Sanders: I Am NOT 'SHOUTING' At Hillary Clinton

[Segami]

Washington (CNN) Bernie Sanders says his criticism of Hillary Clinton's "shouting" on gun control has nothing to do with her gender. "What can I say -- that's just not the case," the Vermont senator and Democratic presidential contender said Sunday in an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union." Sanders criticized the "shouting" from both sides on gun issues in the first Democratic presidential debate. Clinton said Saturday in Iowa that Sanders' remarks came with a gender-related undercurrent. She said: "I'm not shouting. It's just that when women talk, some people think we're shouting." Sanders on Sunday laughed at her suggestion that his remarks were about gender.

"All that I can say is I am very proud of my record on women's issues. I certainly do not have a problem with women speaking out -- and I think what the secretary is doing there is taking words and misapplying them," Sanders told Tapper.

"What I would say is if we are going to make some progress in dealing with these horrific massacres that we're seeing, is that people have got to start all over this country talking to each other," he said. "It's not Hillary Clinton. You have some people who are shouting at other people all across this country. You know that. This nation is divided on this issue." Sanders leaves little room to his left on most issues. But he has represented a rural state that largely lacks gun restrictions -- allowing both Clinton and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, another Democratic presidential candidate, to hit him on gun control.

Sanders, meanwhile, criticized Clinton over her previous support for the "Defense of Marriage Act" -- a law that defined marriage as between one man and one woman, which then-President Bill Clinton signed into law in 1996 after it was approved by a Republican-led Congress.

"I think what my husband believed -- and there was certainly evidence to support it -- is that there was enough political momentum to amend the Constitution of the United States of America, and that there had to be some way to stop that," Clinton said Friday.

But Sanders disputed that characterization of the law, which he opposed at the time. He said the measure was pushed by GOP lawmakers -- and "many of them, I'm sorry to say, were homophobic." "I think everybody at the time knew that it was simply homophobic legislation," Sanders said. "That legislation was anti-gay legislation. It was playing off the fears of a lot of Americans," he added. "Now the good news -- as Hillary Clinton just indicated -- the culture has changed radically. ... We have come a long, long way since that vote in 1996."


http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/25/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-gun-control-shouting/

[boston bean]

1. Sanders never shouts. EVER! hahahahaha

Just those on the other side of the gun issue, you know those who don't want to give gun manufacturers immunity, or want stricter gun laws, that don't comport with Bernie's 'rural' state of VT, are the ones doing the shouting.

LAME, if you ask me.

And if you add in, women get breast cancer because they don't have enough sex, or that women fantasize being raped by three guys while making love to her husband, or that bitter women are responsible for the misogyny against them and excuse mens actions... well...

Lastly, he is the one distorting history regarding the history of Bill Clinton's decision to sign DOMA. They certainly were threatening to amend the constitution along with much Democratic support, many states were already beginning to do so. He wouldn't sign the bill in public and was on record that it was unnecessary and also that DOMA should not enshrine bigotry and discrimination into law.

So Bernie is wrong. He is just plain wrong.

[DURHAM D]

7. Yes he is wrong.

BS, by his own doing, is now off message.

[grahamhgreen]

112. Surrogate much?

[restorefreedom]

18. wow. the desperation grows. nt

[Fawke Em]

27. I'm female and I can tell you

that I sick and damn tired of Hillary playing the gender card.

I won't vote for her because she's a triangulating, Wall Street-owned war monger. I don't give a crap about her "plumbing."

Hillary is ALWAYS plain wrong.

[Live and Learn]

50. +1 nt

[haikugal]

52. Yep...I concur!! nt

[treestar]

64. Playing the card is a right winger's thing to say

Now suddenly you believe women have full equality and that Hillary faces no issues on it.

Similar to Bernie's BLM problems. Let's pretend all is already equal and if anyone mentions it, call it playing the card. Like it is some kind of advantage.

[cui bono]

113. No it's not when it is what happened.

Actually playing the gender card is a victim thing to do and sets back feminism. It's shameful behavior from someone of that stature.

And that has nothing to do with believing women have full equality, it has to do with twisting words and playing victim. No one thinks women have full equality. You don't have to think that to see when someone is playing the gender card. I'm not sure you understand what that is if you think it means anything thinks women have full equality.

This has no similarity to Bernie and BLM. No one, especially not Bernie, ever said everything was all equal with racial issues. And again, that has nothing to do with playing a race card. Playing a race/gender card isn't about mentioning the inequality that exists, it's about using your gender or race to gain advantage when there was no discrimination/sexism/racism towards you.

Hillary falsely twisted what Bernie said and claimed it was an attack on women when there was no such attack at all. That's what playing the gender card is. There's self-proclaimed feminists on here who have played the card too by claiming they are being "attacked" because they are women when in reality they were being refuted because they were making illogical and false claims. It had nothing to do with them being a woman and it wasn't only men disagreeing with them. It was simply that they were wrong.

