Where is Bernie Sanders on Gender Justice?

[ismnotwasm]

Legitimate question of a potential POTUS

I want to support Bernie. I really do. He’s right on the money to call for expanding Social Security, the most effective anti-poverty program in the United States. And I am more than down to fight alongside him against rampant inequality and for better wages and working conditions.

But I have to ask. Why does Bernie struggle so much to talk about gender? Why is it like pulling teeth for him to talk about my identity as a woman in addition to my identity as a worker?

I took a look through his platform recently, and I didn’t exactly see women represented there. For one, most of the policies that would disproportionately benefit women (equal pay, paid family leave, paid vacation, and paid sick days) are housed within the “Real Family Values” section, a classification that implicitly characterizes women’s rights as valuable only insofar as they benefit a larger family unit.

And while the platform mentions abortion briefly, it fails to offer any recommendations about how to preserve and expand access. Due to the Hyde Amendment, federal funds cannot be used for abortion except in limited circumstances. This restriction means that, as a result of economic deprivation, poor women, who are disproportionately Black and Brown, can be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies to term. To reduce these barriers to women accessing basic health care services, Bernie should throw his support behind the EACH Woman Act, a recently introduced piece of legislation that, according to RH Reality Check, “would ensure that anyone who has health care or health insurance through the federal government also has coverage of abortion care.”

http://feministing.com/2015/08/14/where-is-bernie-sanders-on-gender-justice/

[Picking Dem]

1. Here.

http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-womens-rights

[BainsBane]

2. The Women's Health Protection Act looks great

but it stalled in committee over a year ago. It doesn't tell me what Sanders will do to prioritize women's reproductive rights as President.

[ismnotwasm]

3. AND--This isn't a hit piece

It's thoughtful and useful questioning. I want to know as well

[Luminous Animal]

8. Prioritize over what? Black Lives Matter?

Prioritize: designate or treat (something) as more important than other things.

I love it. Painting Sanders as a racist hasn't quite worked out so lets move to sexist.

Hahahahahaha!!!

[ismnotwasm]

15. That comment was uncalled for

Women's reproductive rights are under constant attack from the Right. Its a legitimate concern.

[Cha]

27. Exactly... no one "painted BS as racist.." his supporters in his name.. just accused

others of doing it because they didn't think he was perfect on racial injustice.

Turns out they were right, of course.

Yes, Women's reproductive rights and Health issues are under constant attack from the rwassholes Just as Black Amercians are under constant attack from lethal Police Violence.

Not as deadly but we're still under attack.

[Armstead]

42. Turns out they were right? noooooooo, not exactly

Turns out Sanders brand new campaign hadn't gotten specific enough soon enough. It corrected that right away when pointed out.

But it wasn't just a friendly raising if an issue. It devolved into a smear. THEVimplication was made and hammered at that somehow Sanders didn't care about racial justice, which was the exact opposite of the truth.

The corrections Sanders campaign made were not some change -- merely more clarification of his longtime priorities and beliefs and existing positions he has believed in and fought for all his life.

But that got conveniently ignored.

[Fawke Em]

121. Wait... you have a Stop the XL Pipeline

button in your signature, but you support HRC who hasn't said she would?

[cherokeeprogressive]

147. Um, yeah.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026737025

[seabeyond]

150. um. no. that would just be supporters painting it as such, as many of us

both on du, and across the nation pointed out the weakness in his campaign. no where in that OP that you continually put up as an example states, implies, or suggest sanders is a racist, merely that in his revolution he make no comment about racial issues in the u.s. today and that HAS TO be part of sanders revolution.

please highlight where sheshe stated, suggested or implied sanders was a racist.

look. you are welcome. you are welcome that those of us who used to support sanders, support sanders or do not support sanders took the three months to educate sanders to allow blacks to sit at the table.

he has a little more chance now. many of his supporters fought it tooth and nail. now that sanders is marginally embracing allowing blacks at the table these same supporters cheer and praise sanders.

a bit of disconnect in that.

[cherokeeprogressive]

157. I'M welcome that YOU educated Bernie Sanders to allow blacks to sit at the table? THAT'S fukn FUNNY

Highlight where she stated, suggested, or implied Bernie Sanders was a racist? With the picture she included and I don't give a fuck if she was just being accurate and posting everything included in that tripe article or not. One fucking day after he announced his candidacy, she saw a threat to Hillary Clinton and brought out what she thought were the "big guns".

You taught Bernie Sanders to allow blacks to sit at the table? That's rich. God damn but you are funny.

[seabeyond]

165. well. me and tons of others. you know, all those people you fought so hard against.

the picture has nothing to do with sanders, but black people experience in the u.s.

and ya. you are welcome cause three months later sanders has finally decided to be marginally inclusive to blacks. lets see if you all can learn from the first round, and jump on board with welcoming womens issues.

[cherokeeprogressive]

177. All those people I fought against? Was I fighting someone? I don't remember fighting anyone.

Finally decided. Finally. Please tell me you won't make the argument he formulated ANY of his positions in the period of time that's passed since Net Roots.

"marginally inclusive to blacks." Finally. That's not just Comedy Gold. It's Breathtaking Comedy Gold.

The picture had nothing to do with Sanders? Graphic images of all types are used to exemplify writers' words, are they not? Aren't they used to reinforce whatever idea is being advanced? The article she linked to was about Sanders' inadequacies concerning his campaign's (a one day old campaign) message in the context of his commitment to fighting for equality. What was the graphic image used to reinforce the point? A black man being used as a trophy for white cops. I'd say any reasonable person would agree that thinking the picture was used to make Sanders seem anti-black isn't a bad inference. It might not be the one you like, or the one you choose, but I'm guessing a majority of people saw it that way no matter who they support but some of them wouldn't admit it on a bet.

[seabeyond]

178. the picture was in a story of words about black life and experience. it was part of their story.

one merely had to READ the WORDS to see their reference. really, not tough.

[cherokeeprogressive]

181. The picture was in a blog post that informed readers what the blogger thought about Bernie Sanders.

"It is due to all of the above that I have to say that when Sen. Bernie Sanders kicks off his presidential campaign with a suggestion that he is launching a "political revolution to transform our country," and yet makes zero mention of any of the issues that burden people of color in this country, my response is simply..."Not good enough, Bernie."

You are 100% correct in your statement that it's "really, not tough" to see what the point of the blog post was, and what graphic image was used to reinforce it. Thank you for making my point.

[seabeyond]

184. You are 100% correct in your statement that it's "really, not tough" yet still, you are wrong.

[cherokeeprogressive]

199. How

[seabeyond]

213. the picture had nothing to do with sanders. it had to do with black life experiences.

she discussed black life experiences. and why it was so important to discuss, out loud.

the part sanders enters the conversation is discussion of his revolution, but how he did not include the lives of blacks. the poster felt due to black experiences she had just given examples of, it was not good enough sanders discussing a revolution for only the middle class.

simple reading.

[cherokeeprogressive]

214. Yawn.

K.

[seabeyond]

216. nite

[cherokeeprogressive]

218. Have a wonderful evening sb.

I'm betting we have the same hopes for the world in general, and this country specifically... our biggest difference is which road to take to get there. Please don't let my words come off as meaning I have any kind of personal animosity toward you; I don't.

Chris

[seabeyond]

219. thank you for this post.

all over du, i am saying this to others, i respect, admire and appreciate. let not the primary mar our history.

i appreciate it and right back at you.

i will continue to adamantly stand with my points as you will with yours. i can respect that.

thank you.

[cherokeeprogressive]

220. Making nice whenever possible actually feels like having a heavy load lifted from my shoulders.

Thank you for the kind words. They mean a lot. Some of my favorite DU posts involve seeing two people, diametrically opposed, who can and do put their differences aside at the end of a disagreement.

[seabeyond]

222. ya. i agree. i believe... we can be that good.

?w=400&h=224&crop=1

[1StrongBlackMan]

126. You see ...

Apparwntly, having a candidate running to represent you address your particular interests is unreseasonable.

[ismnotwasm]

194. Yes, I'm starting to understand that

And I'm not to question what or how much either

[BainsBane]

24. Over the sensibilities of white anti-choice voters

at Liberty University and elsewhere. But given your reaction it is evidently too much for any of us to suggest our rights matter. Clearly if his supporters think basic civil and human rights are a joke, I can't depend on the candidate to promote them.
Thanks for reminding me of that. You wouldn't actually want anyone to read his website and think, hey, he looks pretty good. Instead, you need to mock both black lives and reproductive rights in a single post so that everyone is on notice that the only the chosen few matter.

[Bluenorthwest]

58. Hillary Clinton spent 17 years preaching at me that she opposed my rights because of her 'faith'

Well BB, that's fucked up. I could have and for some time was nice about it, and offered mitigations but fuck that. She shat on my rights and you know what? Her reasons were the same reasons Anti Choice people use 'God says'. She claimed God told her gay marriages were creepy or something.
17 fucking years of that bigoted drooling. She and Bill both. Cigar Bill, too Godly for equality. Yeah. That has to be said. They are not fit to judge the lives of others, but they did.

Tell me clearly why you think it was ok for her to oppose basic civil rights for me.

[ismnotwasm]

65. It was wrong

It's always going to be wrong. There is no excusing it. It's a very black mark on her record.

I suppose the closest I can feel to how you feel it the various 'stances' on abortion and women's tights, up to and including porn culture, rape culture, objectification of women.

It's not the same however. For instance, until the right is taken away from me, I can choose to have an abortion--or not. You can't choose to be gay.

But I didn't choose to be born female either. I respect you a lot, I respect your anger. I rarely respond to you but I always read your posts. I respect the anger of people such as Bravenek, who intensely dislikes Hillary for some of her campaign decisions in 2008.

This doesn't stop me from supporting her now--but I certainly don't blame you if it stops you.

If I have a personal bottom line, and a personal deal-breaker, and that is women's rights world-wide.

This article is a gentle questioning on another area the candidate--who has a stellar voting record, all the way from the safety of Vermont, will deal with specific women's issues. Personally I believe as the candidates get feedback as the campaign rolls along, Sanders will improve. The article should have provoked thoughtful discussion and not sputtering outrage from the supporters of Sanders.


He will never reach the all encompassing efforts of Hillary Clinton on women's rights.

[Armstead]

81. Gentle questioning?

"I want to support Bernie. I really do. ...But I have to ask. Why does Bernie struggle so much to talk about gender? Why is it like pulling teeth for him to talk about my identity as a woman in addition to my identity as a worker?"

That is just total ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT. All she needed to do was use the Google machine to see where Sanders stands and what he has done. He has always been ore than willing to "talk about (her) identity as a woman."

Perhaps his campaign needs to do more production of the 25-point issue papers that people never read, and organize his website a little better.

But that is a far cry from "struggling" with gender and "pulling teeth" to get him to talk about it. It's campaign mechanics.

ANYONE who knows how to type in a search term on Google or Bing or wherever can find endless examples of where Sanders stands, what he has said, what he has done.

