Bernie Sanders coming to Detroit to deliver opening-night speech at Women's Convention

[Hassin Bin Sober]

Bernie Sanders coming to Detroit to deliver opening-night speech at Women's Convention

http://www.freep.com/story/news/2017/10/12/bernie-sanders-speech-womens-convention/756532001/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

The Women's Convention will feel the Bern later this month, when Bernie Sanders visits Detroit to address more than 3,000 women and progressive activists as they get ready for the 2018 midterm elections.

The senator from Vermont, an independent who challenged Hillary Clinton for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, is to address the crowd the evening of Oct. 27, on the first day of a three-day convention organized by the Women's March.

“I’m honored to join the women at the front lines of our struggle for economic, social, racial and environmental justice. In January, millions of women came out in an extraordinary and unprecedented display of power and resistance," Sanders said in reference to the Women's March on Washington and sister protests in cities around the world on the first day of President Donald Trump's administration. "Now more than ever, we must support the leadership of women across the country and fight together to advance our progressive agenda."

...


He was the right choice to be a headliner for the first national Women's Convention in 40 years, said Tamika Mallory, co-founder of Women's March, because Sanders knows how to mobilize a new generation of activists.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

1. And many, many women are unhappy about it.

There's a lot of tone-deafness around several decisions made about this convention, which is too bad.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

5. Not true.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

6. What's not true, the fact that many women are unhappy about it, or that naming the convention after

an iconic quote from a woman of color (who, granted, is a featured speaker) and then having an old white man keynote the convention isn't tone deaf? Representation matters, and conferences like this are no exception.

[snooper2]

21. Is his wife going to be there

So he can push her off to their side again?

[pnwmom]

67. How would you know?

I think a lot of women agree with this woman:

Link to tweet

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.democraticunderground.com%2F%3Fcom%3Dview_post%26forum%3D1002%26pid%3D9702475

[Hassin Bin Sober]

68. Bernie is the most popular politician on the planet.

I'm not really interested in the opinion of random people on twitter.

[pnwmom]

71. Yeah, right. This is a woman's convention, not a high school prom.

And there isn't a single poll that says Bernie's the most popular politician on the planet. There isn't even one that says he's the most popular politician in the US, despite the false headlines. There was a poll that said he was the most popular out of 5 named Democrats and 4 named Democrats and Bernie. Big deal.

[samnsara]

154. boy o boy o boy do i agree with you....

[TexasTowelie]

77. LOL!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

78. You can say that again... excellent choice!!

[George II]

131. No he isn't.

[samnsara]

153. well not so sure about that claim...

[Trumpocalypse]

180. That sounds so much like Trump

absorbed with poll numbers and personal popularity.

[George II]

74. https://www.democraticunderground.com/10141888323

[Ninsianna]

112. I guess you've not seen or heard from any women who've been all over

FB, Twitter etc. proving you wrong.

I'd suggest you do your homework, that google for instance and learn what the truth is and why Tamika and those who keep trying to silence women with lies, are failing miserably to defend their actions.

Women are not happy. They're calling out the fraud committed by these organizers, and they're not comporting themselves well on twitter, or on facebook where angry women are demanding refunds or planning to show just how pissed off they are in person since travel arrangements have been made.

This is going over well at all, and lying about it isn't helping matters.

[leftofcool]

132. It is absolutely true. They have received thousands of letters against this.

[heaven05]

138. VERY TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JCanete]

45. many many women is probably accurate. How many in a ballpark number would you venture a guess are

though? Sanders has shown to be more popular, not less, with people of color and women, than with white males, and his favorables are anything but in the gutter, so I'd take a guess that there are many, many...many, women who are perfectly happy with this.

[leftofcool]

133. They got over a million letters against it.

There is also a petition with about 100K signatures on it.

[JCanete]

186. wait, is he delivering the opening speech, or just a speech on opening night? if the latter, what

the fuck is people's issue with this? That's pretty silly. There are only two male speakers at the convention total, and there should be allies of women here. Running against Clinton does not make somebody an enemy to women and Sanders' record in congress and the Senate is a solid one on matters pertaining to women's rights and equality. He hedges less on the issue of abortion than Clinton does, just as an example.

You want to hang his endorsement of a couple people who are less than progressive on this issue than himself over him, then you have to wrap that around the neck of the democratic party at large anyway.

If the former, I do get the issue, and they should probably have done things differently.

[musette_sf]

48. + 1

[Maven]

2. And many women are outraged about it. nt

[musette_sf]

49. + 1

[leftynyc]

3. Beyond STUPID

Most of the women I know would be outraged about this. Not the first time the women's march people were tone deaf and fucked up.

[JCanete]

46. Sounds like you have a tight circle. From previous polling, it looks like he's pretty popular among

women. And he has a pretty damn good track record on women's issues throughout his history in congress and the Senate. So is it really stupid, or just something that pisses you and some people you know off?

[leftynyc]

52. Has nothing to do with Bernie

(although I'm not a huge fan). He shouldn't be the headliner. It should be someone like Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton. Why is it ANY man? And my other problems with the organization is one of the founders who is a twit who said I can't be a Zionist and a feminist. I'm not even going to argue that point - it's imbecilic.

[JCanete]

55. that's fair. nt

[George II]

75. The organizers are also those who deliberately shunned Clinton at their Women's March in January.

[leftynyc]

117. Yup

I'm not a fan of this group for very good reasons.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

181. Kamela was invited but is too busy fundraising that weekend.

Warren was invited but declined and so did Clinton. So did Gillibrand

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/12/16465012/womens-march-bernie-sanders


Though Sanders will speak the first night, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) will deliver the convention’s keynote address. A spokesperson for Sanders said that the Vermont senator was invited by the Women’s March, and accepted the invitation to honor “the women at the front lines of our struggle for economic, social, racial and environmental justice.” And on Twitter, Tamika D. Mallory of the Women’s March noted that there are only two men speaking of 60 and that Waters, not Sanders, is the headliner

......

They said that several prominent female Democrats — including Clinton, as well as Sens. Kamala Harris (CA), Elizabeth Warren (MA) and Kirsten Gillibrand (NY) — had been unable to attend. (Staffers for Harris and Warren confirmed they were invited to participate at the event.)

[leftynyc]

184. Then they're smarter than I thought

That group made it clear what they were all about when they didn't invite Hillary to speak during the march after inauguration day. To hell with them.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

185. Lol. I figured as much. is that what we are going with now?

[leftynyc]

190. Now? I haven't had any

use for them since they didn't invite Hillary to the march in January and since one of their pathetic leaders said I couldn't be a Zionist and a feminist. Fuck them.

[Orsino]

4. This is going to enrage some.

Hope he does well.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

79. Oh, he will... Bernie always does!

[brush]

86. He probably needs to turn down the headliner role. He's at the center of too much divisiveness...

as it is.

Can't he or anyone around him see that this is already causing friction?

He needs to save the organizers who invited him from themselves.

Not smart for it to be a man when there are so many brilliant women to choose from.

