@103, if you're going to go on about "responsibility" you need to acknowledge the fact that for years it was a hypothetical infectious agent believed to be causing immune deficiency. Even after the virus itself was isolated and named, the methods of transmission were not fully understood. The numbers of IV drug users and hemophiliacs infected made blood a fairly obvious method of transmission, but even saliva was still suspect for a decade! Being able to tell people HOW to be responsible when you don't even know if kissing can spread the disease is exactly why well-funded research is so important. Misconceptions about HIV, who can get it, how it is spread, are still shockingly prevalent today (i.e Jenny McCarthy worrying about her kissing scenes with Charlie Sheen) and contribute both to the continuing spread of the disease and the social stigma placed on those who test positive and the gay community in general. Had an unbiased, empathetic leader been willing to have public, science-based conversations about the issue, it would have made an enormous difference.
What else was Sanders doing in the '80s? Well, he was telling the world how good Castro was for Cuba:…

Unlike Clinton, he's not apologizing:…

And here's a refresher about how Cuba had been treating LGBT people in the years prior:…

Are we actually going to excoriate Clinton and give Sanders a pass for this?
@116 more anti-Sanders smears from the Clinton campaign. Sanders always openly supported LGBT rights and to claim that he condoned Cuba's homophobic policies is way below the belt. Unethical but par for the course from someone who also claims that Sanders supported governments that disappear their people when Clinton herself enabled the 2009 Honduran coup that since resulted into 100's of dead human rights campaigners. The hypocrisy of Clinton's red-baiting propaganda is staggering but unfortunately not very surprising.

Phew, you do sound young. Social likes and rants on media mean nothing unless it translates to the polls.

While Sanders has done a tremendous job climbing in national awareness, Hillary has outpaced him by 2 million votes. Yeah, millennial power! I am very favorable to the millennial generation (Gen X) but the people are voting and voting for Hillary. And the polls - no matter how much value you give them - show the word socialist is an anathema to a significant portion of the electorate. The millenials are but one cohort with the right to vote, they tend to have low turn out.

I'd recommend hitting some 538 as well as Facebook.
So glad to see virulent homophobia is alive and well in this comments section. It almost makes me nostalgic for the 80s and 90s.

BTW, Hillary apologized for real yesterday:…

Personally I'm done being pissed at her. That apology strikes me as what she should have said the day before, instead of that weak "misspoke" line. (Frankly, it reads like the one floated on Twitter as a model.) I'm still somewhere between feeling perplexed at this flub and annoyed at this baffling attempt to win Reagan Democrats (like they were gonna vote Sanders anyway...). Not pissed anymore. Just wary.
A sincere thank you Dan Savage for having a memory and sense of history.
Praising Nancy Reagan for her response to HIV/AIDS is like like praising her for "Just say No" campaign which was in starkly hypocritical contrast to her husbands administrations active policy of importing and selling crack cocaine to US inner cities to fund the Contras.
So glad to see virulent homophobia is alive and well in this comments section. It almost makes me nostalgic for the 80s and 90s.

I know. I reported it last night, but nothing's happened.
No, not red-baiting. My point is not about communism. It is about how Castro treated sexual minorities. Did Sanders "condone" that? Well, in 1985, he definitely ignored it. We can all decide for ourselves whether that constitutes condoning it.

Both Clinton and Sanders have made positive statements about heads of state whose horrific records on LGBT issues resulted in incalculable death and anguish. One of those statements has made people's heads explode; the other is rationalized away. I'm just pointing out the double standard.
The Cuba thing is adorable. How many months deep are we into the campaign and this is what you're gonna hang your hat on?

Sanders' mild praise of Castro in the '80s for getting his citizens medical care and education vs. Hillary taking millions of dollars from some of the most repressive regimes in the world.

The mental gymnastics are astounding.
@122 You are making shit up as you go along. These 2 events are not at all comparable.