[840high]

65. This female says AMEN.

[rhett o rick]

31. If Clinton said that she would support a law that would hold gun manufacturers

responsible for gun deaths, I must have missed it. Please show me a link.

[boston bean]

33. wow, you should do some research. Always good to be informed you know.

But I'm not going to do it for you. You can find it easily enough. Hint.. look up their votes.

[Snotcicles]

37. Speaking of research. Do you ever wonder

if Hillary is still profiting from the sales of guns? She was after all a director on the board of Walmart, this country's largest gun and ammo retailer. She also held a sizable number of shares, and still may. The last I heard about them was they were moved into a blind trust when Bill ran for president.
I would like to see someone with ample resources dig deeper into Hillary's connection with Walmart and see if she is still making money selling guns.
I read that Walton family members and the Walton foundation donate large sums to the Clinton foundation. Will it be spun that those monies only come from tooth paste and housewares sales?
If my questions have merit and my hunch is true. Than what a disgusting hypocrisy I see.

[boston bean]

39. Based on your hunches and some conspiracy you've dreamt up, you find me hypocritical.... ok... nt

[Snotcicles]

40. I'm not saying you are hypocritical, and where is there a conspiracy? nt edited spelling

[DonCoquixote]

92. The fact she is in with the Waltons

does not change, and the fact is the Waltons have done a lot of harm, and yes, they do sell lots of guns.

[rhett o rick]

91. I am guessing that means there is not such thing. You are trying to hold Sen Sanders

to a standard that HRC doesn't meet.

[Blue State Bandit]

100. You bring up Hill's lame DOMA excuse to defend her gender-baiting with a half a quote?

If she thinks she can use badly misappropriated quotes to gender-bait her way to the White House, have at it. The more she uses this tactic of using any snip-quote that can be psudo-reasonably misinterpreted out of context, the easier the "cry wolf" pattern will emerge. And god forbid if they're any shakier then this quote. He use the same rhetorical opening when he rebutted O'Maley minutes later "We can raise our voices, but I come from a rural state...".

If she thinks she can hid these mischaracterizations form the women she's trying to inflame, then she's perpetuating the myth that women "don't get technology" (irony not missed). You can't just wipe these remarks off the internet.. like with a cloth (more irony) Women will find them on YouTube or TiVO, and eventually, the question will be asked... hopefully in a debate.

My guess? She's just so used to fighting Republicans in this fashion, expecting pejorative remarks from her opponents so she can ride a wave of sympathy as a path to victory, that she just doesn't know how to react in a clean race with a stand-up guy who's record she's been triangulating since the summer.

[azmom]

2. As a feminist, I am angry that she is going around

Charging sexism. She damn well knows that comment was not directed at her. This only serves to diminish the word.

If you are going to charge someone of sexism, you better get the fucking facts right. If you don't, you only hurt the movement.

ugh

[djean111]

5. Yup. That gender card has been played early and often, and, as a woman, all I can say is that this

is NOT what Feminism is about - Feminism, to me, is about equal chances, not preferential treatment. This is not an election for class president or prom queen. There might be a fair point to this if the candidates were all identical in policies, issues, and previous records - but they most certainly are not.

[azmom]

8. I used to have a little bit of respect for her, but

After yesterday speech, I literally have none. She is a piece of work; is what she is.

Ugh

[Snotcicles]

9. +1.nt

[boston bean]

12. LOL, gender card. No feminist I know of uses that dirty canard. nt

[azmom]

15. Oh please, I 'm a latina with a gender card and

A race card. They are always in my back pocket. Always.

[boston bean]

16. LOL. nt

[Snotcicles]

17. +1.nt

[treestar]

116. right.

[Fawke Em]

28. Yes - we do use it when it's warranted.

And, with her, it's warranted.

Her whole campaign is: "Vote for me because I'm a woman and it's my turn!!!"

[rhett o rick]

32. Let me see if I can guess your point. Because you believe that no feminist uses the term "gender

card", then the usage by a female means that female isn't a feminist. And if she isn't a feminist, by your definition, her opinion on the subject isn't valid. Did I get close?

[boston bean]

35. feminists don't usually use sexist/misognyistic perjoratives against themselves or other women.

And that is about as blunt as I can put it.

[rhett o rick]

61. But maybe not all feminists agree that "gender card" is a "sexist/misognyistic perjorative".

But in any case, you are implying that the poster isn't a feminist because if she was, she wouldn't use that term. So why would you point out that you don't think she is a feminist? I hope that doesn't mean she can't speak from a women's perspective.

[boston bean]

68. I wrote what I meant. nt

[treestar]

118. "Playing the gender/race card" is a right winger's

complaint when they are dealing with issues of gender/race. Period. Only right wingers use that language. If you are a right winger playing a left winger on DU, some "tells" exist. That is the immediate reaction of a right winger to any issue regarding race or gender.