[JCanete]

47. when did he ever denounce planned parenthood? That never happened. Saying it is connected to the

establishment is not a denouncement. Can you find something even derogatory he's ever said about it?

[emulatorloo]

87. Calling a beleaguered Women's Health Organization "establishment" was tone-deaf and petty

And I am a Sanders primary supporter. The Republicans are the establishment that's been trying to destroy Planned Parenthood for years. Needlessly smearing them that way simply because he was butthurt is disturbing.

That being said we know his heart is in the right place, but as a human he makes mistakes. That was a huge one and not everyone is going to give him a free pass

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

99. I am unaware of anything even remotely close.

[bettyellen]

107. You claim he called them "establishment" in a good way? LOL that's rich.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

145. LOL, I said no such thing. You must have me confused w/ someone else... apology accepted.

Or, you just using the old, tried and true "straw man" argument to put words in my mouth?

LOL, now that's rich!!

[bettyellen]

198. Well then he did but you just never heard of it? Hard to believe, and no apology was offered....

Seems like your mind is playing tricks on you and you hear what you'd like to- but not what you'd prefer not to face.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

211. LOL!! Your mind reading skills are amazing!!

[R B Garr]

65. Good reminder. Planned Parenthood's endorsement of Hillary revealed how shallow

and petty the "Establishment" smears were.

[DesertRat]

8. Many women are speaking out against this decision.

Joy Reid on twitter "Hell, even the womens march movement is centering a man who dismisses women’s control of our own bodies as secondary."

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Just a couple of the many comments I've seen since the announcement.

[sheshe2]

9. Thank you Joy!

[Hassin Bin Sober]

20. Is that the same Joy Reid who called Hillary insane and the white people's candidate in 2008?

In 2008 she called Hillary "the white people's Al Sharpton" and accused Hillary of being insane and having a "psychotic break"

Excuse me if I don't care much for Reid's rather fungible opinions.

We all talk about the 25 year campaign to smear HRC. People like Reid are the problem. We can have disagreements about policy and positions without calling people psychotic or racist.

[irisblue]

24. HSB, have any of your opinions changed over the years?

Long grudge to hold there.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

29. Sorry I have a long memory.

And it's not about a grudge. It's about pointing to hypocrisy and pointing out some of the root of Hillary's image problem.

People like Reid dragged Hillary's name through the mud for years and we wonder why she had a 56% unfavorable rating.

I like Hillary just fine. I supported her in 2008 and voted for her in the general 2016.

I pretty much stopped watching anything to do with Keith Obermann after his unhinged rant in 2008 accusing Hillary of trying to get Obama assassinated. I can't look at the guy with a straight face anymore

[Demsrule86]

39. I don't care about 2016. What I do care about is Sen Sander's views on identity politcs

as demonstrated by endorsing Heath Mello. He is not an appropriate choice, and I won't attend.

[musette_sf]

50. + 1

[Ninsianna]

116. This!

[sheshe2]

43. First, this is 2017 not 2008.

I wasn't on this board at that time, though I know that in the political world that the primary of 2008 was heated. At that time I was just concentrating on my candidate, Barack Obama and did not watch all the drama. Plus if you remember, Hillary and Obama built a very strong relationship after that 2008 primary, one that was built on mutual respect and admiration...you see? They let bygones be bygones and forged a strong friendship. People change, minds change, people grow and that is a wonderful thing, something said in the heat of the moment should not be nurtured for nine years...that sort of thing festers. Joy changed too, she has evolved since 2008 and as I said change for the better is a good thing. If others can let it go, you should too.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

82. Yup, THAT Joy Reid.

[Ninsianna]

113. It's weird how obsessed people are with 2008, when in 2017

they're called out for things they're saying that are not true, not honest and rather a fraud.

The Tamika you quote in your article is the same one on twitter claiming that Bernie's not a headliner right?

Or would that be Linda Sansour, Winnie Wong, Nomiki Konst or Nina Turner, all of whom advocated for Jill Stein?

Or are "fungible opinions" in a matter of months, that encouraged people to vote for Trump, in numbers that elected him?

Excuse me if we address the problem of people like the women listed, who don't care or know much about policy or position and who seem to enjoy attacking women, particularly those of color, and do so volubly and with right wing lies, stated verbatim on Fox.

Those fungible folks aren't a problem, cause they also accused Hillary of the same things, and go on Fox every day to do so?

I mean, why are some people problematic but others are not? Despite their encouragement of people to vote for Stein in a race as important as this one was, when they knew what was at stake and just did not give a damn?

Let's disagree on policy and positions, it would be great if some people would learn what these are beyond slogans and catch phrases and learn how reality works, but none of these women are interested in that in 2017, just in lying to women, and smacking them down when they object to the things they say and do.

[stevenleser]

126. There are some folks who use whataboutism at every opportunity. nt

[Charlotte Little]

150. Whataboutism has become...

...the lazy person's new debating tactic. Can't win an argument, don't have any real facts, are stating an asinine opinion? That's okay - just "What about..." until you wear your opponent down.

It's as effective as "Nu uh," "Is too!", "Nu uh," "Is too!" "To infinity and back."

Or

"Your mama!"

[stevenleser]

156. Exactly and certain folks seem to use it repeatedly. DUers need to all fire back when it is used

because it is used, exactly as you said, when you cannot address the actual point being discussed and instead you reach for a tactic that is a distraction and derail.

[Ninsianna]

214. I guess when you lack facts, and have no argument but feel the need to spout off

you gotta go with something.

[George II]

127. We could discuss the things that Sanders has said over the years, but we know what would happen.

[stevenleser]

130. That person would object to whataboutisms being used in those circumstances

Only when they want to distract from certain circumstances are they allowed to be used.

[stevenleser]

128. Whataboutisms do not answer the point, they distract. nt

[George II]

140. I don't recall Joy Reid saying anything like that. Please point us to it if she did. Thanks.

[sheshe2]

141. Even if that is true, which I have seen no evidence of...

what does something she 'said' about Clinton in 2008 have to do with Joy's support of women and the women's movement and...

Joy Reid
✔
@JoyAnnReid
Replying to @JoyAnnReid

...whose culture forced women into impossible situations daily and whose chief cultural opponent: Hollywood, ALSO harbored serial harassers.

Why do you post something like that and bring up Clinton in a statement from Joy about the women's movement and us fighting for our very lives by taking back control of our own bodies, control of our very lives. Your OP has nothing to do with Clinton and EVERYTHING to do with women fighting for their civil rights and their very own existence. We women are fighting for our human rights. This is not about politics, it is about us, about women. Please do not take that away from us.

Link to tweet

[George II]

144. The only references I've seen of her "saying" that are on a TYT video and an obscure blog....

...nowhere can I find the actual statements that Joy Reid may or may not have said.

But even if she did, which is doubtful, that was nine years ago in a heated campaign. People say some odd things in campaigns that are generally retracted or forgotten after the campaign is over.

Unfortunately we can't point out some of the things Sanders has said over the years, but they're out there.

