (and if it were Soros they'd be protesting in Caracas anyway!)

[peacebird]

152. Marissa Jenae does tweet under #BowDownBernie how is that less offensive than the one you mention?

[Vattel]

163. I agree, but I would add

that Hillary does have an obligation not to take part in smearing of Sanders. She failed to fulfill that obligation when she said, "there are some who say, 'Well racism is a result of economic inequality.' I don't believe that . . ."