The "card" imagery is used but it is basically a lament that "oh now we have to deal with this again, and we'd rather not. We want to pretend all of that is gone and there is a level playing field."

[rhett o rick]

119. It's not true that "only right wingers use that language." That appears to be an

attempt to control discussion by making some words/terms verboten. I would say that "politically liberal" posters, like we have on DU are not as "restricted" to how they say things as some would like. And calling someone a "right winger" is another method of distraction from the real issue at hand.

[cui bono]

122. s/he is not describing the situation correctly anyway. It's the PLAYING of the card that's important

not the calling it out. treestar is changing it to calling out being right wing in order to attempt to invalidate this issue, but it just doesn't make any logical sense at all and they are completely incorrect.

In fact, it is in progressives' and liberals' best interest to call out when someone plays the gender card. It happens. Hillary did it and 3 prominent posters on DU have done it, 2 of whom are very vocal self-proclaimed feminists. It's playing victim and that does feminism no good at all. And in Hillary's case it was just plain lying.

[rhett o rick]

126. Exactly so. nm

[treestar]

117. No feminist would ever accuse anyone of playing the gender card

Right wingers do that. Sometimes they reveal themselves here when they can't help but use the language; and forget that it is not language any one so far to the left would ever use.

[cui bono]

121. No. That is just plain wrong an backwards. No femininst would ever ACTUALLY PLAY the gender card.

It's a good thing to call people out on it.

It's the playing of it that is inexcusable. And apparently not a right winger thing either since I've seen Hillary do it and I've seen 3 prominent posters on DU do it, and two of which are a couple of the loudest of the self-proclaimed feminist crowd.

Here's more explanation I posted to you already since you are still trying to spin this.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=726682

[treestar]

123. It's an accusation that comes from right wingers

When they don't want to deal with a thing. Is part of your Hillary opposition grounded in it? Is Hillary too ambitious, for example? Think twice. It may have to do with some un-recognized concept that women are supposed to stay in their place. I can't imagine anyone thinking that Hilary will not have issues - we already see criticism of her clothing and looks from right wingers.

[cui bono]

125. No it is not. It is not a partisan thing at all.

And now you seem to be asking me if I'm a right winger and sexist? And throwing in a free psychoanalysis to boot? That is rich. Lord, the lengths people will go to to defend people who are just plain wrong is astounding.

Not that you deserve to be taken seriously after going there, I will still explain how you are wrong (about everything else in addition to your insinuations about me which you should really consider deleting or apologizing for).

You are conflating two different things. Sexist comments directed towards Hillary and her playing the gender card. Those are two completely different things.

What Hillary did was even worse than playing the gender card because she twisted up what Sanders actually said and meant into something she could then use to play the gender card (saying he said something sexist when he never did). SHE is the one who is undercutting feminism by playing victim to something that NEVER EXISTED IN THE FIRST PLACE.

She's feeling the Bern and so now she is making shit up to try to attack him with and making herself and women look bad while doing so. And that's coming from a female liberal feminist. So save your next post for facts rather than your ugly insinuations. Talk about right winger tactics.

[haikugal]

54. Yeah, pretty strange isn't it?!

Bogus and disingenuous, like the candidate.

[rhett o rick]

76. I am with you. Trying to change the focus to an argument over the term "gender card" is a

distraction from what HRC did. HRC tried to change the focus from gun control to sexism and essentially accused Sen Sanders of stating that when women speak out it's shouting. That's a underhanded attempt to misconstrue what he actually said.

Segami said it better than I (http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251723623):

Clinton must think women are morons that will vote her just because. Otherwise, she would not have taken this comment of Bernie Sanders, which had nothing at all to do with gender, and turned it into a "LOOK AT ME I REFUSE TO BE VICTIMIZED" statement.

Seems to me that Clinton is trying to take the emphasis away from what Sanders SAID, which is that he supports strengthening and expanding instant background checks, do away with the gun show loophole, etc. And instead of talking about the ISSUE of gun control, make it a whiny "Oh, He's Complaining about ME or Complaining about Women shouting" where he was not. What, in order to capture the "I am A Victim" female votes?????? If she believes that she has a point to make regarding Sander's positions on gun control, then make them based on that and not a side route through Victimhood. I like to think women are smarter than to fall for this.

Once again Senator Sanders didn't take the bait to fight in the mud. He replied to HRC's attack with:

"All that I can say is I am very proud of my record on women's issues. I certainly do not have a problem with women speaking out -- and I think what the secretary is doing there is taking words and misapplying them," Sanders told Tapper.

From: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251723110

HRC isn't giving women much credit in thinking they will appreciate her pandering. It's high time for a women to be President, but we need one that will work hard for the 99% and not be beholden to billionaires and Wall Street.