[sheshe2]

147. Those are the only mentions I found as well, George.

So much distraction when the focus should be on women, we are the ones fighting for our lives. This and only this should be the focus. That said I am happy to hear men speaking up and will gladly listen to any ideas to help us move our rights, our human rights forward. We won't go back.

[heaven05]

142. Joy Reid was/is

not a perfect human being...as are others who made it possible for votes to be taken away from HRC...that "insane" comment was 2008, we are talking about the disaster caused by vote siphoners in 2016....along with the russians....and many suspect people who did not have the american people as priority...

[NurseJackie]

18. Wow! That last one... pretty bad. (Thanks for sharing.)

[Me.]

32. I Wonder If He'll Read

His essays on female sexuality?

[boston bean]

10. I don't know about most women, but I just lovenhaving a guy who thinks womens issues are divisive

Identity politics speak for me regarding my rights.

The fact he would even accept this shows me how tone deaf he is.

[DesertRat]

11. The Women's Convention uses"Reclaiming My Time" as a tag line but doesn't have Maxine as the opener.

I don't get it.

[sheshe2]

13. I do not know what they were thinking. eom

[DesertRat]

14. I have a good guess

I think it's all about 2020.

[emulatorloo]

22. Deeper one digs the more it looks like an Our Revolution event

Nina, Nomiki, and Bernie. "Bernie keynoted a Women's March Convention" will be 2020's version of "Bernie marched w MLK" I think.

[DesertRat]

25. Spot on. nt

[Demsrule86]

38. I don't care...this ruins the convention and causes division.

A noted woman speaker should have gone...like Kamela Harris.

[JCanete]

51. Why is it divisive? Because he's male and the march should have a female speaker or something else?

If something else, how is it not divisive to cut certain voices who represent a whole bunch of democrats and liberal independents out of these unifying events? You don't think if that kind of trend were persistent people wouldn't take notice? How then, would that behavior not be alienating, but inviting Sanders in to support the same causes would be? You'll have to explain this one to me too.

[Demsrule86]

66. Yes, a woman's convention should have a woman head line speaker...like Maxine Waters.

or Kamala Harris and Sen. Sander's has said things about planned parenthood and 'identity politics' which should have made the leaders stop and thing about this...but didn't. I won't attend. It feels wrong. This is just another event where women are not allowed to be the most important speakers...very disappointing. I don't live to far from Detroit and had planned to go.

[Demsrule86]

115. Yes because he is male and has made comments about Planned parenthood and

what he calls identity politics, and I call woman's rights. Is it to much to ask for a woman keynote speaker rather than a man at a woman's conference? I have been mansplained for years...and I am sick of it. I really am angry about this and will not attend.

[JCanete]

192. First, it looks like Maxine Waters is delivering the keynote, not Sanders. Second, I understand his

comments about identity politics being a problem when it is in lieu of campaigning on policy. I would love to sit down with somebody who thinks Clinton actually campaigned on policy and watch her speaking engagements with them just to see how we could have seen entirely different things. Her and her surrogates campaigned hard on the fact that she was a woman, as if that in itself meant she would be the best choice for women. The specifics were harder to come by in her stumping.

Yes, I know, she had a website people could go to that outlined her policies. When speaking she managed expectations to the point where it was hard to know what she was going to actually fight for. Now that at least is what I saw. I suspect you experienced something entirely differently. I'm just baffled as to how.

As to Planned Parenthood, yeah, he said Planned Parenthood was part of the establishment. And?....Of course it is constantly under threat by the GOP. That doesn't change the fact that it has put its energy into courting the democratic leadership in power(because of course that makes perfect sense...that's an entirely sensible thing for it to have done) but that investment in democratic leadership means they would be crazy not to back the biggest player on the democratic side. I'm not saying calculations aside, that they would have otherwise abstained, but not endorsing the frontrunner only to have that person win would not necessarily ingratiate them to that person. No matter how noble that person is, that's just risky politics. So yes, Planned Parenthood is intricately entwined with establishment Democratic Politics, and while I grant that his answer was not eloquent enough to not have it come back to bite him, you have to accept that a question about Planned Parenthood's endorsement was one of those intended knockout questions, that really have no good response. The implication is that one of the most famously known organizations that is on the front lines of women's reproductive rights and health has endorsed Clinton..."I guess they must just think she's the better on these issues huh?" That's the insinuation, and the reality, as I've already touched on, is just a wee bit more complicated.

[Demsrule86]

193. He is delivering the opening night's speech...totally pissed about this.

He should not be doing that.

http://www.freep.com/story/news/2017/10/12/bernie-sanders-speech-womens-convention/756532001/

The above is Detroit free press not free republic by the way.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

177. Kamela Harris was invited but she is busy that weekend. She is fundraising.

[tammywammy]

183. Link?

[Hassin Bin Sober]

187. There's lots of info out there. Like how Maxine Waters is the keynote.

A bunch of prominent politicians couldn't bothered to attend .

Sixty speakers and only 2 men.

The organizers are Women of Color and they are insulted by people diminishing their ability to organize an event. They don't like being accused of turning over leadership to men.

People like Joy Reid should be ashamed of themselves. Spreading bullshit. But she accused Hillary of being "psychotic" and a racist in 2008 so I take her opinion with a grain of salt.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/12/16465012/womens-march-bernie-sanders

In a statement to Vox, organizers with the Women’s March defended the decision to give Sanders the opening-night slot. They said that several prominent female Democrats — including Clinton, as well as Sens. Kamala Harris (CA), Elizabeth Warren (MA) and Kirsten Gillibrand (NY) — had been unable to attend. (Staffers for Harris and Warren confirmed they were invited to participate at the event.)

[Demsrule86]

194. That is meaningless to me...plenty of other good women. He called planned parenthood establishment

and has spoken against identity policies IE woman's rights...he is the wrong man for the job, and it should be a woman making the opening speech at a woman's convention anyway...may be his group our revolution involved another poster said...don't know. But I will not attend.

[LisaM]

62. Yeah, I just noticed that, too.

I also notice that as of October 4, he was not listed as a speaker.

http://www.freep.com/story/news/2017/10/04/amber-tamblyn-womens-convention-detroit-march/731513001/

[EffieBlack]

106. Exactly that!

[Demsrule86]

40. If he does this, we will lose. I hope he understands he cannot win a primary and will only hurt our

efforts to unseat Republicans.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

175. No, they only have her as the keynote speaker.

[DesertRat]

191. The opening speech is a big deal

Giving that designation to Sanders strikes a bad chord with many women. I don’t know why none of the many women on the schedule weren't given the honor of opening the convention.
Although she's very busy at the moment, San Juan's Mayor Carmen Cruz might have been a better choice.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

195. Probably because he's the most beloved politician on the planet.

Also he's probably the highest profile besides Maxine who is the keynote.

He's one 60 speakers. No reason to have a grand mal conniption over it.

[LisaM]

12. Exactly. He should have thanked them for the offer....

and then suggested some appropriate women speakers.