No it is like calling the person a racist and apathetic about criminal injustice -- when in reality in the "tough on crime" era in the early 1990's that same candidate stood up on the House floor and castigated a crime bill at the time as a "vengeance bill, a retribution bill" and went on to basically strongly criticize a justice system that "disproportionally punishes blacks"

IF people want to disagree with him on policies in real terms, Okay. Fair game. But trying to put memes out there that Sanders is the OPPOSITE of who he is.....That is not justifiable "gentle questioning."

[azmom]

108. [phone]

[senz]

144. And another [phone]

[Vattel]

163. thank you for speaking the truth

[AtomicKitten]

129. We've reached the summit of Bullshit Mountain.

Behold brothers and sisters.

"I want to support Bernie. I really do. ...But I have to ask. Why does Bernie struggle so much to talk about gender? Why is it like pulling teeth for him to talk about my identity as a woman in addition to my identity as a worker?"

[restorefreedom]

137. we have arrived!

[cherokeeprogressive]

148. I thought it was funny to read that with her "H" logo avatar just to the left of those words LOL n/t

Irony don't get no better'n that.

[Vattel]

192. I have to respectfully disagree.

There is a higher peak:

Or did you miss the part about Sanders' "Real Family Values" classification "implicitly characterizing women's rights as valuable only insofar as they benefit a larger family unit"?

[sibelian]

227. There is no end to their cynicism.

Again:

There is no end to their cynicism.

Again:

There is no end to their cynicism.

Again:

There is no end to their cynicism.

It is infinite. It is a bottomless pit. They have gazed looooooong into the Abyss.

Never underestimate their capacity for cynicism. It is the centrepiece of their entire hypothesis.

Not even Republicans are as cynical.

[seabeyond]

233. about clinton? i know. it is bad, right?

[slipslidingaway]

26. So tired of this racist and now sexist BS. nt

[Cha]

28. No one is "painting BS racist".. and they're not accusing him of being sexist. Only in the minds of

of supporters.

Every other politician gets their feet held to the fire.. but one must not question Bernie.

[slipslidingaway]

35. Where are the threads about Hillary, O'Malley, Chaffee and Webb on gender equality ...

why is there no talk of 'white supremacist liberals' directed towards the other candidates and these slanted words just happened to be uttered at one rally and for one candidate.

Can you answer that?

BLM planned to interrupt Clinton, but did not do so because they were 'late' (there is an excuse!) and also advertised their intentions in advance, think they could have been on time. They met with Jeb before his speech and chanted after it was done, not rushing the stage, unlike Seattle.

Strange, all just in one's mind. If you are not questioning then you are not paying attention.

I thought the idea of dividing people on DU by race and age was a bad idea when the posts began to surface over a year ago, still believe it is a bad idea, no matter the candidate. If we do this many people will lose IMHO.

This is not about Sanders, it hurts every person who has been marginalized, for whatever reason.

[Cha]

41. Hillary is great on Women's Issues!

[beam me up scottie]

63. Unless you're an lgbt woman.

Hillary had to "evolve" on their civil rights.

Bernie, otoh, always supported equal rights for women, minorities and lgbt people.

Glad you brought that up, Cha!

[ismnotwasm]

70. Did he?

[beam me up scottie]

72. Of course.

If you can point to evidence to the contrary I'd like to see it.

[ismnotwasm]

74. Why don't you point to evidence for.

[Picking Dem]

77. Evidence provided.

[ismnotwasm]

98. Oh yeah

"Homosexuals and adultery"

I figured someone would post that

For your reading pleasure

http://m.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/fuggedaboudit/Content?oid=2291039

[beam me up scottie]

105. For your reading pleasure: 32 Years Before Marriage Equality, Bernie Sanders Fought For Gay Rights

Bernie Sanders, 1983: "It is my very strong view that a society which proclaims human freedom as its goal, as the United States does, must work unceasingly to end discrimination against all people."

More:

32 Years Before Marriage Equality, Bernie Sanders Fought For Gay Rights

These days, you’d be hard pressed to find a Democrat with any sort of antigay platform — hell, even the Republicans are starting to realize that to be relevant in 2015 and beyond, you’ve got to move past the “gay issue.”

But these are only very recent developments. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton may be champions of same-sex marriage now, but you don’t have to go far back to find a time when they weren’t. And hey, we’re happy to have their evolved support.

“A decade ago politicians ran against LGBT rights; today, they’re running towards them,” Obama said once in a speech, leaving out the fact that he is one of those politicians.

But you know who wasn’t? Well, assuming you’ve already read the headline, you’re right: Bernie Sanders.

Not only did Sanders vote against the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996 which defined marriage as between one man and one woman, signed into law by then-president Bill Clinton — an unpopular position then — a look back at Sanders’ political career shows consistent support of the gay rights movement. Even when it was more than just unpopular, it was downright controversial.

In 1983, two years into Sanders’ run as mayor of Burlington, VT, local gay rights leaders planned the city’s first ever pride parade and called on the Board of Aldermen to designate June 25 Lesbian and Gay Pride Day.

...

"In our democratic society, it is the responsibility of government to safeguard civil liberties and civil rights — especially the freedom of speech and expression,” Sanders wrote later in a memo. “In a free society, we must all be committed to the mutual respect of each others [sic] lifestyle.”

http://www.queerty.com/32-years-before-marriage-equality-bernie-sanders-fought-for-gay-rights-20150719

[beam me up scottie]

79. Sure, you can start here:

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/bernie_sanders.htm

[ismnotwasm]

99. You too

http://m.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/fuggedaboudit/Content?oid=2291039

[beam me up scottie]

102. Seen that hit piece. It's speculation from a whiner who didn't get an interview with Sanders.

If you have any ACTUAL evidence that he didn't support equal rights, again I'd love to see it.

[Armstead]

118. An alternative interpretation...

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/246370-sanders-i-was-ahead-of-the-curve-on-gay-rights
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Saturday he has been waiting for the nation to catch up to his support for same-sex marriage.
Sanders’ remarks come a day after Friday’s landmark 5-4 Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide.
He argued he was well ahead of the historic decision, unlike Hillary Clinton, his main rival for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.“Back in 1996, that was a tough vote,” Sanders said of his opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).“Not too many people voted against it, but I did,” he told listeners in Nashua, N.H. Sanders at the time served in the House of Representatives, which voted 342-67 in favor of DOMA. The Senate voted 85-14 in favor, before former President Bill Clinton signed it into law. “That was an anti-gay marriage piece of legislation,” he added of the law that defined marriage at the federal level as the coupling of one man and one woman.

And...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-novak/on-lgbt-rights-bernie-lea_b_7662682.html
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, the longest-serving Independent in the history of Congress, is also running for the nomination. And unlike Clinton, his record on LGBT rights is historically excellent.

Sanders voted against DOMA, one of the few members of Congress to do so, at a time when such a stance was not politically popular. Four years after DOMA passed, Sanders helped champion Vermont's decision in 2000 to become the first state to legalize same-sex civil unions. This set a national precedent for LGBT equality achieved via legislative means. In 2009, when Vermont became the first state to allow marriage equality through legislative action rather than a court ruling, Sanders expressed his support once again. Truly, Sanders has been a real leader on LGBT rights, even if this leadership isn't recognized in the way that Clinton's current support is.

[Lancero]

120. For a article supposedly about Sanders, seems odd that he isn't mentioned til 75% the way through.

[beam me up scottie]

123. Ikr? He talked more about the UVM hockey scandal than Bernie.

Not exactly the gotcha piece of journalism they want everyone to think it is.

[Cha]

75. Hillary is great on all women's issue.. Don't care what some BS supporter has to say.

[beam me up scottie]

80. You don't care what lgbt people like Bluenorthwest have to say?

How...liberal of you.

[cherokeeprogressive]

152. Of course she doesn't. She already has her ticket to the coronation.

It's funny how, upthread, she innocently stepped in with her crocodile complimentary "no one thinks Bernie is a racist" bullshit and now she's taking the gloves off because someone has spoken ill of the Future Queen.

[cyberswede]

89. Bernie is great on all women's issues, regardless of what some HC supporter has to say. nt

[AtomicKitten]

130. Unless you're a woman in Iraq. Kaboom! #Shock&Awe

[seabeyond]

138. or a woman in kosovo then, 1999... boom. right? not like sanders

has not supported military action thru out his career, correct?

[Jim Lane]

44. Yet another straw man argument.

No one is saying "one must not question Bernie" and the continued assertion is devastating to credibility.

Disagreeing with a politician's positions is holding his or her feet to the fire. Raising the criticism that positions with which you agree are listed on the website under a heading that you would word differently is not holding anyone's fight to the fire -- it's being petulant.

The point about "Real Family Values" should be clear to anyone who's paying attention to the broader political debate in this country. The right wing has adopted "family values" as a slogan. It's generally used to cover misogyny, homophobia, Christofascism, etc. Sanders's website uses the heading "Real Family Values" to take the fight to those people and call out their hypocrisy.

I think it's a good choice. Even if you disagree with the choice, though, most reasonable people would consider the substance of the policies to be more important than a minor detail of their presentation.

[Cha]

46. Oh yeah, they are.. no one gets to question BS. End of story. I've seen it too many times. and,

for you to say that's "strawman".. is a bogus deflection from the facts.

the meme is Bernie is above reproach. Saying otherwise.. bringing up anything about him being less than perfect.. brings a mass attempt to shoot it down. And, they aren't doing him any favors, either.

[Jim Lane]

47. OMG! When Sanders is criticized, his supporters answer the criticism!

This is a discussion board. There are, duh, back-and-forth discussions in which people disagree. That doesn't mean that anyone is saying that no one gets to question a candidate. It would be more accurate to say that no one gets to question a candidate and have their comments go unrebutted.

If you want to see people who actually consider their candidate above reproach, and who respond to criticism not merely by disagreeing with the substance but by denouncing the criticism as right-wing trolling or whatever, you should look at the supporters of the candidate who's leading in the polls. She's going to be the nominee, you see, absolutely no question about that, and the sole issue is how to win in November. Therefore, anyone who says anything negative about her wants Ted Cruz to be appointing Supreme Court Justices. I haven't seen that kind of crap from any other camp.

[Cha]

49. OMG!!!! You can deny it all you want.. it doesn't make it any less true.

[cali]

100. you don't seem to know the difference between fact and opinion.

[ismnotwasm]

158. Do you?

[cheapdate]

182. Then I look forward to your enlightening the rest of us.

Two thousand years of philosophical inquiry has not yet produced an agreed upon concrete test of what is really true, or even agreement on what constitutes "objective evidence". But since you alone have the answer, please share. I can't wait to find out who was right all along. Was it the empiricists or the rationalists, or something else?

[BainsBane]

30. If we dare ask what he plans to do to protect our civil rights

that amounts to calling him sexist? Do you not understand how ridiculous and counterproductive than comment is?

[slipslidingaway]

37. All you have to do is listen to what he says and if you are not willing to that at least ask ...

the same questions of other candidates. Only asking questions of one candidate appears biased, do you not agree?

The whole OP is counterproductive and biased, do you not see that?

[BainsBane]

170. It questions that assumption

that Sanders is owed votes simply because you like him. I absolutely ask those questions of all the candidates. And Clinton is by far the strongest on women's issues, which is why the majority of women support her. Now you insist we have no right to question if Sanders represents us. What matters is that he represents you.

