Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is the bottom line for me. It is his consistency throughout his entire career that leads me to trust him. I have a hard time trusting either of the Clintons when I have been watching their track record for a very long time. We really don't know what she will do. We have no reason to trust her sincerity on anything.

If we are meant to judge Sanders on his "whole career," should we also look at his writings for clues as to his feminist bona fides?

"A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy. A woman on her knees, a woman tied up, a woman abused.

"A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously."

I think it's unfair to Sanders to quote the incendiary parts of this piece without noting that Sanders is really calling for something more positive. Read in fair context, it seems clear the incendiary parts are meant to grab attention and reflect a reality that Sanders is suggesting we try to shed. Yes, it's bad, melodramatic 1970s writing, but it's not intended to denigrate women.

I know some Sanders supporters will lift quotes out of context to unfairly attack Clinton. So it might feel justified to cite this piece in retaliation. But I think we Clinton supporters should stick to fair discussions of the issues. I believe Clinton prevails over Sanders on a fair discussion of the issues, so let's keep it there.

I hope Sanders supporters will hold themselves to the same standard of conduct.

- Syd (Clinton supporter)

Anonymous wrote:

This is the bottom line for me. It is his consistency throughout his entire career that leads me to trust him. I have a hard time trusting either of the Clintons when I have been watching their track record for a very long time. We really don't know what she will do. We have no reason to trust her sincerity on anything.

If we are meant to judge Sanders on his "whole career," should we also look at his writings for clues as to his feminist bona fides?

"A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy. A woman on her knees, a woman tied up, a woman abused.

"A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh come on... Not that again. Please show some maturity. That article has been beaten to death and has no bearing on anything.

Oh come on yourself. On a thread in which OP claimed that Bernie is the real feminist, seems pretty relevant to me.

...plus it was in direct response to someone who said the great thi

ng about Bernie was how consistent he was on feminist issues. In that case, bringing up his previous writings seems very appropriate.

Should have learned by now,that op can't handle criticism of BS. Her rules are that she gets to attack Clinton and she ignores all rebuttals and makes the same criticisms Overland over for dozens of pages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh come on... Not that again. Please show some maturity. That article has been beaten to death and has no bearing on anything.

Oh come on yourself. On a thread in which OP claimed that Bernie is the real feminist, seems pretty relevant to me.

...plus it was in direct response to someone who said the great thi

ng about Bernie was how consistent he was on feminist issues. In that case, bringing up his previous writings seems very appropriate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh come on... Not that again. Please show some maturity. That article has been beaten to death and has no bearing on anything.

Oh come on yourself. On a thread in which OP claimed that Bernie is the real feminist, seems pretty relevant to me.

...plus it was in direct response to someone who said the great thing about Bernie was how consistent he was on feminist issues. In that case, bringing up his previous writings seems very appropriate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh come on... Not that again. Please show some maturity. That article has been beaten to death and has no bearing on anything.

Oh come on yourself. On a thread in which OP claimed that Bernie is the real feminist, seems pretty relevant to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh come on... Not that again. Please show some maturity. That article has been beaten to death and has no bearing on anything.

Oh come on yourself. On a thread in which OP claimed that Bernie is the real feminist, seems pretty relevant to me.

Anonymous wrote:Oh come on... Not that again. Please show some maturity. That article has been beaten to death and has no bearing on anything.

This is the bottom line for me. It is his consistency throughout his entire career that leads me to trust him. I have a hard time trusting either of the Clintons when I have been watching their track record for a very long time. We really don't know what she will do. We have no reason to trust her sincerity on anything.

I'm a Sanders supporter and actually think this is a reasonable argument. I think the divergence happens with what people believe Clinton wants versus what Sanders wants, and what's compromise versus sacrifice.

To me, the ability to get things done is pretty much a toss up between the two. Much of it depends on the make up of the Congress they're working with and the political capital they get with a won election. These days, that's not much. I just have more trust in what Sanders wants.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
He doesn't PLAN to do it. He PLANS to make college free. He has a plan for that, including who and how much he will tax them. He does not have a plan to create better access to k-12 education. Making college free is putting the cart before the horse.