This is like when tech conventions have panels on women in tech, and they comprise only men.

[DesertRat]

15. The Onion summed it up well

"Man Finally Put In Charge Of Struggling Feminist Movement"

http://www.theonion.com/article/man-finally-put-in-charge-of-struggling-feminist-m-2338

[boston bean]

16. Sort out of like all those guys writing legislation regarding womens health.

[Not Ruth]

30. Not his fault that he is loved or that he was invited

[LisaM]

33. Well, the organizer, or one of them, seems to be the same woman who left Hillary off

the list of women to be honored at the women's march, which was absolutely enraging to many of us at the time.

This is divisive stuff. Don't blame people for being upset. Bernie should disavow this type of behavior. And, IMO, which you are free to disagree with, he should have respectfully declined the invitation.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

36. Oh please.

If he declined the invitation the usual same would be screaming bloody murder "Bernie hates teh women!1!1!1!. Who does he think hunk he is declining?!?!?!?!"

[LisaM]

42. I don't think you understand how upsetting this is to many of us.

And I don't think I'm going to convince you that it's so, so I am going to end this back and forth right now.

[leftynyc]

56. He COULD have done it with grace

That he was flattered by the offer but really thinks the focus should be on the MANY capable, wonderful women and then name some.

[Starry Messenger]

93. Actually, I would finally give his sense of judgement some credit.

Too bad, can't now.

[Demsrule86]

37. Judging from the response, he is not loved by everyone. I have respect for Sen. Sanders but I do not

love him...and he is wrong on identity politics.

[Ninsianna]

110. Given the backlash and the upset, it's silly to pretend he's "loved"

and he was indeed invited, by his usual pet activists who keep turning a deaf ear to women who keep telling them the exact opposite.

Invite him to participate, but to headline and then to lie about it when caught doing so?

These guys are doing lots of damage, and making women angry isn't a good idea.

[JCanete]

207. who are running the women's convention, men? Was it guys who booked Sanders? Serious

question.

Also, Is he actually headlining? Where did you find that info? All I've seen is that he's speaking on the opening day, and that it is not him, but Maxine Waters who is delivering the keynote.

[Ninsianna]

215. It's a bunch of people who seem to be deliberately deaf to what women

are actually telling them every time they make this "mistake".

According to Tamika, he's headlining. And women are also deeply deluded and bitter about political losses, serious question, what decade must one live in to assume that "guys" is gendered?

Accoding to Tamika also, he's not, despite her statement to the Free Press stating specifically that's he's the headliner.

Did you miss the OP where they quote her directly? Keynote and "headliner" are very different things, and they have a plethora of lame deflections about how they're not all about Bernie. Apparently it's all about the opening act, which they've spent no time gushing over.

[JCanete]

222. I didn't assume it, which is why I asked the question. Given that you were saying these guys

were ignoring women it comes across as suggesting that they themselves aren't women with their own opinions on these matters. I'd be surprised if they were ignoring themselves. So "ignoring certain women--those women most closely aligned to my own perspective" would then be a far more plausible statement.

Sanders isn't the headliner. Maxine Waters is. I'm still confused as fuck as to what the problem is here, assuming of course, its not just a lot of bad blood lingering from the primaries and is actually something legitimate that I'm just not following. If the former, then I guess I'm not confused about it at all and people will be haters and blame others for disunity even while they continue to sew it themselves.

[Ninsianna]

231. I know that nit picking definitions seems to be quite popular here, but

Maxine Waters is the keynote address, the headliner is Bernie. You have not seen the volley of abuse and the attacks and the nastiness coming from the national organizers, the invited speakers and the volley of hate in those comments. Racism abounds, attacking women, for expressing that Bernie was not a good choice here, in the role they chose for him and the foul up in the way they handled the announcements, their attitude and the sheer amount of uncalled for and unprofessional behavior.

The problem is that they're attacking people, they just assume that anyone looking askance at the notion of including a man, a very divisive man as the headliner, and he is the headliner, that's what they call the speaker in the prime spot on the opening day, and going all in the offensive attacks, the name calling, the denigration of women, white women, women of color, Hillary supporters, people who supported Bernie, but thought this was a bad idea, people who supported Bernie, didn't mind him speaking but objected to what was being said to other women etc.

They F*ed up really badly here and they're too arrogant to accept that. Also, while they were happily deleted comments they didn't like earlier, the ones where people are showing their truest and nastiest colors are left up.

It's just toxic, and it really didn't have to be, but these women failed miserably at handling this. They also screwed over the people on the ground who've been working their rears off for weeks and will be doing so til this is over.

The haters here are the ones gleeful at their perceived victory who don't even realize how they are fouling things for everyone The usual suspects for the disunity are indeed sowing their usual toxic crap all over twitter, the pages of the organization itself shows who they're playing to and it's harming everyone, even the ones who were on their "side" and who agreed with them, until they saw the level of toxic spew that side was generating and it's only one side.

Lots of people on all sides who are angry and expressing it, but the toxicity is concentrated among a few, who are disgusting everyone.

[JCanete]

206. totally like that! except that among a whole bunch of speakers, he and one other person are the only

men...so maybe not totally like that....huh...maybe not even close to that.

[Demsrule86]

35. I can't believe they picked Sen. Sanders who has spoken against identity issues.

IE women's issues. We are not far from Detroit, but I won't be going now.

[grantcart]

221. Well the irony of this thread is a guy 'mansplaining' about why they need a guy 'mansplaining'

on the first night to make sure the 'gals' get their little meeting off on the right start.

[Weekend Warrior]

17. This has to be satire.

Your link doesn't work.

Do you think he will stay for the convention to listen and learn or will he just mansplain and go?

Too bad this is going to take the conversation away from many of the great speakers they have lined up.

Go Maxine!!!!!

[JHan]

19. I would have loved to see Maxine as the opening speaker.. that would have been a real crowd puller.

I mean look at this :

And this clip, (Facebook link)

https://www.facebook.com/NowThisPolitics/videos/1713663991998417/?hc_ref=ARSmB6EvPnZF1BSxpPbKnzMZP7sPdcXpPZH5aoCVLAZu1ZwSWeE144GTu_JJgxRSuws&pnref=story

Unfortunately, it's not satire, and I also totally expected the pushback against the organizers (Ahem Sarsour and OR) with this decision.

[emulatorloo]

26. Yep, organizer's announcement of this getting lots of pushback on twitter.

Deservedly so. If nothing else, it was tone deaf to have Maxine take a backseat to a guy who votes correctly but seems to not have women's rights as a big priority.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

204. Maxine is the keynote speaker.

And Warren, Clinton, Harris and Gillibrand were invited but were too busy to attend.

All this outrage over nothing.

[PoliticAverse]

59. She's one of the speakers at the convention. n/t

[JHan]

61. Yes, I'm aware of that.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

80. Yes, Maxine never fails to disappoint... love her to death!!

But, Bernie's not a bad choice.

