Sanders posing at African American Memorial

[derpmonster 22,412]

Little centrists tried

[REALITY 80,162]

3 minutes ago, Buddy said:

So you mean to tell me OP is making a joke of African American slavery and civil rights? Pathetic. 

It's a joke in response to this thread

Please...

[JusKeepBreathin 19,311]

4 minutes ago, Buddy said:

So you mean to tell me OP is making a joke of African American slavery and civil rights? Pathetic. 

You're trying to hard bruh.

[Buddy 5,686]

2 minutes ago, M Monstre said:

It's a joke in response to this thread

Please...

And was that thread made as a joke? 

[REALITY 80,162]

Just now, Buddy said:

And was that thread made as a joke? 

Girl, stop trying to act this is some deeply serious thing. If you want to talk about serious political issues there are literally hundreds of other topics to discuss that are much more proactive than this.

The initial thread about Buttigieg was obviously not meant as a joke. However, people in that thread (including me) thought it wasn't that  big of a deal. This thread is a joking response to the other thread saying that there are other politicians (namely Sanders because most people who were outraged over the Buttigieg photo were Bernie supporters) do similar things.

 

[PoshLife 17,019]

10 minutes ago, JusKeepBreathin said:

DADT repeal happened in 2011. Bernie didn't convince much people in 1995 either. 

Intentions are cute. Results are more important. 

By the way Pete enlisted in 2007. So he couldn't openly serve until years later when Obama got results. 

So, I'm not a Bernie supporter (voted for Hillary in 2016 and am undecided for 2020) but your post is so misguided I have to comment.

First, and I recognize this isn't very important, but Congress passed DADT repeal in 2010, not 2011.

More importantly, yes I agree that results are what's most important but you should not minimize the fact that Sanders  was, as a matter of fact, way ahead of most politicians in terms of openly supporting LGBT equality. Even as a Hillary supporter in 2016 I had to cede that to him.

Additionally, intentions are more than just cute. In America's system of governance, it is extremely difficult for one elected official to ram something through the legislative process, particularly in the Senate - so absent results that are often simply out of your control, the fact that you tried DOES matter. Would you rather have someone who tried, or someone who  didn't?

Finally, it wasn't President Obama who got results - at least, not alone. He isn't the one who successfully got several Republican senators to vote for a standalone repeal of DADT; you could frankly credit Joe Lieberman for getting folks like Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski to vote for it (I remember watching him talk to them on the Senate floor), but really it was the groundswell of support that came from thousands upon thousands of constituents calling their elected officials that got it through. Everyone who participated in that movement - even Lady Gaga for getting her fans to call the capitol switchboard - played a role in getting that passed. And of course, as you know, Bernie Sanders voted for DADT repeal.

I'm not sure why Bernie vs. Buttigieg has become a thing, but it's silly to me. Frankly I don't plan to vote for either of them in the primary, but some of you are bending over backwards to make one somehow look better than the other. It's very weird that you're trying to make the argument that Bernie has supported the LGBT community for DECADES but... well I'm not even sure what your but is.

[Morphine Prince 109,655]

I personally still don't like pictures like this! You tried it though! And apparently it was a campaign stop, probably took a picture with the approval of supporters. 

Meanwhile Pete was flexin' for the Gram! Oops! 

[derpmonster 22,412]

22 minutes ago, JusKeepBreathin said:

DADT repeal happened in 2011. Bernie didn't convince much people in 1995 either. 

Intentions are cute. Results are more important. 

By the way Pete enlisted in 2007. So he couldn't openly serve until years later when Obama got results. 

Sis you wanna talk about Obama's results? He's responsible for the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent civilians including children in the Middle East who were attending a wedding.

[HorusRa2 5,005]

2 hours ago, JusKeepBreathin said:

Much worse then. Using an African American Memorial in a calculated move for cheap votes 

Your obsession with Sanders is unhealthy. Go to a clinic sis

[HorusRa2 5,005]

2 hours ago, JusKeepBreathin said:

Much worse then. Using an African American Memorial in a calculated move for cheap votes 

Double post bc internet sucks. 

[Ladey Gaygay 9,321]

y'all im pretty sure this was a joke thread about the pete thing and y'all STILL got angry over it, "HoW dArE hE tAKe a PiCTuRE and ApPreciate aFRicaN AmEricANs'' If you thots dont' stop whining

These types of arguments are also tearing the left apart when we need to unite in order to beat the far right

Spoiler

PS Bernie Bro all the way and also wouldn't mind if zaddy pete wins cause i know TRUMP wont

 

[Musicisfreedom 5,837]

The way y'all act like this is a stan war is... Concerning 

[JusKeepBreathin 19,311]

13 minutes ago, PoshLife said:

So, I'm not a Bernie supporter (voted for Hillary in 2016 and am undecided for 2020) but your post is so misguided I have to comment.

First, and I recognize this isn't very important, but Congress passed DADT repeal in 2010, not 2011.

More importantly, yes I agree that results are what's most important but you should not minimize the fact that Sanders  was, as a matter of fact, way ahead of most politicians in terms of openly supporting LGBT equality. Even as a Hillary supporter in 2016 I had to cede that to him.

Additionally, intentions are more than just cute. In America's system of governance, it is extremely difficult for one elected official to ram something through the legislative process, particularly in the Senate - so absent results that are often simply out of your control, the fact that you tried DOES matter. Would you rather have someone who tried, or someone who  didn't?

Finally, it wasn't President Obama who got results - at least, not alone. He isn't the one who successfully got several Republican senators to vote for a standalone repeal of DADT; you could frankly credit Joe Lieberman for getting folks like Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski to vote for it (I remember watching him talk to them on the Senate floor), but really it was the groundswell of support that came from thousands upon thousands of constituents calling their elected officials that got it through. Everyone who participated in that movement - even Lady Gaga for getting her fans to call the capitol switchboard - played a role in getting that passed. And of course, as you know, Bernie Sanders voted for DADT repeal.

I'm not sure why Bernie vs. Buttigieg has become a thing, but it's silly to me. Frankly I don't plan to vote for either of them in the primary, but some of you are bending over backwards to make one somehow look better than the other. It's very weird that you're trying to make the argument that Bernie has supported the LGBT community for DECADES but... well I'm not even sure what your but is.

The repeal took effect in September 20, 2011.

And yes you are right. I was being facetious in that comment, because the person I was replying to minimized Pete's service in the military a few posts back (not in a joke) so I minimized Bernie's LGBT support as a joke.  

I too think Bernie vs Pete is ridiculous. 

[JusKeepBreathin 19,311]

Oh look the whole gang is here.

[HorusRa2 5,005]

Btw: since it was discussed about the merits of military service with regard to war vs regime change war (there is a difference), let’s just keep in mind that Pete would keep Troops in Syria and elsewhere and has also said that he would consider taking troops into Mexico to fight against drug cartel violence. Clearly, Pete’s idea of military service includes unnecessary use of military force. How many more times does the US need to go into Latin American countries and cause disruption? 

Tulsi on the other hand always uses the words regime change wars. In other words, when the CIA and US government work to stage a coup to overthrow a fairly elected official in order to put in a chosen official who is willing to advance American interests. Tulsi sees this as a waste of taxpayer dollars and as a misuse of military personnel. 

Also: the original picture from Pete is a non-issue and so is this picture with Sanders. Idk why everything has to be a fight related to Sanders. He literally is trying to provide an economic bill of rights for everyone. Blows my mind.