Sanders Criticizes Gay Group, The HRC, for Endorsing Hillary

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 21, 2016 4:44 AM GMT
    NYT: Mrs. Clinton defended Planned Parenthood, the Human Rights Campaign and other Democratic-leaning organizations and labor unions that have endorsed her candidacy.

    http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/01/20/hillary-clinton-dismisses-bernie-sanderss-criticism-of-groups-backing-her/?ref=politics
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 21, 2016 4:49 PM GMT
    From the article:

    [Clinton] added that she was “somewhat confused” by Mr. Sanders’s comments, which he made in an interview with MSNBC on Wednesday [where else?], that the groups that had endorsed [her] candidacy represented the establishment politics he rails against.

    “What we are doing in this campaign, it blows my mind every day because I see it clearly, we’re taking on not only Wall Street and the economic establishment, we’re taking on the political establishment,” Mr. Sanders told [who else?] MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.

    “So,” he continued, “I have friends and supporters in the Human Rights Fund and Planned Parenthood, but you know what? Hillary Clinton has been around there for a very, very long time. Some of these groups are, in fact, part of the establishment.


    You got that right, Bernie, and in a real big way. Maybe you're smarter than you project.
  • fitartistsf

    Posts: 638

    Jan 21, 2016 10:05 PM GMT
    Gee, it's only right that they endorse her, I mean... they have the same initials… icon_wink.gif
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14335

    Jan 21, 2016 10:10 PM GMT
    The HRC had no damn business endorsing that corrupt, power hungry, incompetent whore for President. I will never give a donation to that group ever again. They sure the hell don't represent or speak for me. Fuck 'em.icon_mad.gif
  • NerdLifter

    Posts: 1509

    Jan 21, 2016 10:12 PM GMT
    Well, I shall file the HRC under pro-establishment. How disappointing.
  • slimnmuscly

    Posts: 541

    Jan 22, 2016 1:31 AM GMT
    HRC is masterful at fundraising and at taking credit for victories it had nothing to do with. But when it comes to moving legislation through Congress it's always been completely ineffectual and far more concerned with "access" than efficacy. They're afraid of not getting access if they don't come on board early, and they want to be right by her side as they make excuses for what will they'll inevitably praise as her "savvy" decision to delay action on all her promises.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 22, 2016 1:47 AM GMT
    NerdLifter saidWell, I shall file the HRC under pro-establishment. How disappointing.




    Well, you cant get much more "pro establishment" than their Corporate Equality Index scoring, since 2002. They have the 'pulse' on the fortune 500, big corporate businesses. (also associated with wall street). Small business has yet to come around

    Whos in and whos out and whos just beginning. I would imagine HRC is also endorsed by these corporate giants who are working together (most of them) to advance LGBT employment protections since the federal side of things has been so stifled and oppressed by the right wing and their mouth piece politicians.





  • metta

    Posts: 39095

    Jan 22, 2016 7:25 AM GMT
    How an Early Endorsement From Largest LGBT Group May Reveal Hillary Clinton's Worst Fears

    "So why didn't the Human Rights Campaign keep it going? Why didn't they keep both candidates competing for the LGBT vote and promising more on a range of issues, from fighting to implement the teaching of queer history in schools to taking on issues uniquely affecting LGBT seniors and LGBT people of color? Why not push Sanders more, hoping to get him to speak out more, dangling that endorsement in front of him -- he could, after all, become the Democratic nominee -- and why not do the same with Clinton?"


    "The only answer to that question has to do with access to the White House, and perhaps what the Clinton campaign may have said to HRC, and to Planned Parenthood, the Brady Campaign on Gun Violence and other groups that have endorsed early, about the kind of access they might get -- and what they might not get if they didn't endorse now. (Let's also not forget that Chad Griffin, HRC's president, worked in Bill Clinton's administration, and raised much money as a bundler for Obama's and Clinton's campaigns.) And it is a campaign that needs those endorsements now, calling in its chips, as Bernie Sanders and his insurgency has taken the Clintonites by surprise. What seems like an early burst of enthusiasm from a group that hasn't ever endorsed any seriously contested presidential candidate before any votes took place may actually be an indication of the fear and loathing inside the Clinton campaign."

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/this-week-the-human-right_b_9030106.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 22, 2016 5:03 PM GMT
    ^^^^^ HRC and its apologists can make all the excuses they want, but the record shows that it's pulled this crap several times in the past, endorsing Democrats well before either party had settled on a nominee, and they're sure to do so in the future, as long as it "speaks to their needs." As for the "access" threats inherent in this latest attempt at a credible explanation, they're not at all surprising coming from that arch-conniver of all, Clinton II. Hillary's already thrown at least one gay man under the bus - or should I say into the fire?; his name was Christopher Stevens, for those who may not [choose to] recall - and she's certain to do so again.

    Whomever you vote for, avoid this woman like the plague.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14335

    Jan 22, 2016 6:52 PM GMT
    MGINSD said^^^^^ HRC and its apologists can make all the excuses they want, but the record shows that it's pulled this crap several times in the past, endorsing Democrats well before either party had settled on a nominee, and they're sure to do so in the future, as long as it "speaks to their needs." As for the "access" threats inherent in this latest attempt at a credible explanation, they're not at all surprising coming from that arch-conniver of all, Clinton II. Hillary's already thrown at least one gay man under the bus - or should I say into the fire?; his name was Christopher Stevens, for those who may not [choose to] recall - and she's certain to do so again.

    Whomever you vote for, avoid this woman like the plague.
    Exactly.
    +2,000,000
  • metta

    Posts: 39095

    Jan 23, 2016 8:44 AM GMT
    Bernie Sanders Clarifies HRC ‘Establishment’ Remarks for Rachel Maddow


    http://www.towleroad.com/2016/01/sanders-establishment/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 23, 2016 6:30 PM GMT
    metta saidBernie Sanders Clarifies HRC ‘Establishment’ Remarks for Rachel Maddow


    http://www.towleroad.com/2016/01/sanders-establishment/

    This line from the "story" says it all:

    On last night’s Rachel Maddow show, Rachel sent Kasie Hunt to obtain a "clarification" from Sanders. [Emphasis and quotes added.]

    "You womenfolk circle them wagons!"

    It doesn't get any better, Bernie; you shoulda quit while you were ahead.