[bettyellen]

200. I'm sure you meant that insult, too.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

212. Love 'em both... how is that an insult?!

Your mind reading skills need improving.

[bettyellen]

219. "Never fails to disappoint" means always disappointing. LOL.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

220. Sorry, but it's an idiom expression...

Literally, I see your point bettyellen, but, when I say I love Maxine - actually, one of my faves in Congress - I think my meaning is clear, so you should give me the benefit of the doubt.

But, if you don't, I could care less!! (Note: that was a joke, employing another popularly misused idiom... literally, I COULD care less... so I guess I really DO care!)

Seriously though, I'm glad you got a good laugh... I did too! It IS kinda funny!

[bettyellen]

225. It is an idiom but it means you're disappointed. Leave out the fails next time if you mean to praise

Words do have meanings, if you got it wrong that's okay too. But yeah- it's a negative statement .

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

226. Thanx for splainin... I'll try to be more grammatically correct next time, so as not to offend you.

[bettyellen]

227. It's about saying offensive things about Maxine, not about my feelings at all.

I'd think you'd like to express yourself more clearly, no? It's not grammar- it's about actually meaning what you say.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

228. You really should listen to YOURself... have you ever made a mistake in your life?

You can stop lecturing now... Yes, sayin how much I LOVE Maxine is SOOO offensive... I get it!! Geez!!

[bettyellen]

229. You didn't say that. You said she never fails to (that means "always")

Disappoint. It seems like you are clinging to some kind of story that what you said means the opposite. It does not.

Now more than ever, words mean something. It's fine if you made a mistake and didn't understand the phrase.

But you didn't have to respond immediately with insults. You should be grateful to not make that mistake again, for fucks sake. Get over yourself. Next time you screw up I won't be kind enough to help you out.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

232. bettyellen, I can only hope that, one day, I'll be as perfect as you...

that is my new goal in life. Thank you ... thank you for castigating me over and over and over again and alerting me to my horrendous mistake in using a common idiom that twisted my intended meaning... your perfection is a model for ALL of us to live up to!!

I am truly grateful for the grammar lesson and I promise, I will review all future posts no less than three times, so they meet with the lofty standards you have set.

[bettyellen]

234. Not sure why you've been so rude about it- but at least your not claiming that statement meant

Anything positive. So that's good. I'm sorry about your delusions of my perfection, I can't help you anymore. Ain't nobody got time for that thankless job.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

235. What's rude is your steadfast refusal to take someone at his word that, indeed, my prior statement

was, in fact, MEANT to be positive, as I've stated NUMEROUS times... even if it didn't come across that way to you, as the self-apponited "grammar police." You refuse to acknowledge this yet AGAIN by your latest comment, as if you're an accurate mind reader... you really need to get over yourself.

Instead of just accepting my honest explanation, you're only further embarrassing yourself by refusing to do so and making the same silly grammatical point over and over, which, ironically, I've ACCEPTED numerous times... now that's rude!

Unlike you, however, I don't attribute any bad intent to your comments... we all have our bad days. But, you know, sometimes, it really is OKAY to concede a point - that maybe my intentions really were good - and move on.

I tried that with you, ADMITTING my honest grammatical mistake, which WAS meant to be positive, over and over again, and even laughed at myself about it. You should try it!

[bettyellen]

236. It's not grammar. It's meaning- words have meaning, but yeah.... whatever.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

237. Yes, but if an idiom can have different meanings, why would you...

continue to ascribe the one to me that's the most negative, which, as I've said all along, is NOT what I intended. (By DEFINITION, an "idiom" is a collective group of words having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words used.)

I know your a perfect grammarian bettyellen who would never misuse the English language - I commend you for that - but, couldn't you find it in your heart to cut someone just a LITTLE slack, who's obviously not as educated and perfect as you, and just take them at their word that they meant no disrespect to Maxine Waters? Is that even remotely possible for you?

Your steadfast refusal to acknowledge that as even a POSSIBILITY, while desperately clinging to this notion that, somehow, you can read people's minds and know what they intended - even after they've explained themselves countless times - is laughable.

At some point, it really IS okay to concede this small point... though I know your pride won't allow you to. So, if it makes you feel any better that you are not only grammatically superior, but also know exactly what is in my heart, let me feed your fragile ego by declaring, three times for emphasis, for all the world to hear: YOU WERE RIGHT!! YOU WERE RIGHT!! YOU WERE RIGHT!! YAYYYY!!!

Having used an idiom that can have two different, indeed opposite meanings, I must secretly hate Maxine Waters, as you surmised, even though I've declared my undying LOVE for her on numerous occasions in this and many other threads. My other declarative statements, in trying to clarify my grammatical "faux pas," were obviously an attempt to cover-up my true intentions, which you so skillfully uncovered through your amazing mind-reading skills.

btw, you got any lottery numbers for me?

[bettyellen]

238. It doesn't have two meanings. Never did. Sorry for your confusion.

And it's got nothing to do with grammar, jeeze. That's ridiculous.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

239. Well bettyellen, YOU definitely never fail to disappoint, that's for damn sure...

as, for the ump-teenth time, due to your extreme pettiness, you can't seem to find it in that immense heart of yours to concede - even the REMOTE possibility - that my intentions MIGHT have been good and that any slight to Maxine Waters you felt, might have been misinterpreted... especially after my repeated explanations to the contrary.

Do you see how small this makes you look? I didn't think so... so, please, go ahead, one more time for old time's sake... feel free to have another whack at it and further embarrass yourself by refusing to concede this tiny point... tell me again the correct meaning of the phraseology I mis-used and what a bad guy I am for insulting Maxine Waters... I forgot.

[bettyellen]

240. I never once said you were a "bad guy" while you insulted me over and over again....

And I explained only once that the phrase would give other people the wrong idea. Sorry that you seem confused that it could be taken either way or that it's about grammar.... I'm just fed up with people's double speak. Words matter to me. Your opinions of me, do not matter to anyone. Get over yourself.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

241. LOL, nice try... but I DO appreciate your candid statement

that you're fed up with people's doublespeak... that's a reasonable position to hold and I, for one, certainly would not describe someone who does that as a "good guy." So, I'll CONCEDE that point to you. You're absolutely right to feel that way... it would bug me too.

So, you were certainly within bounds to raise questions about any bad intent I might have had in using phraseology that you interpreted as "doublespeak" to denigrate Maxine Waters. You "win" that round.

BUT, when I laughed off my own mistake; acknowledged your point that my comment ( a "triple negative" ) could/should have been phrased better and, thus, could be misconstrued; but that it was NOT what I intended to say; and then proceeded to declare my sincere admiration for Maxine, THAT'S when you COULD have acknowledged that I had no bad intent.

The fact that, after this constant back and forth, you continue to stand on your technically correct grammatical analysis and STILL won't acknowledge that clearly says a lot about you. Is it REALLY that hard?!