I asked about a specific piece of legislation his website sited as proof of what he will do for women, only it has been stalled in committee for over a year. I then asked what he plans to do as president and I was attacked. How dare I question the great man? Who am I but a mere women, too inconsequential to even dare ask about my interests. Point made. You don't want or need our votes. That point has been made clear time and time again. So he will not get them. Sanders can thank you folks for making sure he doesn't.

I'm done telling you people basic points about politics anyone should know. You keep on doing exactly what you are doing.

[beam me up scottie]

53. The op used a loaded question to imply that Bernie doesn't care about my rights as a woman.

And as a woman I find such transparent tactics to be insulting and sexist.

The only ones making ridiculous and counterproductive comments are the blogger cited by the op and the Hillary supporters who are trying to pretend this was a serious inquiry.

We're not buying what you're selling but cheer up, it's not all your fault, your product wasn't that great to begin with.

[Autumn]

85. We women are smart. We know who cares about our rights and we know who's

playing games.

[beam me up scottie]

87. Exactly. STOP exploiting women's issues, Hillary supporters.

They picked the wrong group of people to mess with this time.

[Autumn]

90. That all they can do but I find it wierd to see a poster who considered Hillary

to be morally depraved back in 2008 defending her so staunchly with much the same tactics used to defend Obama.

[beam me up scottie]

92. Morally depraved?

Just how much HAS Hillary evolved?

[Autumn]

95. A whole fooking lot

[senz]

154. Well said.

[cali]

64. lol.

[corkhead]

122. LULZ

Someone is in need of some nap time:

On Sat Aug 15, 2015, 12:28 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Prioritize over what? Black Lives Matter?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=519518

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

disruptive trolling

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Aug 15, 2015, 12:39 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is getting ridiculous.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I think it's a fair statement and should be addressed in the thread. Disruptive trolling? Baloney, unless, of course, you're an alert stalker.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is one of the most ridiculous alerts I have been a jury for. If you can't handle a comment like that, keep to the protected HRC group
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Gonna need more than just name-calling as an "alert message", Alerter.

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

[cyberswede]

125. LOL juror #4

[1StrongBlackMan]

127. No one was painting Bernie as a racist ...

except, of course, Bernie supporters in there straw man arguments, to protest Black folks advocating that he pledge to adress issues beyond economics.

[Cha]

136. Exactly.. and some still haven't learned that whole strawman attack didn't work out so

well for them. they need to keep up.

Bernie hired a Black Woman has his press secretary.. he's listening. Just too many of his online supporters in his name.. are not.

[seabeyond]

139. NO ONE... stated, implied, or suggest sanders was a racist. further, everyone clarified sanders

is NOT a racist.... prior to discussing his campaign issues.

wow. still 3 months later saying the same damn thing. lol

hi strong black man.

[senz]

141. Ohhh, you knew that was coming, didn't you?

[peacebird]

4. KaPow! Bernie policy delivered!

[ismnotwasm]

5. Well yes--that's easy to find

But it doesn't address the article. The good people at Feministing know how to look up a candidates website.

[peacebird]

6. As a woman, working in a 'man's' job for decades, I can say with no regrets that Bernie is the only

Candidate looking after womens issues

[Luminous Animal]

7. And has for decades.

[ismnotwasm]

11. You must be joking

Or course you're not. Silly me.

[Luminous Animal]

12. Maybe they should use their brain power and look up his record.

Hillary supporters seem to have no problem with her rolling out her positions bit by bit with well crafted videos.

But Bernie, apparently, should have launched his campaign from the head of Zeus fully formed.

[ismnotwasm]

14. The topic is Gender.

[Armstead]

23. The topic was framed as Sanders "struggling" with women's issues

[beam me up scottie]

51. They're too busy acting like being a woman automatically makes Hillary a better candidate for women.

Appealing to my lady parts doesn't work when the Republicans do it, why do Hillary supporters think it's going to win me over now?

It's insulting and quite sexist.

[ismnotwasm]

71. The topic is Senator Sanders on women's rights (I stand corrected)

Really you should read the whole thing

[beam me up scottie]

78. Why? She already declared that Bernie "struggles" to talk about gender issues.

Anyone who starts out being that dishonest doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.

All of the information is out there, if she was interested in a discussion she should have started with the truth.

[Control-Z]

187. He's had 30 years to prepare.

He's been touted as unchanging and stubborn about his grand ideas. Seems he should have iron clad solutions for them by now.

[Armstead]

22. Apparently not

Last edited Sat Aug 15, 2015, 09:20 AM - Edit history (1)

[Armstead]

117. Self delete,. Put in wrong place

[Armstead]

21. But,but,but...

[Armstead]

9. He's against it

Ask a stupid question....

[ismnotwasm]

13. Now now

Senator Sanders has an excellent voting record, and 100% NARAL rating

[Armstead]

18. I have a difficult tine with an article that gripes because...

Last edited Sat Aug 15, 2015, 01:32 AM - Edit history (1)

Equal pay and family leave are included under family values and not on a seperate category for women. Um, equal pay is equal pay.And his website DOES have a large section on womens issues.

OR. Complaining that his proposal for infrastructure is inadequate because the jobs would go to men. Um, not necessarily. First, it is sexist to assume that women can't work construction jobs. It also ignores the fact that construction companies (or Federal programs) have office jobs, snd generate activity and employment for many other related types of businesses among suppliers, support services, design firms, etc.

That kind of innuendo as evidence that he is "struggling" with women's issues is bullshit.

And NO ONE is more committed to UNIVERSAL ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE. That presumably includes women.

The point about funding for abortion is legitimate. But that ties in with the whole matrix of legalities regarding the Hyde Amendment. My guess is that Sanders would support anything that might rectify that problem.

[cyberswede]

19. Good post. nt

[beam me up scottie]

62. ^^THIS^^

And if the op really cares about his position on abortion rights everything they need to know is right here:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Bernie_Sanders_Abortion.htm

Why would any woman claim he struggles with our issues?

It boggles the mind.

[ismnotwasm]

66. Okey Dokey

[TBF]

143. Then why the question? nt

[ismnotwasm]

10. So it looks like Sanders supporters thus far

Are completely satisfied with him, and any concerns or questions by anyone else should be dismissed.

Well it was worth a try. This is actually a rather nice article--if one takes the time to read it

[delrem]

16. Yah, Bernie might be OK, if you squint,

but Bernie supporters and white progressive liberals are all such <xxxxx>

They're <xxxxs> and <yyyys>, I know, 'cause I saw a tweet from a "Bernie supporter" that was just so bad!


You guys flying the H-arrow are just so damn transparent with your aggressive/passive crap.

[Cha]

25. Of course. Any issue that comes up... BS is perfect. Everyone else must have their "feet held

fire".. but not BS.. you must not go near his.

[Armstead]

29. Not true. But total trumped up distortions are challenged

He's "struggling" with gender justice because he is proposing a huge infrastructure program to stimulate employment?

C'mon. Bullshit is bullshit.

[BainsBane]

31. The article addresses that very point

Addressing unemployment is great, but it doesn't affect the disparities in pay or low rates of female employment in the construction industry where workers would get jobs through infrastructure improvements, an industry that employs only 26% women and where sexual harassment is far too common. Read the article. Every time you all insist we have no right to even ask about what a candidate plans to do for us, you communicate the message that we aren't important enough to even dare ask.

[Armstead]

36. Yeah, okay. Bernie does'n't care about women, and neither do his supporters

All that information on his website, and all his votes, and everything he has said and done all his life on these issues do not matter.

None of it means anything. He's struggling with women's issues. Okay, fine whatever.

[beam me up scottie]

52. It's the new meme and it's just as hillaryous as the original 'Not Good Enough Bernie'.

If they only knew how desperate this looks they'd quit digging.

[sheshe2]

34. Sounds to me like Bernie supporters

speak FOR us, Cha.

Yet REFUSE to listen to our legitimate concerns.

[Armstead]

39. What's a legitimate concern on this?

Seriously, read his website, look up his record,look up what he has said over the years.

If you honestly find something that indicates Sanders is "struggling to deal with women's issues" and has been non supportive, on the wrong side of the issue or some sin of comission or omission, -- bring it on. Discuss and debate.

Maybe he, or some of his supporters might say "well you have a point. He needs to address that." Or might disagree with you and explian why.

Maybe if brought to the attention of him and his staff, they might also say you have a point.

But this generalized concern trolling and snarky innuendo about someone who has consustently and overwhelmingly been on the side of women's rights and issues? Neh.

[Cha]

40. They can REFUSE all they need to, she.. but, it's not going to do a damn bit of good. the questions

will remain and will be put forth to the one, whose feet "..must not be held to the fire".

[Armstead]

43. Who the hell is refusing?

The link to his webite was provided. If you sincerely want to know more, Google is your friend. Look up his voting record, what he has introduced,what he has said and done on women's issues and all issues that affect women over time.

Plenty of information avaikable if you sincerely want answers. And if you find something you don't like fine. Bring it up specifically.

But this "oooooo, ooooo, oooo there are questions. I think he has a problem with women. Ooo,ooo,ooo".....That be horseshit.

[beam me up scottie]

54. What legitimate concerns? The op is a do over of the 'Not Good Enough Bernie' hit piece you posted.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026737025

It's just more anti-Bernie propaganda repackaged as concerned feminism.

When are you guys going to get that we don't like having our causes exploited by Hillary's fan club?

[davidpdx]

61. Why don't you and Cha stop with the low blow snarky crap

The both of you sound like disgruntled Republicans and certainly don't sound ANYTHING like the two people that I knew in the past. I have no idea what you or Cha's problem is, but both of you have terrible attitudes.

You Sheshe have attacked me for no reason and I see you doing it to others too. You better believe it when (and if) you get put on vacation I will not be shedding a tear for you. I'm sure you will be martyred just like the rest of the people in your clic have.

[ismnotwasm]

156. I am so sorry your feelings have been hurt.

[Cha]

212. "Why don't you stop with the low blow snarky crap?"

[cali]

103. that was a hit piece wrapped up in "concern". Bernie is fluent on the issues

she says he struggles with. He's addressed them for years. And yes, I know that for a fact. I'm a Vermonter.

[Cleita]

17. Ask him. You may be surprised.

Call into "Brunch With Bernie" when he answers questions from the ordinary people.

[tazkcmo]

20. He's for it. n/t

[Hydra]

32. How about this? Why isn't Ms. Clinton out stumping to relaunch the ERA?

It's one of my pet projects. It's something that should have been a no-brainer back in the 80s, but apparently we were having a no-brain moment for 30+ years.

Something like that would utterly help the dialogue and move things forward- Hillary has been the target of intense sexism for most of her national political career. She'd be perfect to do it, and she'd reap reap the kind of political capital Obama had available(and squandered) that could move mountains.

[CentralMass]

33. Here is one applicable link.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Bernie_Sanders_Civil_Rights.htm


Constitutional Amendment for equal rights by gender.
Sanders co-sponsored a Constitutional Amendment:
Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to equal rights for men and women. Summary: States that equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

[Comrade Grumpy]

38. A more interesting OP might have asked where ALL the candidates are on gender justice.

This just comes off looking like another attempted hit job.