[haikugal]

80. Thank you!!

Beautiful post that expresses my thoughts completely.

[rhett o rick]

87. You are more than welcome, but again Segami said it better than I

here: http://www.democraticunderground

[haikugal]

89. You both did a great job, I'm glad you linked to Segami's post!

Thanks again..

[cui bono]

114. Oh, I see, so Hillary isn't a feminist.

Why does Hillary not think women should have equal rights?

[treestar]

115. Very true. That is a right winger thing to say

and up to today, I have never heard of it being used by anyone other than a right winger.

[cui bono]

124. Not true at all. Why would calling someone out for playing the card be a right winger thing to say?

Obama supporters called her out on playing the race card. So are they right wingers too then?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=726682

[restorefreedom]

20. pretty sad, actually.......

playing the female card is just another tool to get her power...shows how she is willing to sell even women's issues up the river to get what she wants.

too bad her biggest supporters don't even realize they are being played.

[azmom]

22. That woman sold her soul a looooong time ago.

She is a shell of a person.

[restorefreedom]

23. a shell that the mic, msm, and 1%

will be only too happy to fill with their oligarchic crap.

[azmom]

26. It's tragic really. Let's work as hard as

Humanely possible so that Warren gets the honor of first woman president.

[restorefreedom]

43. oh yes, that is a goal worth working for! nt

[MuseRider]

67. "playing the female card is just another tool to get her power"

That is how I heard it too and that, IMO, makes her very far from what I have ever known or called feminism. I know there are many differences in thought but to me the basic call is I am equal because I am. I have never called for anything because of my gender. I fight because I am, I fought for LGBT the same way and am not LGBT. It just seems the only way to really win anything, really win without seeming creepy or dishonest, is to win because of you, not what kind of piping your body has.

I am surprised she did that quite frankly. If she is upset enough to use that now what in the hell is she going to do if she gets the nomination? It will not ever stop, not even if she succeeds. It will be a non stop war on all of us (I am not blaming her for that) just mentioning what it is going to likely be like.

Calling someone who consistently says he likes and respects her out like this reminds me why it will be so very hard to vote for her. He just disagrees from time to time WHILE respecting her and she thinks that is yelling? Her policies are certainly the main problem for me but you add the triangulation that makes me not trust a thing she says and then add this ability to take the good things said by someone and then bite them just to win makes me actually sick. Bad play. It feels like she can't take it (she certainly can and does not need to do this) and it surely feels like someone reaching for anything to get ahead.

[restorefreedom]

70. yes, if it is like this now

it would be a very interesting ge against trump. but i don't think we will have to worry about her in the ge she won't be there. what really gets me is that women's causes are supposed to be one of her premier issues, and she has absolutely no hesitation about selling feminist ideals right up the river just to get her butt into the White House. There really is no subject, no cause, no person that they will not steamroll to get the power that they want. It makes me want to vomit.

[MuseRider]

79. I will answer with something I was going to edit my post with

and also say that it sure feels like she is going to hurt us as much as she could help us.

What I was going to say is that she is absolutely correct with her comment. We have all been accused of "yelling" being "shrill" etc. when we disagree and talk about something because we are women, it comes right after we don't respond correctly to the pat on our silly little heads. I can't imagine there is a woman alive who can't say that. I just do not see it coming from Bernie. He is not a sexist. To some here he is evil incarnate and pulling the wool over our eyes because he is the worst of the worst on every social issue. We need to hear that but we don't need to agree.

I am committed to voting for her if she does get the nomination. It will take a huge effort to do so but I am doing it in the hopes that she holds true to women. I was safely sure of that until I saw the video of Elizabeth Warren talking about the bankruptcy bill. Now I am not even sure she will come through with that. Voting on a hope and prayer is not my thing but at least we know what the other side would be doing to womens issues. At least there is some hope with her. ***don't want to don't want to*** but I will.

[restorefreedom]

106. well i respect your choice to make that hard vote

i am also making a hard choice. i will write in bernie or vote green or something. its not sour grapes like "well my candidate didn't get it so nyah nyah". its more like i just don't see any real substantive difference between her and establishment gop, no matter what her position of the day is. and her last redeeming quality, her stance on womens issues, is gone as i see it. she is clearly saying to vote for her because she is a woman and i guess she has no worthwhile policy positions because they are now playing the gender card every five minutes. i think it will backfire in a big way with anyone who is not a hard core supporter. it is really looking sad now and it is still so early.

[MuseRider]

107. The great thing about this country

is we are allowed to vote our conscience. We also do not have to tell anyone how we vote. I have made that kind of hard choice before as well. This time I have to vote for women's issues if she does get the nomination. I know that is not popular but it is my conscience. Thanks, we all should respect each others votes and probably more people would speak like you have except for the rules of this board.