To simply gloss over that by noting you never said I was a "bad guy" is so obviously disingenuous. To be honest though, I really don't care what you have to say anymore... almost said "I could care less." It's actually kind of AMUSING that for someone who is SO concerned about what words mean - again, RIGHTFULLY so - you CLEARLY know what I'm saying, and your refusal to acknowledge that is transparent.

So, carry on, and keep declaring your "grammatical victory" making you right to question my intentions, regardless of my explanations to the contrary.

[GaryCnf]

27. Let's see

Joy Reid . . . or Tamika Mallory

No contest . . . Tamika is not beholding.

[saidsimplesimon]

28. Thank you Detroit Democrats

As always, thank you Senator Sanders for your support of women.

[LisaM]

34. I'll be in the Detroit area that day.

Guess I'll be pulling out a Hillary button to wear around.

[questionseverything]

73. i wish i could be there

I have both buttons

I love em both


pssst I will share a secret

we are stronger together

[OxQQme]

170. kicking for this ↑ "we are stronger together"

I have a hard time understanding the 'fog of puritanism' here.

"THE BRITISH ARE COMING! THE BRITISH ARE COMING!"

"Don't listen to him. He's riding a brown horse. We only listen to spotted horse riders."

Can we not get beyond that view?
Blow away the fog and truly listen to a person of experience, regardless of their political or gender affiliation?

Here's a thought....Hillary speaks at a male oriented event.
Folks, on this thread, how do you feel about that?

btw..I sport 3 Bernie bumper stickers.....and voted for Hillary in the general as an 'anybody but trump' choice.
Am an (i), but registered (d), as (i)'s have no place in primaries.
(Or, apparently, on this forum, according to many puritan voices.)
How weird is that?

[questionseverything]

202. i supported bernie in the primaries but

when hc became the party nom I worked for her and voted for her

she was invited to speak and declined...at this point I wish she would reconsider because I know Bernie would give her his spot if it could bring peace


the 99 have got to come together or learn to live with the scraps of the 1%

the spotted horse story is so correct...this board is constantly mired down in the last battle when our energy needs to be focused on 2018 (as we work to resist day to day terrors)

[bettyellen]

230. There's a problem many women have w Sanders support of candidates against choice....

And what "male oriented events" are needed or even remotely likely among liberals? Why are you accusing women of purity when others have their "tests" that their willing to set aside others civil rights for? WTF?

[Arazi]

197. Yup, stronger together. This ragefest about Sanders speaking is crazy

[niyad]

31. tone deaf for sure.

[Lucinda]

203. +1

[SaschaHM]

41. So a man is a headliner for the first national Women's Convention in 40 years...

Last edited Thu Oct 12, 2017, 04:55 PM - Edit history (1)

That's incredibly tone deaf and frankly wrong give the amazing women that they already have speaking at the convention. The spotlight should be give to one of them and Bernie should be relegated to another spot. Not surprising though given the organizers snub of HRC while organizing the Women's March.

Edit: Changed the title. He is "a headliner" and the opening night speaker.


He was the right choice to be a headliner for the first national Women's Convention in 40 years, said Tamika Mallory, co-founder of Women's March, because Sanders knows how to mobilize a new generation of activists.

[kcr]

44. This is the explanation:

"People want to hear from the leadership from within our government who can give us some insight about what's happening … so we can know what we need to do to be able organize."

Apparently, we women are just too dumb to do it ourselves!

[JHan]

53. Mallory couldn't be serious with that... Please tell me that ain't real.

There's no woman in government she could have asked instead?

There are no women she could have asked who know how to organize and have a high profile? WTF?!

[kcr]

111. Yep. That's what she said.

But WE'Re being divisive. Isn't that ridiculous?

[leftynyc]

57. WHOEVER gave that

moronic explanation is an imbecile. Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand - how many fucking women do I have to name that are in government before this moron gets the point.

[bettyellen]

108. Wow, what a pantload. How embarrassing is THAT?!?!

They've forgotten all those women who marched didn't do it for their revolution. They'll see soon though.

[PoliticAverse]

58. He's not "the headliner". n/t

[DesertRat]

72. He's not "a woman". nt

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

85. No, but in pushing a legislative agenda promoting progressive values, he speaks for a lot of women

whose voices, otherwise, would not be heard.

[JHan]

94. I know your argument can't be that no one would listen to a woman...

That there are no women who could have headlined or opened the conference who would promote "progressive values" and speak for women whose "voices would not be heard otherwise"

Dear God ....

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

95. Of course not... referring only to Bernie. Why you assume the worst of people?

Dear God...

Don't have to be snarky... just sayin Bernie not a bad choice. Can think of many women who also would've been excellent voices for the progressive movement who could have spoken too.

[JHan]

96. Because you're missing why there's been such pushback..

( and I will refrain from mentioning my own view of Sanders here)

Mallory's explanation for inviting Sanders to open the conference was insulting. It would have been magnificent to have a woman give the opening speech, to open the conference, a woman who stands for liberal values - that's the heart of the criticism and your comments don't reflect you grasp that..

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

98. No excuse for making rude comments... all I'm sayin.

[JHan]

100. Well..

I apologise if you believed I was being rude, that certainly wasn't my intent.

Your comment struck me as bizarre, which is why I was incredulous. There are many women who sell liberal values - or progressive values if you prefer -well. Mallory's explanation for inviting him to open the conference is ... frankly.. nonsense. And the pushback expected.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

105. Apology accepted. And, yes, MANY women do... nothing I said was meant to imply otherwise.

Guess I thought that was obvious, so it didn't occur to me that I had to say it to keep from offending anybody. Not my intention in the slightest.

You have a good evening.

[melman]

102. No one's missed the reason for the 'pushback'

Everyone knows it's because the Hated One must be hated at all times. That's it.

[JHan]

103. uh huh

[melman]

119. Agreed then

That's terrific.

[JHan]

121. .......

[betsuni]

124. You have missed the reason for the pushback.

You don't listen. That's it.

[melman]

205. No

I really have not missed it all. It's a fake, phony issue based on one thing only.

[treestar]

114. Yeah, why a man, period, makes

no sense.

[PoliticAverse]

60. The speakers scheduled for the Women's Convention...

http://www.womensconvention.com/speakers.html

[Lordquinton]

63. I'm glad some people know how much Sanders has changed the landscape

and are using his popularity in the greater US to good use, instead of the constant calls to shove him in a closet.

[R B Garr]

81. Yes, it's clearly about honoring Bernie. nt

[Lordquinton]

88. That's what you see?

I'd think people here would recognise the smart move of inviting a champion of the left to speak at such a landmark convention. He has stood on the right side of movements consistently and attracted more people to politics than almost anyone else. He's one man out of 60 speakers. To focus that he's the only thing happening is doing a great disservice to the women who have organised this event.

[R B Garr]

104. What's a great disservice to women is to elevate

one man's image over their own participation. Women have no problem unifying and don't need to subvert their autonomy to one politician. I doubt you are concerned about disservices to all women -- just those who worship Bernie. I saw on this thread that some women were specifically excluded by the Our Revolution brigade -- very divisive.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

84. You have that EXACTLY right!!

[LisaM]

208. Changed the landscape how?

Everything is a clusterf**k right now. The young activists he supposedly roused did not vote in large numbers. We have very little hope of regaining the house, and many state governments are in the hands of extremists.