And I've said nothing about feminism. But BS is not going to help women. He will help middle class white men. Much like Trump will help lower SES white men.

Okay, I see that facts have no impact on you so I won't discuss this any further.

NP. So what is his plan for K-12.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
He doesn't PLAN to do it. He PLANS to make college free. He has a plan for that, including who and how much he will tax them. He does not have a plan to create better access to k-12 education. Making college free is putting the cart before the horse.

And I've said nothing about feminism. But BS is not going to help women. He will help middle class white men. Much like Trump will help lower SES white men.

Okay, I see that facts have no impact on you so I won't discuss this any further.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm honestly baffled by your first statement. Publicly-funded higher education is a false premise? In what way?

Sure, there are approaches that would diminish its value, but I'm thinking in terms that maximize return on investment. Only qualified, high performing students are accepted into programs, some schools are more competitive than others, and there's a "pay back" component, i.e, recipients are required to work in civil service in some way - like the National Health Service Corps.

There are always myriad reasons NOT to do something big like health reform, social security, civil rights bills - but the benefits to figuring out how to do them are always so much greater. I don't see how higher education is different. Or impossible.

Read past PP's baffling-to-you first statement. She answers everything you ask.

I'm the person who said its a false premise. The premise that Sanders is campaigning for it on is that it will reduce the inequality gap. That is the false premise. Free public colleges will not reduce the inequality gap, and in fact stand to increase the gap. If we make college free before we address the inequalities in k-12 education, and the problem families face in affording high quality childcare, we're not fixing the root causes of the gap, and we're making it worse.

Where are you getting the idea that Sanders is not going to address k-12 and childcare? He has made is very clear that education on all levels are top priority. I posted links earlier in this thread. I see no problem with free public college but it is also not his main platform as someone keeps stating.

The links that were posted about his platform on education are based on legislation that was never even voted on. He has not said anything about how he will raise money to improve access to quality education k-12, in addition to the billions upon billions required to fund free public college. He has no concrete plans to make high quality childcare, primary and secondary education available to every single child in this country.

What are you talking about? He talks about this constantly. His plan is to raise taxes for billionaires and corporations in order to pay for these things. How can you have missed this? Whether or not you believe that is feasible is another question but he talks about this all of the time. i posted a link to his speech talking about childcare. I quoted him on education and posted a link from ontheissues.org which talks about his entire history as a politician. You do not get to make up the facts as you go along. You might not think it will work but saying he has no plan is just false.

He can talk about it all he wants. He definitely believes in it (according to the ontheissues thing that was posted, unless I missed one), but he doesn't have a plan. He plans to tax Wall Street and billionaires to pay for free public college. And what is the proportion of students in public colleges vs private? I don't know it, but making free college available to everyone is impossible without increasing the number of public colleges by a huge number. I have watched most of the debates, and have only heard him say he supports education, and oh by the way - FREE PUBLIC COLLEGE!!! Believing that everyone should have access is different than having a concrete and viable plan to actually do something about it.

Not to mention - k-12 education reform should come before making college free!

So the real issue is not that you don't think he plans to put more money into k-12 and create a comprehensive childcare plan. The problem is that you don't believe he will actually do it and that is a different ball of wax. My main reason for saying he is the better feminist is that I do believe him, based on his history, and I do not believe Clinton, based on hers. I can remember getting all excited during Bill Clinton's debates when he talked about a childcare plan and then, of course, nothing happened. We saw, instead, his welfare reform which was terribly damaging to poor women and children. And we saw Hillary fighting hard to put that plan into effect. So it's pretty hard for me to believe she is going to be any different now.

He doesn't PLAN to do it. He PLANS to make college free. He has a plan for that, including who and how much he will tax them. He does not have a plan to create better access to k-12 education. Making college free is putting the cart before the horse.

And I've said nothing about feminism. But BS is not going to help women. He will help middle class white men. Much like Trump will help lower SES white men.