First, the absence of evidence is just that, so you don't know whether or not Sanders "ignored" LGBT rights in Cuba (as you claim) and considering a) his pro-LGBT stance for his entire political career and b) his labeling himself a democratic socialist, there is every reason to believe he didn't "ignore" Cuba's homophobic policies.

Second, you are comparing apples to oranges. Clinton praised the Reagans explicitly for addressing the AIDS crisis when in fact they let people die without doing anything for years. The equivalent of what Clinton did would be for Sanders to explicitly praise Castro for his good deeds toward LGBT people.

I also see that you have no comment regarding Clinton's smearing Sanders' human rights record while herself enabling the 2009 Honduran coup d'etat that was followed by the death of hundred of human right campaigners.
While you guys are bickering amongst yourselves, there is a raving fucking lunatic on the loose.
@123 Not hanging my hat on anything—just pointing out, in this specific context, what I think is a pretty egregious double standard.

@124 For "ignored" read "remained silent on" if that makes you feel better, which it probably will.

Also, i don't see that difference as significant enough to exonerate Sanders on this point. Braeburns to Fujis, at the very most. For an excellent example of apple/orange comparison, btw, see 123's second graph.

@125 I couldn't agree more, which is why this selective outrage is so maddening. Neither side's hands are entirely clean on this point, and I think both Clinton and Sanders deserve censure, but this is being used as yet another my-side-good/your-side-bad wedge issue.
Anyone remember Ryan White?
@126; this started out as a reaction to a super foot in mouth moment by Hillary Clinton, which activated memories of grief and rage and a real feeling of wtf.
if Bernie Sanders had made such a colossal mistake, I'm sure Dan and many others' outrage would have been the same.
@126 You are tiresome because elementary logic should tell you that you don't know whether Sanders "remained silent". The only fact you know is that Sanders didn't say anything about it in the video clips you saw. You don't know what he said in the rest of the interview or before or after, you troll.
Considering your lack of thinking, one can see how you construe that Clinton saying something clearly wrong and hurtful is equivalent to YOU not having evidence that Sanders said anything.

I also see that you still have nothing to say about Clinton's role in enabling the 2009 Honduran Coup.
@54: Yeah, it's hard to keep all your stories straight when the story keeps changing. #WhichHillary
Yes, anon1256, the Honduran coup also is awful (obviously)—a tragic and terrible miscalculation on Clinton’s part.

You seem to think my point is to defend Clinton from any and all allegations of wrongdoing. It isn’t. It’s to be clear-eyed and honest about the strengths and failures of both candidates—as opposed to picking and choosing, along strictly partisan lines, what to be offended by, and rationalizing away the rest. No selective outrage. No double standards. Is it really not possible to be distressed by BOTH what Clinton said about Nancy Reagan AND about what Sanders said about Castro? Do we have to choose only one?

And if there is, floating around out there somewhere, a statement by Sanders condemning Castro’s treatment of the LGBT community, let’s see if we can dig it up. Probably there are many such condemnations, but Sanders and his staff and his supporters have all for whatever reason decided not to widely publicize them. Still, one shouldn’t assume they don’t exist. To quote you and Donald Rumsfeld, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

And LavaGirl, you’re no doubt right--
Thank you future President Hillary Clinton for you heartfelt, prompt, and accurate-this-time apology. Redeemed, you have re-earned my vote.


"We shall overcome the lethal myth of heterosex-supremacy that dominates life and law on Planet Heterosex-Supremacy!" - The Reverend Timmy, Ordained Awestruckian. Welcome VIDEO:

Heterosex-supremacist politicians, regardless of their godstyle-choice, that choose to pervert the sanctity of our legal marriage into their political football choose to not earn our votes.

Over 6 million views! Hubby Earl & Rev.Timmy hoofing down 5thAvenue NYC for our freedom to marry! (at minutes 1:27).

    Please wait...

    Comments are closed.

    Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

    Add a comment

    By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.