[nilesobek]

45. Isn't Bernie Sanders married?

I bet she is the best judge of how Bernie is on women's issues.

[underthematrix]

48. bernie had been married twice. He has one biologival child by a woman

he was not married to

[gollygee]

67. I feel confident that Bernie is very pro-choice, but this is ridiculous

I wouldn't have trusted Ann Romney if she said Mitt Romney was a champion on women's issues. It also assumes all heterosexual married men are better on women's issues than unmarried and/or gay men.

[beam me up scottie]

50. Pfft. Legitimate question my ass. It's as legit as "When did he stop beating his wife?"

Why does Bernie struggle so much to talk about gender? Why is it like pulling teeth for him to talk about my identity as a woman in addition to my identity as a worker?

So that's this week's meme? One blogger thinks he doesn't talk about gender so he's not an ally?



More of the Not Good Enough Bernie bullshit from Hillary supporters who refuse to acknowledge the fact that he is to the left of her when it comes to civil rights.


Women don't want lip service from candidates who need polls to tell them what's right. We know who has fought for us and who will always fight for us.


Anyone who actually wants to know where he stands on the issues can easily find out, asking loaded questions about one candidate while pretending to be a concerned feminist holding his feet to the fire is for amateurs.

Stop exploiting women and minority causes for Hillary.

[Vinca]

55. Oh, boy. Now Bernie hates women.

We've done blacks. Next week Latinos or gays?

[beam me up scottie]

59. They've already been there done that for Latinos and lgbt people:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251461135

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=500521

Despicable.

[ismnotwasm]

73. He most certainly does Not hate women.

[Vinca]

88. Apparently my attempt at humor failed.

[cali]

104. no, he just struggles with them. liars suck.

[ismnotwasm]

151. They certainly do

[TBF]

145. Seriously, anything to discredit him -

and keep the focus off the heiress apparent.

[GitRDun]

56. I think the article highlights one of the BS campaign weaknesses

Just as is the case with BLM, if someone sat down and talked to Bernie, they would come away thinking he is 100% behind women and the issues that are important to them.

And, just as is the case with BLM, the BS campaign has not marketed, tailored a message properly to this Democratic constituency. It's the difference between running for Senate in a relatively small, homogeneous state where many actually know him and running a national campaign for President.

Marketing and outreach to each constituency matters. The reason Hillary's campaign has fewer problems in this area is she already has this covered. She's done work globally on women's issues.

I know this post is about form over substance, but it gets to the heart of some of the bad blood that percolates around here.

People ask questions about BS positions on important issues to their particular group. The campaign gets caught a bit flat footed because their campaign message is more homogeneous, less tailored.

Then BS supporters get offended by the questions, knowing their guy does support that group's concerns.

I keep saying it, I'll try again here: It's not a weakness of BS, it's a weakness of his campaign. This messaging issue is what makes comparisons to President Obama circa 2007 ineffective; the Obama campaign was better at this.

There's no conspiracy against BS here. All we're seeing is a Vermont campaign strategy struggling to adjust its marketing, messaging to a national level where people don't know BS as well.

[Armstead]

57. That's a reasonable response, although I disagree about the nature of these things

Sander's campaign has been in its formative stages. So, yeah, there's always an ongoing need to bring it all up to speed.

And if people were to legitimately point out areas where Sander's campaign falls short in "style" that'd be one thing.

And campaigns are contests, and heated debate about differences over issues is always inevitable. And no "side" is totally innocent.

But this Rovian tactic of deliberately distorting a candidate's deeply held and lifelong values and priorities to confuse the actual content debate by lying about what he has done is what angers Sanders supporters.

Bernie basically got ambushed at a public forum, and somehow that morphs into him being "insensitive to the needs of blacks" and, worse that he doesn't give a damn about it. And that his supporters are a "white progressives" are portrayed as bigots and racists.

Which is totally opposite from reality. And is a whole lot different than reasonably pointing out insufficiency in certain marketing materials, or not being precise enough about particular issuesin the texts of his speeches.

The OP here, and the statements by Clinton supporters, strikes me as an attempt to go back to the same well, this time using gender issues.

Complaining about the specific organizational placement of material on his website -- or his support of a massive infrastructure stimulus -- as evidence that Sanders is struggling with women's issues and reluctant to address them is just shit-stirring and grasping at straws to find more Rovian ammo.

And the same people who are willing to jump on Sanders with these claims, have no problem with the outright evasiveness of a certain candidate who -- when asked about two issues that are very important to many people (TPP and Keystone) -- that she "can't" take a position and even says "I'll tell you after I become president."

[GitRDun]

111. You may be right about Clinton supporters, IDK

All I am here to say is the BS campaign is probably going to stumble on more things as he steps out nationally.

My hope for us here is we can better recognize the difference between posts that are pointing out how the campaign (not necessarily Bernie) needs to improve and those that are just tribal attacks.

It gets depressing seeing posters you like get banned, having people assume they know what motivates my posts, and reading through some of the mean spirited comments in threads.

[Armstead]

115. Okay....But I'm not sure what you mean by banned?

"It gets depressing seeing posters you like get banned..."

I've never been banned, and only got alerted on once

Unless DU isn't telling me something

[ismnotwasm]

68. And that's what I hoped to hear.

I believe we need to thrash out issues from candidates. Not the candidates personally. O'Malley for instance, is looking real good on social justice--among other things. I don't think people should discount him at all.

[Armstead]

82. Thrash out issues? Fine. That's different than distorting generalities.

If Sanders either promoted some bad policy, or blocked a good one, or said something insensitive or stupid...Fine. have at it. Hash it out, just as with any candidate on any issue. Expect a debate, but that's fair game.

Or, if you think Sanders is too radical, or too grumpy or something. Fine. Honestly complain about it.

But (nudge,nudge, wink,wink) he has a "problem" and a "struggle" with women's issues because of the organization of his website? Or the fact that he proposed an infrastructure improvement plan as indicating a lack of concern for women?

C'mon.

[beam me up scottie]

83. You are on fire in this thread, Armstead!

Your posts are spot on, this was never meant to be an honest inquiry about his position on women's rights.

[Armstead]

84. I'm pissed off. Bernies been one of my heroes since the 1990's, and I cannot abide lies about him.

I can deal somewhat calmly with people who honestly disagree with him for legitimate reasons.

But this bogus total twisting of who he is and what he stands for does bring out the matches.

[beam me up scottie]

86. Agree 100%

I have loved Bernie since the 80's, he is a lion when it comes to civil rights.

The nasty smear campaign being waged against him here and elsewhere is despicable.

[virtualobserver]

106. The problem is that they have so little to work with in terms of Bernie's record

and the contrast with Hillary's record is stark.

Bernie's character is absolute hell to run against.

I mean, you can only scream "socialist" so many times. The Hillary War room has been linking and distorting the thinnest threads.

[beam me up scottie]

107. No kidding. Upthread the op is trying to "prove" that Bernie didn't always support lgbt rights.

They have scoured the archives looking for evidence that he's not all we say and they've only made themselves and their candidate look worse.

[virtualobserver]

109. There have been many attempts to "prove" that over the last few weeks

The circus-like contortions needed to execute those attempts have been painful to watch

Those attempts do prove something.....that either Hillary wants to win at ANY cost, or her supporters do. I think that the political geniuses have taken spin as far as it can go.

[beam me up scottie]

110. And in the process they're swift boating a true ally who fought for their rights.

It's bad enough when the Republicans attack liberals who fight for us, now Hillary supporters are doing their dirty work.

[senz]

160. Nice analysis, virtualobserver.

It takes patience to wade through the insinuations. Thanks.

[senz]

146. And I agree with you, bmus

It is totally despicable. Turns my stomach.

[ismnotwasm]

101. This is an issue I am passionate about

Sanders may be our Democratic nominee. I'd like to see a stronger showing from him. I don't "nudge and wink" anything.

[Armstead]

114. Okay. Here are a few suggestions

Go to his website and another one that a supporter set up "Feelthebern" ...Read about his actions (legislative and otherwise) and his positions, statements and whatever else you think is relevant to this issue. Also look at his Senate website.... (You can type in "women" or something else on the search box on that.)

Use Google if you want to know more. Enter "Bernie Sanders,...." add "women" and whatever issues you care about and see what comes up. Ditto to above.

If you find instances where has has said or done something specific that you feel is wrong, go ahead and post that. Be prepared for a reaction from people, but if you state it in a clear way in good faith, people are more likely to respond and debate it honestly. Maybe some will agree with you. (Of course, this being DU you'll get other types of responses too, but that goes with the territory.)

(Note: He wrote something stupid and obnoxious in the early 1970's that has made the rounds. He has acknowledged that it was stupid.)

If you think he needs to be clearer in his campaign, send his campaign a note or give them a call and suggest that. They want to know what people think.

Finally, refrain from generalized "concern" posts or re-posts of opinion pieces that suggest he is not overall sensitive to women's issues, or has a "problem" and is struggling with women. That's not gonna fly.

[Control-Z]

189. That something stupid and obnoxious (rape poetry)

was written by a grown man. It has changed my feelings about Sanders forever. Men's sexual attitudes seldom evolve. If anything they become more radical. Admitting be shouldn't have written it doesn't change the fact that he did write it and that those are his ideas about women and sex.

I'm sorry but that's a deal breaker for me.

[Armstead]

190. Fine. Hold it against him and don't vote for him. I dont care

[ismnotwasm]

196. I will, hands down vote for the Democratic President.

[Control-Z]

204. As will I.

Just so tired of the fabrications, attacks, and general lack of kindness.

[Control-Z]

203. What happened to that advice you offered us?

I responded to that post specifically. Your post telling us how to talk about issues. I brought up an issue and you just blew me off precluding every word you had to say.

[Armstead]

205. I was frustrated and had been on DU too long dealing with this kind of stuff

So I snapped at you.

Stated more diplomatically:

I don't believe some idiotic attempt at creative writing and social commentary someone wrote in 1972 (a very different era) should be held against them today. If every idiotic thing people said or did in their younger days were held against them now, we would not have anyone qualified to run for office.

I don't know Sanders personally, but I seriously seriously doubt that he walks around harboring rape fantasies.

("Campaign spokesman Michael Briggs called the essay a "dumb attempt at dark satire in an alternative publication" in an interview with CNN, adding that it "in no way reflects his views or record on women." He added, "It was intended to attack gender stereotypes of the '70s, but it looks as stupid today as it was then."&quot

In Sander's case, the claim that he is "anti-woman" that is especially hollow in light of his long,long record of advocating for women's rights and health and economic status.

However, if you believe that one badly written essay from 40 years ago betrays some deep character flaw that totally negates his record and reflects an "anti-woman" attitude today, then there is nothing I can say that will convince you otherwise.

[TM99]

228. He did not write rape poetry!

If you are going to 'condemn' someone at least get the facts straight.

It was an attempt to discuss gender roles, sexuality, and the like. It was not how you are characterizing it.

[ismnotwasm]

195. I've examined his record.

His voting record is outstanding.