[restorefreedom]

108. i guess there is not often an "easy" vote for many of us

funny , i think my position is not popular among many here, although i have seen others express it. sadly, there have been efforts to make us feel like shit no matter who we plan to vote for. i know that if hillary gets the nom, come ge time, i need to not bring it up. honestly, if she is the nom i will continue to post but will focus on non ge topics and local race issues.

or i might be so fed up i will stop following politics all together. stay tuned.

peace,

[MuseRider]

110. I just have to respond once more to you,

I can't remember a time that I have felt so solidly behind a candidate. I was big on Kucinich and stuck that out both times but I knew he was never going to get far. I had no idea how far Bernie would get and have been so surprised and happy with this election season so far.

I think a good part of our pushing is that this is the first time in many many years that we have had an actual, true lefty with an honest chance to win. I have issues with him on a few things, nobody will ever be totally perfect but in the overall sense I am ecstatic to be able to feel so satisfied. It is going to sting if he loses, I have to admit that. I will not be working for Hillary in this life but just knowing what the other side has planned for women I HAVE to cast that vote.

Whatever works for you. Peace.

[restorefreedom]

111. what you said. ...we all gotta go with our conscience. and i was for dennis too! :) nt

[Segami]

10. Its the Clinton way...

Last edited Sun Oct 25, 2015, 12:57 PM - Edit history (1)

Back in 2008, its was all about racist overtones with candidate Barack Obama....

Now today, in 2015, the innuendo being lobbed against Bernie Sanders is sexism....

Its the Clinton way....

"...The comments, which ranged from the New York senator

" target="_blank">appearing to diminish the role of Martin Luther King Jr. in the civil rights movement — an aide later said she misspoke — to Bill Clinton dismissing Sen. Barack Obama’s image in the media as a “fairy tale” — generated outrage on black radio, black blogs and cable television. And now they've drawn the attention of prominent African-American politicians.


“A cross-section of voters are alarmed at the tenor of some of these statements,” said Obama spokeswoman Candice Tolliver, who said that Clinton would have to decide whether she owed anyone an apology...."

[TwilightGardener]

36. Yup. Why I'll never support her.

Not an ounce of honor in her entire body.

[beam me up scottie]

13. This.

[winter is coming]

45. ^^ This, so very much. n/t

[Zorra]

47. Well said. My feelings exactly. nt

[MuseRider]

81. !

Take a bow.

[historylovr]

101. Well said.

[NuclearDem]

3. I'M NOT SHOUTING

[SidDithers]

102. Perfect...

Sid

[mmonk]

4. The right answers.

"Shouting" is just another word manipulation.

[Enthusiast]

6. I'm glad Bernie set the record straight. Some people have no respect for the truth.

[bunnies]

11. "Sanders criticized the "shouting" from both sides "

So Clinton made this all about her and is claiming sexism? *smh* Pathetic.

[glinda]

44. I agree. I heard how he presented it in the context that it was presented. She is twisting.

[Evergreen Emerald]

14. He's lying.

[Fawke Em]

29. No. He's not.

She's lying.

The statement was NOT sexist.

[TwilightGardener]

34. The point is to get people discussing whether or not Sanders is sexist, make him deny it.

That's a Clinton/Rove dirty trick. Make something up out of thin air, make people discuss it, and pretty soon the suspicion centers on "IS BERNIE SEXIST"? Only idiots would fall for it, but there are a lot of idiots out there.

[winter is coming]

48. OTOH, people who see it as bogus will likely distrust anything that comes out of the mouths

of Clinton or Clinton proxies from that point forward. It's a double-edged sword with a sharp blade, and with oafs like Trump in the race, it's pretty clear to see who's a sexist jerk and who isn't. Also, it's an odd tactic to reach for when you're supposedly winning. I figured Clinton would shoot herself in the foot again, but never imagined it would be this soon.

[azmom]

51. She's got idiots on her campaign.

This is going to blowback hard.

[TwilightGardener]

53. Concerning the tactic--it serves to intimidate Bernie, and by example O'Malley,

that they'd better WATCH THEIR MOUTHS, they're walking on eggshells, choose their words carefully, etc. There is zero substance to this attack, but there doesn't have to be. It's to plant a negative seed, and then stand back and watch them respond, watch them try to avoid further attacks of sexism (however bogus), etc. It's a psych-out. Back in 2000, when Karl Rove had South Carolina GOPers whisper about John McCain's "black" adopted daughter--the Bangladeshi girl--there was obviously nothing to the attack. There didn't have to be. It planted a seed of negativity in South Carolina among the more racist elements there, and it served as a notice to McCain that it was gonna get underhanded and ugly, fast. Intimidation.