[romanic]

64. The Bernie bashers need a new script.

"He doesn't care about us, he's sexist, he's tone deaf, he bashed Hillary, blah blah blah"

[Paladin]

69. So does the Bernie Is God crowd. (nt)

[melman]

89. Projection

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

97. Comments like that only serve to further divide us...

The enemy is sitting in the White House... such division contributed to how he got there.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

83. Seriously, Bernie stance on so many progressive issues is extremely beneficial to women.

[delisen]

137. Thank you Bernie for your beneficence

but I would rather have full, unequivocal human rights.

You may believe that god created woman in her own image or you may believe in the unalienable right of all Womankind ( men are included in each of these statements so don't be offended) but you may not identify us as just another interest group.

[seaglass]

70. This is a fucking joke. Glad the Womens March leaders who think they can co-opt the Resistance

are getting their well-deserved blowback.

Everyone now knows what this is, a falsely-advertised People's Summit.

[R B Garr]

143. Exactly! The way they've gone about this is co-opting

The Resistance because it's been so effective. Notice how they have no problem with appropriating from that group and benefiting Sanders with it. The phoniness and divisiveness are on full display.

[Voltaire2]

76. Lots of great speakers.

[Omaha Steve]

90. K&R!

[Beacool]

91. Why the keynote speaker on opening night?

They couldn't find a woman?

[delisen]

160. They felt they needed male permission

It is like a Saudi prince opening a conference women's right to drive in Saudi Arabia.

Maybe Planned Parenthood can organize a conference and call upon the Pope to keynote.

They might as well have an official song-
I vote for James Brown's recording of "It's a Man's Man's Man's World. (Co-written by Betty Jean Newsome).

[Hassin Bin Sober]

168. This subject is like a bad children's version of "Operator"

He's gone from giving a speech on opening day to being the "keynote" speaker.

Lol. people have themselves worked up into a lather.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/12/politics/bernie-sanders-womens-convention/index.html

"We invited many elected officials to our convention that align with the purpose and mission of our existence -- to harness the political power of diverse women and their communities to create transformative social change," she said in follow-up statement after the news was announced. "We are thrilled that Rep. Maxine Waters and Sen. Sanders will be speaking at the Women's Convention."
Mallory elaborated that while some female lawmakers won't be present, they still extended their support for the event.
"We all know how busy women leaders are, and we are grateful for the support of women like Secretary Clinton along with Sens. Harris, Warren and (Kirsten) Gillibrand," Mallory said. "Although their schedules did not allow them to join us in Detroit the weekend of October 27, they will be fighting for our shared values, as they do every day. Our program features more than 60 women leading in activism, organizing and advocacy, as well as grassroots leaders running for and serving in office across the country. We are excited to come together, to unite across our differences and to fight for the future we all believe in."
In a series of tweets on Thursday afternoon, Mallory addressed criticism from Women's March followers.
".@womensmarch is led by women, mainly WOC. We announce one man as a speaker among over 60, and y'all start saying he's our leader?!" she wrote. "When you lash out at WOC leaders, saying we have a man as our headliner/leader, you erase our work. You erase Rep Waters' work. LISTEN TO US. To the folks yelling at @womensmarch & directly at me: Why does your version of advocating for women's rights = bashing Black women leaders?"

She pointed out that the convention has over "60 speakers currently lined up. Only 2 are men." She emphasized that Waters, who is a black woman, was announced as a speaker in mid-September.

[smirkymonkey]

216. Yeah, I already kind of feel like I am living in the twilight zone, but this just

completely baffles me.

[Ken Burch]

101. I can imagine a deeper reason that the organizers may have done this...

Last edited Fri Oct 13, 2017, 01:20 PM - Edit history (1)

...is as a challenge to the mainstream women's leadership...that the organizers feel that that leadership needs to take steps to reconnect with the grassroots.

I'd say they could have made the same point by booking Nina Turner.

(on edit)

What I posted there was not intended as a defense of what the organizers did, and I'm sorry my wording conveyed that intent.

[betsuni]

125. "imagine a deeper reason" "mainstream female leadership" LOL ESTABLISHMENT FEMALES CONSPIRACY

"grassroots"

[Me.]

157. Allow Me To Join You

[Ken Burch]

166. I wasn't defending the decision. I said in that post they should have gone with Nina instead.

Are you really arguing that women never have issues with their leadership?

[seaglass]

129. They just broke up the group though. It was a tone deaf move. Nina is speaking. n/t

[Ken Burch]

162. i agree that it was tone deaf.

Just trying to guess what they might have been thinking.

[Me.]

155. What The Heck Are You Talking About?

Women, especially women of color, are the grassroots. And am so glad they booked Nina because their true intentions are now clear. But thanks for trying to mansplain this to women.

[Ken Burch]

164. I wasn't trying to mansplain and I agree that booking Bernie was a crazy idea.

My comments were driven by the fact that I was sincerely puzzled by the choice-and still am.

When I see things that are truly confusing, I sometimes "think out loud" to try to make sense of those things for myself.

It's a bad habit, and I've been trying to break myself of it.

In no way was I defending the decision or trying to give the group cover for it.

Booking Nina makes much more sense, and of course women and people of color are the grassroots-a grassroots that, even if they aren't personally pro-Bernie, are as pro-economic justice(in addition to social justice) as anybody else.

[Me.]

165. IMO

Booking Nina makes no sense and rather than give them cover does the opposite. There are real women leaders out there who haven't been invited to speak, Nina not being one of them. And yes the grassroots are pro-economic, who wouldn't be. But that concern does not trump social justice. You can't have one without the other, which is not very often understood.

[Ken Burch]

167. I've always agreed that economic justice doesn't outweigh social justice.

So does everybody else on the post-1935 left.

The only argument any of us ever rejected was the centrist canard that social justice could be achieved in isolation from economic justice, or without any economic justice measures at all.

The justice struggles are distinct, but linked.

And in the left I've always been part of, everybody has always backed both. It was only in 2016 that the notion that there was some sort of tension between the justice struggles was introduced. Would you agree that it's finally time to move past that?

[Me.]

172. The Grass Roots Never Disputed That

But the 'Our Revolution" people generally seem to think white man money trumps the other.

[ehrnst]

173. +1000 (nt)

[Me.]

176. Hey...Delighted To See You

[ehrnst]

179. Back at you!

[ehrnst]

169. Mainstream.

[Ken Burch]

189. Again, I wasn't defending the decision...I think it was dumb.

Attempting to figure out is not attempting to justify.

Not my organization, not my call.