Kindly refrain from telling me what issues to post about, or be "concerned" about. I didn't write the article---it's certainly "flying" somewhere.

[gollygee]

69. I agree with you 100%

This is not a weakness for Bernie, but his campaign is not that well run. He's intentionally not spending much money on campaigning, which I understand, but this is a weakness when you do that.

This is why I think the debates will help him so much. He's going to get asked a lot of questions about things like this, and I think people will respond well to how well -and genuinely - he responds to the questions.

[GitRDun]

112. I agree with you on debates

A lot of the current speculation is meaningless.

Once they see the candidates on the same stage, the curtain should come up.

[Bluenorthwest]

60. Hillary Clinton on the Sanctity of Marriage, hers being so glorious she is allowed to judge others:

"I believe marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman. I have had occasion in my life to defend marriage, to stand up for marriage, to believe in the hard work and challenge of marriage. So I take umbrage at anyone who might suggest that those of us who worry about amending the Constitution are less committed to the sanctity of marriage, or to the fundamental bedrock principle that it exists between a man and a woman, going back into the midst of history as one of the founding, foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization, and that its primary, principal role during those millennia has been the raising and socializing of children for the society into which they are to become adults."

Hillary is saying among other things that two women are not capable of marriage, a man is required to validate each woman. How very feminist of her!

[djean111]

91. And this - " its primary, principal role during those millennia has been the raising and socializing

of children for the society into which they are to become adults." Pretty much a worse opinion, IMO.
All straight couples in that village, evidently.

[cantbeserious]

76. Ever More Attacks On Bernie Over Topics Already Addressed

Last edited Sat Aug 15, 2015, 11:02 AM - Edit history (1)

eom

[djean111]

93. Yep. And if Bernie had said anything at all remotely like what Hillary said ten years ago -

we would be reading about it 24/7, as a reason to not support him.

I have learned to read threads that start out with "I am a Bernie supporter, BUT.." or "I really want to support Bernie, BUT..." with a quite honestly earned ocean full of skepticism, if not cynicism. And I wait for the "Well, I cannot support Bernie any longer, because.....".

[cantbeserious]

94. All Too True - Rationalization And Self-Deception Are Amazing Tranquilizers

To Insight And Understanding.

[cali]

96. anyone who claims this isn't an attack.is full of it.

[azmom]

113. As a latina, I cannot support Hillary because she

Is accepting money from the for profit prison system. To Latinas this is a women's issue, just like immigration. The for profit system is a vampire and feeding itself on the suffering of POC families. When you incarcerate our men, you are hurting our women. Bernie is the only candidate I trust to tackle this issue head on.

[MH1]

116. Same questions of the current poll leader? (Hillary)

I apologize for not reading all responses to this thread, so maybe it's already been answered.

Particularly this section:

And while the platform mentions abortion briefly, it fails to offer any recommendations about how to preserve and expand access. Due to the Hyde Amendment, federal funds cannot be used for abortion except in limited circumstances. This restriction means that, as a result of economic deprivation, poor women, who are disproportionately Black and Brown, can be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies to term. To reduce these barriers to women accessing basic health care services, Bernie should throw his support behind the EACH Woman Act, a recently introduced piece of legislation that, according to RH Reality Check, “would ensure that anyone who has health care or health insurance through the federal government also has coverage of abortion care.”

Has Clinton announced support for the EACH act?

[LadyHawkAZ]

119. This is the best they've got? Really?

[Warren Stupidity]

124. Didn't the Clinton's invent the "abortion ought to be rare" meme as a way to triangulate over

women's reproductive health rights, playing to the right by shaming all women who have ever had an abortion and implicitly agreeing with efforts to restrict reproductive health care access?

Oh why yes they did.

[1StrongBlackMan]

128. Great OP ...

I wonder why so many here would take offense to it?

[Armstead]

161. Oh I don't know why....

Voted NO on restricting UN funding for population control policies. (Mar 2009)
Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP. (Mar 2008)
Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion. (Mar 2008)
Voted NO on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions. (Oct 2007)
Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
Voted YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
Voted YES on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
Voted NO on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)
Voted NO on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
Emergency contraception for rape victims at all hospitals. (Sep 2006)
Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006)
Provide emergency contraception at military facilities. (Apr 2007)
Require pharmacies to fulfill contraceptive prescriptions. (Jul 2011)
Ban anti-abortion limitations on abortion services. (Nov 2013)
Protect the reproductive rights of women. (Jan 1993)
Ensure access to and funding for contraception. (Feb 2007)
Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception. (Jan 2009)

Equal pay for equal work by women. (Mar 2015)
Bush’s tracking citizens’ phone call patterns is illegal. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act. (Feb 2013)
Voted NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)
Voted NO on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
Voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
Voted NO on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance. (Sep 2004)
Voted NO on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration. (Jun 2003)
Voted NO on banning gay adoptions in DC. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions. (May 1998)
Constitutional Amendment for equal rights by gender. (Mar 2001)
Rated 93% by the ACLU, indicating a pro-civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)
Rated 100% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 97% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery. (Jun 2008)
ENDA: prohibit employment discrimination for gays. (Jun 2009)
Prohibit sexual-identity discrimination at schools. (Mar 2011)
Endorsed as "preferred" by The Feminist Majority indicating pro-women's rights. (Aug 2012)
Enforce against wage discrimination based on gender. (Jan 2013)
Enforce against anti-gay discrimination in public schools. (Jun 2013)
Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment. (Mar 2007)
oted YES on reinstating $1.15 billion funding for the COPS Program. (Mar 2007)
Voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime. (Jun 1999)
Voted YES on maintaining right of habeas corpus in Death Penalty Appeals. (Mar 1996)
Voted NO on making federal death penalty appeals harder. (Feb 1995)
Voted YES on replacing death penalty with life imprisonment. (Apr 1994)
Rated 78% by CURE, indicating pro-rehabilitation crime votes. (Dec 2000)
More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes. (Apr 2001)
Require DNA testing for all federal executions. (Mar 2001)
Increase funding for "COPS ON THE BEAT" program. (Jan 2007)
Reduce recidivism by giving offenders a Second Chance. (Mar 2007)
Voted NO on military border patrols to battle drugs & terrorism. (Sep 2001)
Voted NO on subjecting federal employees to random drug tests. (Sep 1998)
Legalize medical marijuana. (Jul 2001)
Rated 7% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-Family-Value voting record. (Dec 2003)
Ban high lead levels in children's toys. (Nov 2005)
More funding & services for victims of domestic violence. (Jan 2013)

Voted for ObamaCare; but prefers single-payer system. (Apr 2015)
Move toward a single-payer system. (Mar 2015)
Voted NO on the Ryan Budget: Medicare choice, tax & spending cuts. (May 2011)
Voted YES on regulating tobacco as a drug. (Jun 2009)
Voted YES on expanding the Children's Health Insurance Program. (Jan 2009)
Voted YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare. (Jul 2008)
Voted NO on means-testing to determine Medicare Part D premium. (Mar 2008)
Voted NO on allowing tribal Indians to opt out of federal healthcare. (Feb 2008)
Voted YES on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility. (Nov 2007)
Voted YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D. (Apr 2007)
Voted NO on denying non-emergency treatment for lack of Medicare co-pay. (Feb 2006)
Voted NO on limiting medical malpractice lawsuits to $250,000 damages. (May 2004)
Voted NO on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients. (Nov 2003)
Voted YES on allowing reimportation of prescription drugs. (Jul 2003)
Voted NO on small business associations for buying health insurance. (Jun 2003)
Voted NO on capping damages & setting time limits in medical lawsuits. (Mar 2003)
Voted NO on allowing suing HMOs, but under federal rules & limited award. (Aug 2001)
Voted NO on subsidizing private insurance for Medicare Rx drug coverage. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on banning physician-assisted suicide. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on establishing tax-exempt Medical Savings Accounts. (Oct 1999)
MEDS Plan: Cover senior Rx under Medicare. (Jan 2001)
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record. (Dec 2003)
Improve services for people with autism & their families. (Apr 2007)
Establish a national childhood cancer database. (Mar 2007)
Increase funding for occupational & physical therapy. (Apr 2011)
Preserve access to Medicaid & SCHIP during economic downturn. (Apr 2008)
Provide for treatment of autism under TRICARE. (Jun 2009)
Sponsored bill expanding the National Health Service Corps. (Mar 2009)
Collect data on birth defects and present to the public. (Apr 1998)
Make health care a right, not a privilege. (Nov 1999)
Voted YES on instituting National Service as a new social invention. (Mar 2009)
Voted YES on providing $70 million for Section 8 Housing vouchers. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on promoting work and marriage among TANF recipients. (Feb 2003)
Voted NO on treating religious organizations equally for tax breaks. (Jul 2001)
Voted NO on responsible fatherhood via faith-based organizations. (Nov 1999)
Increase the earned income tax credit. (Jan 1993)
Fully fund Head Start; Job Corps; and WIC food program. (Apr 1993)
Support school breakfast for low-income children. (Mar 2009)
Reduce the concentration of wealth & wage inequality. (Nov 1999)
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record: Strongly Favors topic 1
Emergency contraception for rape victims at all hospitals: Favors topic 1
Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance: Strongly Favors topic 1
Provide emergency contraception at military facilities: Favors topic 1
Require pharmacies to fulfill contraceptive prescriptions: Favors topic 1
Ban anti-abortion limitations on abortion services: Strongly Favors topic 1
Protect the reproductive rights of women: Strongly Favors topic 1
Ensure access to and funding for contraception: Favors topic 1
Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception: Favors topic 1
NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on banning partial-birth abortions: Favors topic 1
NO on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad: Favors topic 1
NO on Unknown roll call for 2001-89: Favors topic 1
NO on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info: Favors topic 1
NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime: Favors topic 1
NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions: Strongly Favors topic 1
YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research: Favors topic 1
NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP: Favors topic 1
YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines: Favors topic 1
NO on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions: Favors topic 1
NO on restricting UN funding for population control policies: Favors topic 1
Strongly Favors topic 2:
Legally require hiring women & minorities
(-5 points on Economic scale) Equal pay for equal work by women: Strongly Favors topic 2
Constitutional Amendment for equal rights by gender: Strongly Favors topic 2
Rated 97% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance: Strongly Favors topic 2
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery: Strongly Favors topic 2
Increase funding for occupational & physical therapy: Favors topic 2
Endorsed as "preferred" by The Feminist Majority indicating pro-women's rights: Strongly Favors topic 2
More funding & services for victims of domestic violence: Strongly Favors topic 2
Enforce against wage discrimination based on gender: Strongly Favors topic 2
Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment: Strongly Favors topic 2
Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue: Favors topic 2
Stronger enforcement against gender-based pay discrimination: Favors topic 2
NO on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions: Favors topic 2
YES on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges: Strongly Favors topic 2
YES on reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act: Favors topic 2
Strongly Favors topic 3:
Comfortable with same-sex marriage
(+5 points on Social scale) More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
Rated 100% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance: Strongly Favors topic 3
ENDA: prohibit employment discrimination for gays: Favors topic 3
Repeal Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell, and reinstate discharged gays: Favors topic 3
Prohibit sexual-identity discrimination at schools: Strongly Favors topic 3
Enforce against anti-gay discrimination in public schools: Strongly Favors topic 3
NO on banning gay adoptions in DC: Favors topic 3
NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage: Strongly Favors topic 3
NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman: Strongly Favor

[1StrongBlackMan]

193. Did you read the OP? ...

It listed specific and unaddressed PRESENT concerns.