[haikugal]

58. Dirty, dirty politics that does nothing to benefit America or it's people. nt

[winter is coming]

69. For some, it's about the winning, and not what you do with the win.

And when you follow that mentality for very long, all you end up doing with the win is fixating on the next win. Great for the winners, great for the game machinery, shit for the people on the sidelines.

[haikugal]

72. Exactly..they have nothing of value to offer other than winning at all costs.

The end justifies the means...wrong on every possible level.

[winter is coming]

66. Thing is, as a democratic socialist, Bernie's already been called everything but late for supper.

I don't think this will faze him much. We just need to not overreact when this shit gets pulled.

[DonCoquixote]

95. in other words

It is the old "have you stopped beating your wife" argument?

[TwilightGardener]

98. Yes. Just plant the seed, put it out there. It doesn't have to have merit.

Just has to be brought up.

[dorkzilla]

73. Don’t you just love these “Nah-ah” responses?

FFS, back it up with something! Just saying “he’s lying” doesn’t mean shit.

I’m trying to bite my tongue as hard as possible because we had a wee glimmer of unity against the GOP this week but ugh...I’ve nearly chewed it off now...

[rhett o rick]

96. I have a picture of fingers in ears and eyes closed. Just sayin'. nm

[dorkzilla]

99. That’s about the size of it...

I picture both hands clasped over ears screaming “he’s lying I CAN’T HEAR YOU LALALLALALALALALALALALA!!!!!!!!!! MOM, HE’S SHOUTING AT ME!!!!!!!!!!!"

[cui bono]

120. But didn't you hear?

It's Sanders supporters that started all the animosity again.

[zappaman]

19. I agree.

He seems to shout at everything.

[pa28]

21. Imagine if Sanders had turned Hillary's "arm waving" comment into anti-semitism.

That's exactly how silly and divisive her gender attack is. What a shame.

[azmom]

24. It's a damn shame. She has no respect

For the truth.

[retrowire]

46. Good point. n/t

[dsc]

25. He is part right and part wrong

He was criticising both Clinton and O'Malley so it wasn't sexist. But he is dead wrong on what is wrong with the gun control debate. The pro gun control side has been too restrained far from shouting too much. When Newtown happened the pictures of those children's bodies should have been on the front page of the New York Times and every other paper for days on end until something was done. Every single person who voted against that should have had their homes and offices surrounded with protesters with pictures of those children shouting them down 24/7. They should have be unable to eat, sleep, read, entertain or anything else without the images of those children.

[99th_Monkey]

62. I heard it a different way.

Seemed to me Bernie was actually talking about how too few candidates and people in general, are
rolling up their sleeves to do the hard work of cultivating a sufficient consensus on a set
of policies to reduce gun violence in ways that both sides agree will help.

Bernie wasn't accusing Hills or O/M of 'shouting' so much as he was pointing to the disgracefully divisive &
dysfunctional national discourse; and calling for a more rational dialogue. <-- is Hillary opposed to such?

Her using the shouting comment to accuse Bernie of being a mysoginist is a pathetic self-serving distraction
from the very thing Bernie was calling for, i.e. to tone down the vitriol and work together to find real
solutions to gun violence.

[TwilightGardener]

30. One of the stupidest, most nonsensical attacks I've ever seen.

[Sunlei]

38. I agree, Bernie is not 'shouting at anyone'. This is just his style of speaking, he has always

had this style. He is passionate about the issues.

Watch him in the countless times over the past many years, Senator Sanders has spoken about issues to Congress, to the Senate. This is his style of a public speech and there's nothing wrong with it, it's great.

Please, we need to move past the appearance, speaker style, & decades old Government crap of our candidates. Focus on the current issues & the future. They're all unique people and all firmly in our Party.

[Orrex]

49. It is indeed "just his style of speaking," and he should really work on it.

Recall that VP Gore was criticized for being "too aggressive" when he stepped forward to shake W's paw at one of the 2000 debates. Imagine how the socialist from his tiny constituency in the liberal far-northeast will be perceived when his "great" "style of speaking" really gets going. What his supporters embrace as his "style," others might readily find off-putting and aggressive. You can deny this, but you will gain nothing from denying it.

He is passionate about the issues.

That's close to meaningless. Every candidate will claim to be passionate about the issues, but some are able to convey it without sounding petulant or unhinged. Clinton has been criticized for her tone for decades, yet she perseveres. Sanders is moving into the public eye in a way that he never has before, and if he can't handle criticism of his oratorical style, then he's simply not ready for prime time.

Please, we need to move past the appearance, speaker style, & decades old Government crap of our candidates.

That's a lovely platitude. We've needed to "move past" all of that since the birth of politics, and there's no reason to think that we're going to "move past" it in the next few decades, at least.

[haikugal]

71. There is absolutely nothing wrong with Bernie.

Not his speaking style or his subject matter. This is a bogus attempt to smear him. It's obvious the issues can't benefit Clinton so we have to deal with her, and her supporters, personal attacks and attempted smears. American politics at it's worst.