[Ninsianna]

109. Kinda strange how Tamika is all over Twitter pretending that Bernie is not a

headliner, I wonder why she feels the need to say two mutually exclusive things. Also, why wait til today to tell people? Knowing how many women would vehemently disagree and how all that's been mobilized when they pull these stunt is backlash as a new generation of activists raise their voices loud and proudly against silencing women to focus on white male career politicians in office for decades and whose recent record has been about divisiveness and stances that specifically angered women by promoting the unacceptable notion that women's basic human rights are "negotiable".

He was a terrible choice, and Tamika and her fellows are reaping just derision for their tone deaf handling of this situation. It's through the insistence of sponsor, Emily's List that local women running for office were even included, at a WOMEN's Convention.

It seems they didn't learn their lesson back in January, and they have been willfully deaf and deceptive in their actions now.

But hey, this insult has indeed motivated women to become active against just this sort of thing. We're tired of being silenced, lied to, and exploited.

[Madam45for2923]

118. Yep, I am wondering about these organizers.

[ehrnst]

171. About the organizers.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/08/01/opinion/womens-march-progressives-hate.html

[Ninsianna]

213. Wait a few hours and take a look at their antics on twitter.

Apparently no one should question them because they're WOC so their statements that contradict themselves should be ignored.

Not sure why the WOC who are questioning them are somehow oppressing them, but logic and honesty don't seem to be at work here.

[KG]

122. I lulz'd

[LexVegas]

123. Who?

[delisen]

134. Sanders not a revolutionary for women

He is a reformer of liberals and progressives-a reformer's reformer.

Women need a revolution-we taken reform as far as it can go, and now we are losing what we have gained.

We need to strike out for full human rights because we are the humans-in fact we are the majority of humans.

Sanders is being marketed and packaged like a New Coke product: Feel the Bern! Feel the Bern! They are feeling the bern in the Midwest! they are feeling the bern in California!

Bernie is a new spark plug for democrats! He is also a flagellation whip for when we want to feel the bold scold and beat ourselves up!

What a guy-our caucus guy! Some days he'll beat us and then some days he'll treat us.

He keeps us on our toes and bowls us over at the same time!

Oh brave new world, that has a Bernie in it!

......well you get my drift.

[George II]

136. Here's an interesting development, Mallory's statement that you highlighted above (bold)....

Last edited Fri Oct 13, 2017, 10:07 AM - Edit history (1)

...has now been deleted from the article and her statements changed:

"Editor's Note: This article has been updated to clarify Tamika Mallory's statements regarding Bernie Sanders."

It previously stated what you highlighted, I guess either the editor or Mallory herself wanted to tone that down for some reason:

"He was the right choice to be a headliner for the first national Women's Convention in 40 years, said Tamika Mallory, co-founder of Women's March, because Sanders knows how to mobilize a new generation of activists."

[sheshe2]

148. Aaaah. eom

[Hassin Bin Sober]

174. Probably because people wrongly assumed and turned that into "keynote"

It's like a bad children's game of "operator"

Next they will have him seizing control of Planned Parenthood.

Seems like a few high profile women politicians were too busy to show up.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/12/16465012/womens-march-bernie-sanders


Though Sanders will speak the first night, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) will deliver the convention’s keynote address. A spokesperson for Sanders said that the Vermont senator was invited by the Women’s March, and accepted the invitation to honor “the women at the front lines of our struggle for economic, social, racial and environmental justice.” And on Twitter, Tamika D. Mallory of the Women’s March noted that there are only two men speaking of 60 and that Waters, not Sanders, is the headliner

......

They said that several prominent female Democrats — including Clinton, as well as Sens. Kamala Harris (CA), Elizabeth Warren (MA) and Kirsten Gillibrand (NY) — had been unable to attend. (Staffers for Harris and Warren confirmed they were invited to participate at the event.)

[George II]

182. No, probably because either the author of the article of Mallory herself realized....

....that calling it the "the first national Women's Convention in 40 years" was a blatant lie or gross exaggeration.

The edit has nothing to do with "keynote".

[heaven05]

139. Was Hillary Rodham Clinton even invited????

Woman's conference and she was not invited? Did she turn them down? Something rotten in Denmark here?????????? Did Ms. Mallory even consider HRC....bs can motivate people, true, as I see his MINORITY wing of supporter are motivated and loud...which does not a leader make.....HRC should have been keynote speaker...what an affront to a great lady and top running, recognized Democratic Party, not independent, LEADER!!!!!!!!!!!

[sheshe2]

149. ...

[Hassin Bin Sober]

188. HRC was invited. Harris was invited but is busy fundraising.

And Maxine Waters is keynote. Would you have her pushed out?

[heaven05]

209. WATERS

is excellent and instead of one of the speakers...Hillary and Waters would have been a slam dunk. Too bad HRC couldn't make it...

[Cuthbert Allgood]

196. She couldn't go.

Is that Sander's fault?

Do you thing Clinton should be the keynote instead of Waters? Sanders is just the opener.

[heaven05]

210. too bad HRC

couldn't make it instead of...... No fault assigned...just questioning why a minor leader of a very minority wing of the Democratic Party....and...oh well, my point is made.

[redgreenandblue]

151. Good god, by the responses in this thread one could think they had invited Rush Limbaugh.

Some people need to let go of the hate.

[samnsara]

152. hmmmmm.....as a woman, i would rather have a woman make that...

...opening speech.

Just saying.

[underthematrix]

158. This is fine. White people love Bernie Sanders.

We need his peeps to vote Dem so I don't care as long as he delivers the votes.

[redgreenandblue]

159. Except that his approval rating is higher amongst African Americans than amongst whites.

Fail.

[underthematrix]

161. You're partly right, Sanders had a favorable rating among African Americans

under 30 but this was not the case with the over 30.

[bettyellen]

199. Any Dem is more popular with POC than w white voters- but I'm sure you knew that.

[JCanete]

224. That still makes any claim that Sanders is favored by white people...that he's a white person

candidate, bunk as all hell.

[Mike Nelson]

201. I would have picked a woman...

...I'm sure Bernie is a big supporter of women's rights - but it's not something he is especially known for, over the years.

[smirkymonkey]

217. Bottom line: It's a Women's Convention and a woman should be the keynote speaker.

I don't care how liberal a man is. No man should be headlining at this conference. Period. It's fucking insulting.

How would people feel if a white person was the keynote speaker at a conference for people of color? It's just bullshit.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

218. And Maxine Waters is the keynote speaker.

She was announced as keynote week's ago.

It's funny how people who obviously know zip about this convention are quick to drag the Women of Color organizers through the mud.

".@womensmarch is led by women, mainly WOC. We announce one man as a speaker among over 60, and y'all start saying he's our leader?!" she wrote. "When you lash out at WOC leaders, saying we have a man as our headliner/leader, you erase our work. You erase Rep Waters' work. LISTEN TO US. To the folks yelling at @womensmarch & directly at me: Why does your version of advocating for women's rights = bashing Black women leaders?"

[JCanete]

223. eh...as somebody already pointed out, good thing they thought of that and Sanders is not now

nor ever was the keynote speaker. Maxine Waters is. Whew, crisis averted?

[Lil Missy]

242. I gotta wash my hair that night.