[ismnotwasm]

197. I don't think some here did

They saw the title, the excerpt, and got defensive.

[1StrongBlackMan]

206. I think you are correct. And, my question remains ... why? n/t

[JDPriestly]

211. I saw Sanders' speech in Los Angeles at the Stadium.

He definitely talked about equal pay and family leave, all the women's issues.

He is great on women's issues. He doesn't go into a lot of little human interest stories. He talks briefly about each issue and what he will do about it. It is important to listen to his speeches before assuming that he is not talking about this issue or that. He hits them all.

That is why he is so successfully reaching large crowds of Americans and appealing to diversity. Lots of women were in that huge crowd at the Stadium in Los Angeles.

He is also a huge supporter of abortion rights and mentioned that early in his speech if I remember correctly. In fact I was surprised at how vocal he was about women's issues.

[seabeyond]

215. same issue blm has. take it beyond the economic discussion. we need to know he GETS we are on an

unlevel playing field like the blacks need to know sander GETS they are on an unlevel playing field. to suggest we he can throw out a plan that helps middle class that does not address the unlevel playing field oppressed experience is wrong headed.

[JDPriestly]

221. There is no doubt in my mind after listening to several of Sanders' speeches that

he knows very well the problems that women and people of color have. No doubt whatsoever.

He will embarrass Congress into changing our justice system and into passing legislation to help women.

He is advocating for abortion rights and a woman's right to control her body, equal pay, maternity leave and other issues that will help women.

One thing a lot of women overlook is the importance of Social Security to us. We earn less than men. Social Security benefits are based on what you earn. I know a woman who married a man younger than herself. She has retired and has to rely on the lowest payments from Social Security -- not really Social Security -- until her younger husband retires and she gets some additional benefits based on his work.

I personally do not trust Hillary on the Social Security issue. Regardless of what she says, she is friends with people like Pete Peterson and many on Wall Street who want to privatize Social Security. That would really hurt older women.

Women on the average, from a statistical point of view, live longer than men, so a woman not only may be dependent on Social Security for a longer time than her husband, but the savings that a couple or a single woman may have accumulated will have to stretch further.

Social Security is a make or break issue for women (although we do not think about that fact much).

In 2008, Obama advocated for raising the cap on the income subject to Social Security taxes. Hillary objected if you recall suggesting that an income of $250,000 per year is middle class. I don't know about you, but I consider myself to be middle class, and my husband and I together never, never made that much money in a year. It was quite a mistake on Hillary's part.

I think Bernie is a fighter and more likely to fight the oligarchs for us than Hillary is.

Hillary is a nice person, but she does not have the stubbornness or the understanding of the lives that most of us have and the economic and workplace issues that we have that Bernie has.

When I think of how the Republicans just dug their heels in and refused to support any of Obama's good ideas or work with him, I think we need a strong fighter who will mince no words in dealing with Republicans in Congress.

I like Obama. He is a great man, but he has been too easy on the Republicans. He just does not have the toughness that Bernie has. He has not been able to answer the Republicans' nastiness in kind. The Republicans have bullied not only Obama but the entire country in the last 25 years since Reagan. It's time we get someone who can stand up to them.

[seabeyond]

223. from the plans he propose to his insistence that economic equality will address the issues,

i do not have the same confidence. from 40 yrs of him using the same language, addressing the same issues consistently, i trust his words that his focus and priority and his energy will be addressing middle class and working class.

i have researched him for a good couple months reading everything i can, and i have listened to him repeatedly over this campaign. and he clearly states he is reaching out to working class and middle class. his plans back working class and middle class.

i have yet to hear him mention how the unlevel playing field will affect the implementation of his plans for working class and middle class.

i do not sit in the same confidence as you. further, i think i have a lifetime of his own words telling me absolutely where his focus will be.

that matters to me.

[Armstead]

198. I did and the original article

And it's a bunch of hornswaggle with a bunch of characterizations and whining about nothing to "raise concerns" about Sanders supposed insensitivity to women and their issues.

He's insensitive to women because he's proposing a major investment in infrastructure without having stated that the construction industry is sexist? C'mon. Since when have politicians proposals for infrastructure improvements had to be automatically accompanied with calls to address sexism in the construction industry? Does President Obama mention that everytime he talks about infrastructure? Do any of them? I am certain that if his proposal ever came to fruition, there would be all kinds of equal opportunity requirements built in.

And horrors! His website is not organized like she believes it should be. It lists equal pay and family leave under a heading of new family values? Equal pay is equal pay, regardless of a heading on a website. It is very common to refer to them that way.

I listed the things I did in that reply because it would be impossible for anyone who is not just looking to stir some imaginary pot to say that with a record like that Sanders is "struggling" to address women's issues or that somehow he doesn't "get it" or give a shit. It's disingenuous at best.

[1StrongBlackMan]

207. Okay ... but don't you, also, see this as, yet, another instance of ...

Others, particularly feminists, are saying/pointing out that his economic solutions do not address, what is in their opinion, is of greater concern ... And in the infrastructure instance arguably makes the concern greater.

[Armstead]

208. Once again....

IF someone has a problem with an actual position or action Sanders has taken, that's a different matter. But this is not about that.

First of all, there are a whole of feminists who are actually familiar with Sanders who do not have those concerns. They are totally comfortable that he will be -- as he has always been -- totally supportive and active for all women's issues. (Much of the pushback defending Sanders on this thread has been from women who are very active in these issues.)

Frankly, I think those who claim to be "concerned" either have not bothered to look up his record and background, or they are so committed to another candidate they have a blind spot...Or they are so invested in the possibility of the first woman president that Sanders doesn't matter.

I usually try not to be conspiratorial, but some of it seems like a deliberate attempt to raise phony "red flags" about Sanders in a classic Rovian tactic of using a candidate's strengths against them. ("Kerry isn't a war hero. He was a coward.&quot

[1StrongBlackMan]

209. Okay ...

There appears to be a common rebuttal theme here ...

Those that do not agree are low informationed.

There are some {fill in the blank} that support.

Well ... what has {fill in deflection candidate/politician} done?

Conspiracy theory.

This is not a good liberal look.

[Motown_Johnny]

131. Where he has been for decades. Where is HRC on TPP today?

[seabeyond]

132. over the last couple months i saw sanders fail, the one opportunity being an advocate for women.

and that is what i expect of me democratic candidate, to be my advocate.

planned parenthood was being attacked. he stated, he did not watch the video but agreed with the president of PP apology about the tone of the video.

i feel that not only did he not take the opportunity to stand with women and support PP, but he actually harmed us with a dismissal, and validating the accusations by merely agree with the apology and ignoring all the other stuff the president of PP had said that day.

a weeks or so later, he came out with a statement.

but at the time of chaos, i feel he did more harm than even being neutral keeping his mouth shut, since he did not have time to educate himself.

how much of an advocate for women? i dont know. we will have to wait and see. i have seen nothing since.

[Cha]

133. i remember that now, seabeyond. Oh but BS is perfect on everything.. his supporters accused those

with questions about his stance on "racial injustice".. of trying "to paint him as a racist!" and now they accusing anyone with questions on his views about Women's issues.. of calling him a "sexist" or some such shite.

As usual they're not doing him any favors. that "you're calling BS a racist!!!!" didn't work out so well for them and this won't either.

Good to see you back.

[seabeyond]

134. but, you can darn well bet the sanders supporters appreciates and praises sanders for finally, .....

after throwing hat in the ring and 3 months later digging in heals standing only on economic justice, that he FINALLY relented and has allowed blacks to sit at the table. it took all of us DEMANDING that sanders allow blacks to sit at the table. he has finally relented and welcomed them with marginally open arms.

so.... sanders, you are welcome. i and others took a lot of hits, encouraging sanders to become inclusive, from day one of just the time of sanders exploring a run. a couple of du voices are paying now with very long time outs from du.

it will behooves sanders to be inclusive. and will only do more so to welcome women, gays and latinos at the table, too.

or

we can start all over again, to convince sanders and supporters that we dems, a part of the party WILL be sitting at the table with voice or vote.

some people do not learn the lesson first time round.

[Cha]

135. Precisely.. they conveniently dismiss the actions that resulted in people asking questions and

demanding change.

Bernie hired a Black Woman to be his press secretary. Boom.

[Armstead]

155. No you won't hear anything because he's oblivious to all social issues and he's hostile

He's such a myopic cretin. Doesn't care about race gender, sexual orientation....He thinks the criminal justice system is in great shape and doesn't need any reforms. He's all for locking up people for life if they're caught with marijuana. He wants a totally privatized healthcare system.....He's vehemently opposed to LGBT marriage, and I heard he wants to make it illegal for two people of the same sex to live together.....I think he said the Social Security retirement age should be raised to 75.

[seabeyond]

162. so you are one that did not learn the first round, with blm issue.

[Armstead]

164. No I haven't learned that Sanders is oblivious and unsupportive

Voted NO on restricting UN funding for population control policies. (Mar 2009)
Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP. (Mar 2008)
Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion. (Mar 2008)
Voted NO on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions. (Oct 2007)
Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
Voted YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
Voted YES on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
Voted NO on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)
Voted NO on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
Emergency contraception for rape victims at all hospitals. (Sep 2006)
Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006)
Provide emergency contraception at military facilities. (Apr 2007)
Require pharmacies to fulfill contraceptive prescriptions. (Jul 2011)
Ban anti-abortion limitations on abortion services. (Nov 2013)
Protect the reproductive rights of women. (Jan 1993)
Ensure access to and funding for contraception. (Feb 2007)
Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception. (Jan 2009)

Equal pay for equal work by women. (Mar 2015)
Bush’s tracking citizens’ phone call patterns is illegal. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act. (Feb 2013)
Voted NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)
Voted NO on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
Voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
Voted NO on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance. (Sep 2004)
Voted NO on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration. (Jun 2003)
Voted NO on banning gay adoptions in DC. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions. (May 1998)
Constitutional Amendment for equal rights by gender. (Mar 2001)
Rated 93% by the ACLU, indicating a pro-civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)
Rated 100% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 97% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery. (Jun 2008)
ENDA: prohibit employment discrimination for gays. (Jun 2009)
Prohibit sexual-identity discrimination at schools. (Mar 2011)
Endorsed as "preferred" by The Feminist Majority indicating pro-women's rights. (Aug 2012)
Enforce against wage discrimination based on gender. (Jan 2013)
Enforce against anti-gay discrimination in public schools. (Jun 2013)
Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment. (Mar 2007)
oted YES on reinstating $1.15 billion funding for the COPS Program. (Mar 2007)
Voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime. (Jun 1999)
Voted YES on maintaining right of habeas corpus in Death Penalty Appeals. (Mar 1996)
Voted NO on making federal death penalty appeals harder. (Feb 1995)
Voted YES on replacing death penalty with life imprisonment. (Apr 1994)
Rated 78% by CURE, indicating pro-rehabilitation crime votes. (Dec 2000)
More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes. (Apr 2001)
Require DNA testing for all federal executions. (Mar 2001)
Increase funding for "COPS ON THE BEAT" program. (Jan 2007)
Reduce recidivism by giving offenders a Second Chance. (Mar 2007)
Voted NO on military border patrols to battle drugs & terrorism. (Sep 2001)
Voted NO on subjecting federal employees to random drug tests. (Sep 1998)
Legalize medical marijuana. (Jul 2001)
Rated 7% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-Family-Value voting record. (Dec 2003)
Ban high lead levels in children's toys. (Nov 2005)
More funding & services for victims of domestic violence. (Jan 2013)