[Orrex]

74. I hope that Sanders isn't as thin-skinned as his supporters

If reasonable criticism of his oratorical style is considered a "personal attack" or an "attempted smear," then I can only imagine what will happen when he faces actual personal attacks and smears, as Clinton has been deftly handling for decades.

Criticism of a rhetorical style is hardly a smear, especially if it describes a resonable concern about how he'll be perceived in the run-up to the general election. What rationale will you use when his Brooklyn-heavy "speak your mind" style makes potential voters less receptive to his message?

During his recent NPR interview, I couldn't believe how unprofessional and petulant he sounded, jumping on the interviewer for a softball question that Sanders simply didn't like. I'm sure that his supporters will now (as they did then) claim that he was blindsided by unfair "Gotcha!" journalism, but that's not what happened at all. It was a simple question that Sanders didn't feel that he had to answer, so he refused to answer. That's a clear sign of a politician who's not ready for the big stage, and one can only assume that Sanders knows it.

Look, tell yourself whatever you like, if it justifies Sanders' missteps. After all, you've declared that "there is absolutely nothing wrong with Bernie," a statement of quasi-religious adoration that frankly reveals your own lack of objectivity.

Equally frankly, I don't care how you rationalize it, as long as you vote for the Democrat in 2016. I'll sure as hell be voting for Sanders if he miraculously wins the primary.

[haikugal]

77. I'll say it again...

Bernie is the genuine article and we like that. He isn't polished, rich or accommodating to the oligharchy, we like that.

It's a shame that any defense of our candidate against bogus criticism is identified as 'thin skinned' by spinners but please proceed.

[Sunlei]

82. I like Bernies style too, reminds me of my family. My dream is that....

Sanders and Clinton team up, VP and President. This is the only way we will have both of them.

I know they can work together, as a team they would steamroll over ANY Republican who runs.

[Orrex]

83. Right, right.

He's the genuine article. No politician has ever made that claim before.

It's a shame that any defense of our candidate against bogus criticism is identified as 'thin skinned' by spinners but please proceed.

Well, that's petty and childish of you, not to mention short-sighted. I get that you dislike the term "thin-skinned," because you'd rather portray yourself as some moral champion fighting the good fight, but in fact you're simply ignoring reality. If Sanders' campaign survives Primary season, you'll see what actual smears and actual personal attacks really are, and if you have any self-awareness you'll long for the days when Sanders had only to face reasonable criticism.

On what grounds do you declare that criticism bogus? Such criticism has been a real factor in elections for many centuries; if the precedent of history is any indicator, then bogus criticism has been an effective strategy since before the grandfather of Sanders' great-grandfather was born.

You like the fact that Sanders isn't polished, because when he fails to win the primary, you can dismiss his failure as establishment elitism. Then you can snuggle up in your hipster politics and pretend to know better than everyone who sees the big picture.

But as I noted above, I don't care how you rationalize it to yourself, as long as you vote for the Democrat in Nov 2016. Sanders will certainly do so; will his supporters?

[haikugal]

86. You couldn't be more dismissive?

I'm the one who said he's genuine, not Bernie. You've been following the Clintons too long.

[Orrex]

90. Please show me where I claimed that Sanders made that statement.

Since I clearly didn't do so, are you willing to go on record and admit that you're making shit up?

You couldn't be more dismissive?

You are certainly inspiring me to be more dismissive.

[Duval]

63. Reminds me of the "Dean Scream" touted by

our MSM, when Dr. Dean was shouting to be heard over the very loud enthusiastic crowd! "Much ado about nothing". I like the way he speaks!

[dorkzilla]

75. And she’s lived in New York long enough to know that’s how most of us speak

We’re loud and passionate. Her neighbors are mostly people who were brought up in NYC (a good portion of us up here in Westchester hail from the Bronx so we all say “dawg” and “cawfee) so I don’t think it was his speaking style. She’s just out and out full of shit.

And THIS was a spectacularly timed baseless attack because it just fucking dissolved ANY good will I had for her. And as a woman I agree with the comments up thread - I feel like she’s playing the sexist card in a very careless, calculating and dishonest way.

[Orrex]

85. If NY's 29 electoral votes are all he needs for the election, then he's set

But his oratorical style will serve him poorly elsewhere.

[dorkzilla]

93. I don’t think it will be an issue

If GWB’s oratory deficits didn’t tank him, Bernie will be just fine.

[Orrex]

103. Sure.

Dubya's artificially folksy schtick was calculated to make him seem like an approachable everyman, an amiable doofus representing Real America, and to out nation's great shame it was effective in this regard.

Sanders' Brooklyn accent will be used to portray him as a New York socialist out of touch with Real America, and that's when the campaign against him will really get started.