Voted for ObamaCare; but prefers single-payer system. (Apr 2015)
Move toward a single-payer system. (Mar 2015)
Voted NO on the Ryan Budget: Medicare choice, tax & spending cuts. (May 2011)
Voted YES on regulating tobacco as a drug. (Jun 2009)
Voted YES on expanding the Children's Health Insurance Program. (Jan 2009)
Voted YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare. (Jul 2008)
Voted NO on means-testing to determine Medicare Part D premium. (Mar 2008)
Voted NO on allowing tribal Indians to opt out of federal healthcare. (Feb 2008)
Voted YES on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility. (Nov 2007)
Voted YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D. (Apr 2007)
Voted NO on denying non-emergency treatment for lack of Medicare co-pay. (Feb 2006)
Voted NO on limiting medical malpractice lawsuits to $250,000 damages. (May 2004)
Voted NO on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients. (Nov 2003)
Voted YES on allowing reimportation of prescription drugs. (Jul 2003)
Voted NO on small business associations for buying health insurance. (Jun 2003)
Voted NO on capping damages & setting time limits in medical lawsuits. (Mar 2003)
Voted NO on allowing suing HMOs, but under federal rules & limited award. (Aug 2001)
Voted NO on subsidizing private insurance for Medicare Rx drug coverage. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on banning physician-assisted suicide. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on establishing tax-exempt Medical Savings Accounts. (Oct 1999)
MEDS Plan: Cover senior Rx under Medicare. (Jan 2001)
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record. (Dec 2003)
Improve services for people with autism & their families. (Apr 2007)
Establish a national childhood cancer database. (Mar 2007)
Increase funding for occupational & physical therapy. (Apr 2011)
Preserve access to Medicaid & SCHIP during economic downturn. (Apr 2008)
Provide for treatment of autism under TRICARE. (Jun 2009)
Sponsored bill expanding the National Health Service Corps. (Mar 2009)
Collect data on birth defects and present to the public. (Apr 1998)
Make health care a right, not a privilege. (Nov 1999)
Voted YES on instituting National Service as a new social invention. (Mar 2009)
Voted YES on providing $70 million for Section 8 Housing vouchers. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on promoting work and marriage among TANF recipients. (Feb 2003)
Voted NO on treating religious organizations equally for tax breaks. (Jul 2001)
Voted NO on responsible fatherhood via faith-based organizations. (Nov 1999)
Increase the earned income tax credit. (Jan 1993)
Fully fund Head Start; Job Corps; and WIC food program. (Apr 1993)
Support school breakfast for low-income children. (Mar 2009)
Reduce the concentration of wealth & wage inequality. (Nov 1999)
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record: Strongly Favors topic 1
Emergency contraception for rape victims at all hospitals: Favors topic 1
Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance: Strongly Favors topic 1
Provide emergency contraception at military facilities: Favors topic 1
Require pharmacies to fulfill contraceptive prescriptions: Favors topic 1
Ban anti-abortion limitations on abortion services: Strongly Favors topic 1
Protect the reproductive rights of women: Strongly Favors topic 1
Ensure access to and funding for contraception: Favors topic 1
Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception: Favors topic 1
NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on banning partial-birth abortions: Favors topic 1
NO on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad: Favors topic 1
NO on Unknown roll call for 2001-89: Favors topic 1
NO on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info: Favors topic 1
NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime: Favors topic 1
NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions: Strongly Favors topic 1
YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research: Favors topic 1
NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP: Favors topic 1
YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines: Favors topic 1
NO on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions: Favors topic 1
NO on restricting UN funding for population control policies: Favors topic 1
Strongly Favors topic 2:
Legally require hiring women & minorities
(-5 points on Economic scale) Equal pay for equal work by women: Strongly Favors topic 2
Constitutional Amendment for equal rights by gender: Strongly Favors topic 2
Rated 97% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance: Strongly Favors topic 2
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery: Strongly Favors topic 2
Increase funding for occupational & physical therapy: Favors topic 2
Endorsed as "preferred" by The Feminist Majority indicating pro-women's rights: Strongly Favors topic 2
More funding & services for victims of domestic violence: Strongly Favors topic 2
Enforce against wage discrimination based on gender: Strongly Favors topic 2
Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment: Strongly Favors topic 2
Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue: Favors topic 2
Stronger enforcement against gender-based pay discrimination: Favors topic 2
NO on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions: Favors topic 2
YES on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges: Strongly Favors topic 2
YES on reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act: Favors topic 2
Strongly Favors topic 3:
Comfortable with same-sex marriage
(+5 points on Social scale) More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
Rated 100% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance: Strongly Favors topic 3
ENDA: prohibit employment discrimination for gays: Favors topic 3
Repeal Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell, and reinstate discharged gays: Favors topic 3
Prohibit sexual-identity discrimination at schools: Strongly Favors topic 3
Enforce against anti-gay discrimination in public schools: Strongly Favors topic 3
NO on banning gay adoptions in DC: Favors topic 3
NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage: Strongly Favors topic 3
NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman: Strongly Favor

[seabeyond]

167. that didnt do it for blm, now, did it?

[Armstead]

169. My honest opinion

They should have done their homework before singling him out as their first "target" for emparassment.

Short,. Suggest watching- 1991

" target="_blank">

[seabeyond]

172. ya. i listened to that. good for him. said it well. so? still fucked up the planned parenthood

issue when he had the chance to be an advocate for women.

[Armstead]

173. Whatever....

I'm sure there's equally strong examples of his advocacy for women and PP and women's health in the Internetospheere.

But I'm not going to waste my time looking for it. Obviously nothing -- short of him chaining himself to the gate of a PP clinic in a show of solidarity -- would have been enough for some people...And that probably wouldn't have been enough either.

[seabeyond]

174. see, you pretend as if there is actually a conversation as you specifically go to extreme

sarcasm to let me know my one concern i brought up was irrelevant and in need of being dismissed.

so the whatever does apply. that was your intent with post one. why waste the time to further post.

he has spoken about plan parenthood. and he has done well. when people made him aware that he ought to take an interest in it, because women need a president that will be a voice for us.

it is no longer about just voting one way or another with what is put out in front of him.

it will be his focus on his agenda. blacks and women want him to focus on our issues, along with economic equality.

merely sitting at the table, a perspective president actually focusing on us.

not only white middle class, upper middle class and men. republican, libertarian, independent and democratic.

but the actual democratic base. he needs to talk to all of us, across the nation, consistently, so we know he has our back.

[Armstead]

175. I am sarcastic because I am sick of seeing him (and supporters) trashed for the wrong reasons

It;s one thing to defend Sanders (and the peopel who support him) against those who say he is "too radical" and "too far left" or a socialist ideologue or whatever.

But 180 degree distortions of what he is at his core....that's a bridge too far.

Your problem with him, as yo are expressing it, is that you object to his tone, or something or other, exemplified in that situation. Therefore you portray that as a lack of empathy, awareness, supportiveness......He may have been a little bit flatfooted in a situation where many people were caught flatfooted. (Including Clinton).... He's only human, and at the moment he has a lot on his plate.

But if you look at the totality of his actions and statements and positions over the years.....oh why bother?

[seabeyond]

179. i want him to advocate for women and our issues. blacks want him to advocate for blacks

and their issues.

you think he is doing fine. a lot of black and women do not think he is doing it at all when his focus and only discussion is economic equality.

he chose to run his campaign exclusively speaking about economic equality. for three months.

dug in his heals. said we need to put the other social issues to the side and focus on economic equality.

YOU want me to accept that.

and I am not going to

this, .... would be a differing opinion.

now, sanders sees the light and has become more inclusive with blacks, ADVOCATING for them in his speeches across the nation. hiring more blacks. and getting a black pr woman to help him in communicating.

YOU do not see that there was a problem. sanders finally recognized there was a problem. you disagree with him now? is that even allowed?

[Armstead]

183. Thisn is becoming a circular argument but let me explain this..

Yes, Sanders was focused very heavily (and monotonously for those familiar with him and the issue) on a core economic/political message. Power and wealth have become too concentrated, and we are becoming an oligarchy that is enriching a few at the top at the expense of everyone else. An d destroying any semblance of representative democracy amnd governeny "of the peple" in the process.

And the reason he was so relentless is that for the first time in memory, he was bringing this message into the mainstream political process. He had broken through and was saying things that have long needed saying in the public square for decades.

And yes, it was not initially a 3D message and campaign, because he has beem trying to break through a barrier and the filters of mainstrem politics and media. And yes, for many of us, that is a vital issue that is critical -- not just personally, but we see it affecting Everyone. Poverty jobs, access to healthcare, etc. these affect every race, gender and subset of the population.

If BLM or women or whatever other group felt he needed to widen his message and be more "inclusive" fine. Knowing what he has stood for and done for decades, I am sure he would have been receptive. He was receptive. His rapid response to BLM was because this stuff is NOT new to him. he's been working on it for years.

But that did not require embarrassing him, and undercutting that economic message in the process.

Sanders' larger concerns and priorities have ALWAYS included social issues (or whatever you want to call them). There was NO REASON to create a false impression, and jeopardize a rare chance to inject progressive politics into the mainstream, and perhaps ultimately bring about progress on all of these issues.

[seabeyond]

185. no. he was not receptive. conversation was being had prior to netroot and he was not receptive

for a couple months after netroot. as a matter of fact he dug his heals in and told us, repeatedly in interviews and in speeches. applaud our advances getting a black president, and the strides women have made, and gay marriage. now... the REAL issue we need to focus on is economic equality. republicans, put the other stuff to the side and look at your families and see how they are doing.

he was LITERALLY saying this shit out loud.

he may still be saying it. i hope he isnt. cause... how does that sound to you?

[Armstead]

186. I stand by what I just wrote, and you are free to disagree.

[seabeyond]

188. that really is the bottom line. we disagree. nothing nefarious nor insult needed.

we simply see it differently.

[azmom]

201. That is not correct

Netroot protest was on July 18
Seattle protest was on August 8

How do you get two months?

[senz]

140. "I want to support Bernie. I really do." But but but but ....

I don't want YOU to.

'kay?

[seabeyond]

142. at 17'ish% nationally and only two states of 50, you think it is a good idea to reject voters? lol

[senz]

149. Bernie is the ONLY candidate running who cares more about the American people

than about money and power. The only one.

Bernie hasn't rejected ANYONE -- except the oligarchs.

He just threw his hat into the ring in late May. Somebody else has been running, running, running for at least 8 years. And yet he's already getting bigger crowds than the other candidate. Even with all their money, all their corporate buddies, all their years of preparation.

Maybe it's because Bernie speaks from his heart, hm? Can you imagine that?

Maybe it's because Bernie's the Real Deal and people know it.

Truth will out. Even against the odds.

Let's see, now I should say, "lol." Right?

[seabeyond]

159. "I don't want YOU to." my comment is about you feeling it is a good move to reject sanders voters

when he sits at 17ish% and might have two states.

[senz]

166. Ahhh...I should have used the dripping sarcasm emoticon....

pssst...it was a parody of the OP .... check it out...

As for Bernie's two states, that's two states AND GROWING. People love this man because he's honest.

Not half bad, eh?

[seabeyond]

171. psssst, you told a possible voter to go away. we all have unique ways to run campaigns.

sending voters away is a .... oh, creative move. lol. when way on the bottom.

is it two?

i thought he had new hampshire and close in iowa. so one and one competitive. but i was generous giving two.

[senz]

176. Look, I'm sorry Bernie Sanders bothers you so much.

I hope this doesn't mean you have a problem with good people in general. That would be sad. Or maybe you just don't like those who don't favor your particular candidate. Is that it? In that case, it would probably be best to simply get used to it, because that's not going to change.

Now have a nice evening, seabeyond. Bye.

[seabeyond]

180. you tell a voter to go away, i laugh and your conclusion is i have such a problem with sanders,

people in general and how sad that is? lol.

i laughed at YOU cause YOU told a voter YOU did not want her to vote for sanders when he is already well the underdog.

you need to focus.

[senz]

200. Maybe you need to look up the word "parody." nt

[seabeyond]

202. Maybe you ought to not tell people sanders doesn't need their votes, you think?

[sibelian]

229. I want to support Bernie too... but...

Oh.... I just don't KNOW.

It all seems so...

Oh, I just don't KNOW.

[senz]

230. Uh-huh. Yes. Affirmative. Definitely.

YOU get it.

[ismnotwasm]

153. Damn

I thought the topic would turn out better than this.

I thought wrong.

[guillaumeb]

168. Another way to look at the information:

When the post says:

"I took a look through his platform recently, and I didn’t exactly see women represented there. For one, most of the policies that would disproportionately benefit women (equal pay, paid family leave, paid vacation, and paid sick days) are housed within the “Real Family Values” section, a classification that implicitly characterizes women’s rights as valuable only insofar as they benefit a larger family unit."

Rather than attempt to frame this as a negative, why not see it as a legitimate contrast between the "family values" rhetoric of the GOP, which is nothing of the sort, and look at this as a Democratic "family values" plank?

The Hyde Amendment also prohibits any Federal health plans from covering abortion, and has done so since 1984. Where are ALL the Democrats on this? Generally silent.

[Live and Learn]

191. I trust Bernie on justice for all. If you wouldjust give him half a chance, you would see that he

really is the candidate that supports the rights of all people.

[bigtree]

210. O'Malley

Martin O'Malley @MartinOMalley
Equal pay for equal work is not only good for women, but good for our economy. #EqualPayDay

Martin O'Malley op-ed, HuffPo 04/08/2014

Equal Pay Day -- Making Maryland Even Better for Women

Strengthening and growing the middle class continues to be the North Star of the O'Malley-Brown administration, as it has been over the last eight years. In addition to making record investments in our No. 1 ranked public schools, and doing more than any other state since 2007-08 to hold down the cost of college, we have also achieved a tremendous amount to make Maryland an even better state for women. Today, Equal Pay Day, is a good day to reflect on how far we've come.

The Center for American Progress, rates Maryland as the best state in the nation for women. I couldn't agree more.

It's great that Maryland is tied for having the lowest wage gap between our working men and women of any state in the nation, but there's more work to do to eliminate that gap entirely. Lt. Governor Brown and I brought people together this year to raise Maryland's minimum wage to $10.10. Women account for more than 60 percent of Marylanders making the minimum wage or less, so this increase will give a raise to hundreds of thousands of women.

Maryland currently has the third-lowest poverty rate for women in the nation, and raising the wage will lift even more women and families out of poverty and into the middle class. No woman who works full time and plays by the rules should have to raise her family in poverty.

We all do better when we're all doing better. Maryland is the No. 1 state in the nation for women-owned businesses -- one-third of Maryland businesses are women-owned. Maryland also ranks third in the nation in percentage of managerial jobs held by women at 42.4 percent.

As President Obama said, "when women succeed, America succeeds." That's why I signed the Lilly Ledbetter Civil Rights Restoration Act into law in 2009. That's why I appointed the first ever woman to be Chief Judge of Maryland's highest court. That's why I have appointed 68 women to judicial appointments.

read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gov-martin-omalley/equal-pay-day---making-ma_b_5112829.html_

___________________________

This may come to a surprise to some, considering his Catholic faith and his noted “Catholic values,” but Martin O’Malley is a full supporter of both abortion rights and increased access to contraception. O’Malley has received a “100 percent” rating from NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland, who once praised him for chewing out former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell on state-mandated ultrasounds. “Nothing says jobs like transvaginal probes,” O’Malley said in 2012, throwing some very public shade at McDonnell.

O’Malley’s high marks from NARAL are proven by his track record. In 2002, while he was serving as mayor of Baltimore, aides confirmed that O’Malley supports legal abortion and fair access without interference from the government until the point of viability. He also supports late-term abortion when the life of the mother is at risk, or when the fetus has a severe abnormality. And according to NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland, O’Malley has not infringed on abortion rights by signing any new abortion restrictions during his tenure as governor.

When it comes to birth control, O’Malley has increased access to contraception and pregnancy counseling, particularly among low-income women. In 2012, O’Malley signed the Family Planning Works Act, which greatly expanded reproductive-health access by providing low-income women with free pregnancy counseling and Medicaid-funded contraception, STI testing and cancer screenings. According to RH Reality Check, the act would provide these subsidized medical services to an additional 33,000 women in the state.

O’Malley has also promoted increased support for new mothers (and fathers) by signing the Maryland Parental Leave Act in 2014. The law expands parental leave for working parents, requiring Maryland small businesses to provide at least six weeks of unpaid leave for the birth of an employee’s child. Prior to the law, small businesses were exempted from providing unpaid family leave.

read: http://plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/newsroom/press-releases/planned-parenthood-action-fund-welcomes-martin-omalley-presidential-field/


O’Malley wrote in a February op-ed published in POLITICO:

Unfortunately, Republicans’ aversion to compromise means that many of the common sense economic policies that would most effectively help middle class families make ends meet, like paid family leave and ensuring equal pay for equal work, are stuck in the mud—just like Americans’ wages.

He added that expanding mandated paid overtime would overwhelmingly benefit women. “Raising the overtime threshold would ensure that millions of Americans, especially women and younger workers, receive the compensation they’re owed for putting in extra hours at work instead of spending it with their families,” O’Malley wrote.

The truth is this: A strong middle class is the source of sustained economic growth and generational prosperity. Raising the overtime threshold would ensure that millions of Americans, especially women and younger workers, receive the compensation they’re owed for putting in extra hours at work instead of spending it with their families. It would create new jobs, as employers who are reluctant to pay overtime hire new workers instead. And it would represent a step forward for the millions of hardworking families whose paychecks no longer stretch far enough to adequately save for retirement, pay for their children’s educations or start their own businesses.

read: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/02/overtime-pay-115540.html#.VWoGdpNViko


O’Malley has described his view on abortion as “pro choice”. Aides have said he supported a 1992 Maryland referendum which stated that abortions should be legal, without government restriction, until the time in pregnancy when a fetus can survive outside the womb.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/martin-omalley-believe-candidate-stands-11-issues/
_______________________

Governor Martin O’Malley (D) accused the Catholic leadership of “hyperventilating” over the Obama administration’s new regulation requiring employers and insurers to cover reproductive health benefits without additional co-pay. Catholic organizations argue that the rule violates their religious liberties and are planning to sue the federal government, even though the measure includes a narrow religious exemption that mirrors existing conscience protections in New York and California.

During an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday, O’Malley, himself a Catholic, claimed that the Church is politicizing the health care debate and moving the goal posts from abortion to contraception in their war against the administration:

O’MALLEY: I am Catholic. And I think, Candy, there’s been a little bit too much hyperventilating over this issue…this is not about abortion. It’s about covering contraception as part of the health care coverage, mandatory, basic coverage. 28 states already require this. And in Europe —

CANDY CROWLEY (HOST): But you’re not thinking about the state, the federal government, telling a religion what it must cover in a health care policy.

O’MALLEY: Well, there is an exemption for the — for churches themselves. The exemption does not necessarily extend to institutions like hospitals or universities that employ people of all faiths. But these same rules apply in countries like Italy which have overwhelming numbers of Catholics. And yet we did not see the reaction in those countries to these sorts of things.

read: http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/02/06/419179/omalley-contraception-catholic-hyperventilating/
_____________________________

Cecile Richards of Planned Parenthood Action Fund highlighted O’Malley’s commitment to ensuring affordable health care for all women in a statement sent to Bustle:

“Martin O’Malley has been a strong advocate for women’s health and rights. As governor of Maryland, he worked to protect women’s access to safe and legal abortion and also supported access to affordable birth control. During his term, he signed a law that ensures low-income women in Maryland have access to free pregnancy counseling, contraception, as well as lifesaving cancer screenings.

“Martin O’Malley’s record is in stark contrast to the GOP presidential contenders so far who are in a race to the bottom on women’s health. With his strong leadership and commitment to women, we welcome him as another champion for women’s health to the presidential field.”

Gov. O'Malley invited more than 20 young women from middle schools across the state to the Governor's Leadership Forum for Women and Girls in Annapolis to talk about how more women can rise to leadership roles and succeed. (https://www.flickr.com/photos/mdgovpics/sets/72157642955794814)

watch O'Malley:

[seabeyond]

217. this would be a difference. thank you. nt

[bigtree]

224. hey, you!

...posting and everything!

Welcome back!

[seabeyond]

226. ty.... and

bigtree, thank you for helping with sanity allowing me to express. i appreciate.

i wish more people would actually read what omalley put out, for womens issue. a man that used lots of words to communicate with us, that though a man, he gets what we are saying.

so many do not get the importance.

[Romulox]

225. The OP is absolutely shameless. nt

[demmiblue]

231. Yawn.

[mmonk]

232. Here is Bernie on civil rights issues.

Hope it helps.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Bernie_Sanders_Civil_Rights.htm

[2banon]

234. omg. seriously?

[Gothmog]

235. K&R

[ericson00]

236. knr

[Maedhros]

237. I'm going to assume Alyssa Peterson isn't as stupid as this piece makes her seem,

and assume that she knows she's printing bullshit and is acting as a good attack dog for Hillary.

All she would need to do is go to a Bernie rally. He spent a good chunk of time talking passionately about equal pay, family leave and right-to-choose when I saw him in Portland.