The thin-skinned supporters now complaing about the "smears" and the "personal attacks" on Sanders will look back fondly on the days when Democrats simply questioned the effectiveness of his oratory. They'll understand that reasonable criticism from someone who will happily vote for Sanders if he miraculously survives the primary is nothing at all like the personal attack they imagined it to be.

[dorkzilla]

104. Right. Thin-skinned. Got it. She’s already saying “he’s picking on me!"

But we’re thin-skinned. If she miraculously survives the primary, is what you meant. You’re welcome.

[Orrex]

105. Please provide a citation for that quote, or else admit that you're making shit up.

Sanders' supporters are quick to respond to reasonable criticism with wishful thinking and lies. Do you think that your chosen candidate would embrace such a strategy? I seriously doubt it, but perhaps I think more highly of your candidate than you do.

[SidDithers]

41. In all caps...

Sid

[GusBob]

60. The irony lol

[rhett o rick]

97. And we go for the distraction, "Hey look the OP used caps"

[retrowire]

42. omg

there she goes using the gender card again.

Much more respect being lost here. That's so...

"OH YOU MUST FEEL THAT WAY BECAUSE IM A WOMAN"

"No, I never implied t..."

"SEXIST! HA! LOOK AT THE SEXIST EVERYONE"

That's what Hillary's doing right here.

Ignorant, manipulative politician as always. Sigh.

Hillary Supporters: You're watching this right? Your candidate manipulates other peoples words and uses them for self serving purposes. This is who you're supportive of.

[DrBulldog]

55. Clinton's ridiculous focus-group attack on Bernie:

"I'm a woman ... wah wah wah ... I'm a woman ... wah wah wah ... I'm a woman ... wah wah wah ... don't you dare tell me I'm SHOUTING!!! ... wah wah wah ... "

So Hillary is so "brilliant", so "Presidential", that she has to resort to cheap gender-card distortions of Bernie's stated position on gun control to insinuate that Bernie is sexist?! A REAL Presidential candidate would have come back with an alternate gun control view.

And Bernie was laughing in response to the question because it was SO dumb. Yet he simply and humbly repeated his full position and then simply said no, he was not being sexist.

So look out folks - here again comes the Clinton verbal sleaze. It was only a matter of time. She did the same thing against Obama when she realized the coronation crown might be going somewhere else. Remember her insinuation of the possibility that Obama might NOT be Christian ... ?

[DrBulldog]

56. If Bernie is sexist . . .

. . . then why did he forcefully and gallantly save her from the email issue nonsense in the first debate?

Comon' people. Give me an answer to THAT. I'd love to hear it.

[108vcd]

57. After Reading This Thread

I can say unequivocally, there are just folks who will vote for Clinton no matter what

it doesn't matter that she is the embodiment of everything that's wrong with Washington these days, and it would be an injustice to even call her an Obama lite....

apparently because she's a woman, everything gets caste aside

[Orrex]

88. Interesting use of "caste" in your sexist declaration

Maybe it's a typo, but...

I can say unequivocally, there are just folks who will vote for Clinton no matter what

it doesn't matter that she is the embodiment of everything that's wrong with Washington these days, and it would be an injustice to even call her an Obama lite....

apparently because she's a woman, everything gets caste aside

Well, there are people who'll vote for Sanders no matter how quixotic his campaign, and they're eagerly willing to ignore any obstacles that reality might place in his way.

Beyond that, it's purely sexist to dismiss support for Clinton on the grounds that it's "because she's a woman." There are many reasons to support her, as there are reasons to support Sanders. Clinton has ability to withstand partisan attacks in a way that Sanders has not. Clinton has foreign policy experience that Sanders does not. Clinton has represented the US on the world stage, while Sanders has been nearly anonymous outside of a tiny constituency in the far northeast corner of the country. None of these factors depend on second X chromosome. Why would you pretend otherwise? You're making a sexist attack while complaining about complaints of sexist attacks!

Practically speaking, the goal is to take the Whitehouse, and of the two leading candidates, Clinton is more readily able to do so.

If Sanders miraculously wins the primary, I know of no Clinton supporter who won't vote for him. In significant contrast, more than a few of Sanders' supporters have pre-emptively declared their intent to stay home on election night if their candidate isn't on the ballot.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

59. "taking words and misapplying them"

Exactly. That's what Republicans do.

[Juicy_Bellows]

78. She wants a mud fight.

She wants to drag any competition into the mud and slug it out. Can't do it on policy so let's get ugly.

No thanks, I'll pass Mrs. Clinton.

[haikugal]

84. Indeed. nt

[Vattel]

94. More sleazy politics from Clinton. She is good at it.

[Armstead]

109. "I think what the secretary is doing there is taking words and misapplying them,"

God he's good.

I would put it differently.

"She lied and twisted my words."