Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Saturday, January 19, 2019

Here’s my basic problem with Bernie Sanders. To put it bluntly, once a Trotskyite, always a fool. Personal experience of Sixties-style left wing posturing left me allergic to the word “revolution,” and the humorless autodidacts who bandy it about. The Bernie Sanders type, I mean: morally superior, never mistaken, and never in doubt.

I’ll never forget the time in 1970 that several “radical” colleagues my wife had invited for dinner denounced our record collection as racist. Merle Haggard, Johnny Cash, Hank Williams, Flatt and Scruggs. Never mind that we also owned B.B. King, Lightning Hopkins, Beethoven and British rock albums. A taste for country music made us, pardon the expression, politically incorrect.

Also professionally doomed. I needed to resign before they fired me. I had no interest in either of the academic community’s ruling passions: Marxist sentimentalism and real estate.

How Bernie missed becoming an English professor at some picturesque New England college, I cannot understand.

Anyway, here’s where I’m going with this. To me, the Clinton campaign’s high-minded refusal to expose Senator Sanders has been a big mistake, needlessly allowing this unelectable crank to pose as a serious candidate far too long—and enabling Bernie and his impassioned supporters to translate the old GOP anti-Hillary playbook into left-wing jargon.

In consequence, Clinton has found herself in a one-sided fight against her own degraded image. Some of it is  her own damn fault. Accepting preposterous fees to speak to Wall Street bankers and then keeping the speeches secret is no way to run for president.

But realistically, Sanders lost any chance of prevailing after he lost New York and Pennsylvania badly. Word has yet to reach him. Meanwhile, it has become common to see Clinton described as “evil,” a “war-monger” and worse on social media, while the Sanders campaign whines that it was cheated. The damage to progressive chances in November from this kind of poisonous rhetoric is hard to overstate.

In The Daily Beast, Michael Tomasky puts it this way: “The guy who’s going to end up with about 300 fewer pledged delegates and more than 3 million fewer votes doesn’t get to say ‘you beat me, but you must adopt my position.’ It’s preposterous and arrogant, which of course means he will do it.”

Has leading the Children’s Crusade gone to Sanders’ head? No doubt. However, my larger point is that he’s always been this guy, and Democrats have been needlessly polite about it.

Is it impolite to point out, like Slate’s Michelle Goldberg, that in “1980, Sanders served as an elector for the Socialist Workers Party, which was founded on the principles of Leon Trotsky. According to the New York Times, that party called for abolishing the military budget. It also called for ‘solidarity’ with the revolutionary regimes in Iran, Nicaragua, Grenada, and Cuba; this was in the middle of the Iranian hostage crisis.”

No, that’s not objectionable because it’s undeniably true. No doubt Sanders has an explanation for such heterodox, albeit politically poisonous views. Fine — so why hasn’t he been forced make it?

In 1976, Bernie urged the University of Vermont student paper to “contrast what the young people in China and Cuba are doing for themselves and for their country as compared to the young people in America…It’s quite obvious why kids are going to turn to drugs to get the hell out of a disgusting system or sit in front of a TV set for 60 hours a week.”He wrote stern letters to the FCC protesting shows like “Gunsmoke” and “I Love Lucy.”

Ancient history? Perhaps. But also 30 years after George Orwell’s epochal novel Animal Farm, and around the same as Chairman Mao’s “Cultural Revolution” was winding down after giving millions of Chinese youngsters a swell chance to serve their country in slave labor camps.

As I say, show me an American Trotskyite, and I’ll show you a damned fool.

But again, shouldn’t Bernie have had to explain it?

Let’s pass over Sanders’ newspaper columns fantasizing about rape and suggesting that cervical cancer is caused by sexual frustration.

“Basically,” writes Will Saletan “if you were designing the perfect target for Republicans—a candidate who proudly links socialist economics to hippie culture, libertinism, left-wing foreign policy, new-age nonsense, and contempt for bourgeois values—you’d create Bernie Sanders.”

With so distinguished a record of crackpot opinions, maybe it shouldn’t surprise that Bernie has also misjudged the Democratic electorate. Salon’s Amanda Marcotte is correct: Sanders didn’t lose because establishment Democrats cheated. He lost because his Thomas Frank-influenced theory that strong majorities of white working class voters would respond enthusiastically to left-wing economic populism turns out to be wrong. The “revolutionary” turnout Bernie kept predicting never materialized.

He swept the white-bread college campuses and the cow states. End of story. The urban proletariat? Not so much. Who can be shocked? Campus radicals have been trashing “establishment” Democrats and fantasizing about a working class insurrection all Bernie’s life.

The revolution remains imaginary.

Photo: Ariella Reiss (L) poses while dressed as Bernie Sanders before a campaign rally in Santa Monica. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit36
  • Print this page
  • 3083

361 responses to “Clinton Should Have Exposed Sanders When She Had A Chance”

  1. Ken Stevens says:

    This is just a hatchet job pure and simple. There are lots of legitimate criticisms of Bernie but you soley focus on his ancient political past and ignore his well articulated positions on the economy as well as his well established track record of successful pragmatism on a lot of bipartisan legislation over the last several years. Clinton used to be a Goldwater Fepublican, maybe she’s a double agent….

    • YankeeClipper says:

      Yep, at the age of 17, Clinton was a “Goldwater Republican.” She was still in high school and couldn’t vote in that election but, by all means hold it against her. Meanwhile, Senator Elizabeth Warren was a Republican and remained one until 1996 but, that’s okay, she’s a hero in the alleged Progressive movement.

      • A_Real_Einstein says:

        In 1996 in an interview with CBS Clinton spoke of how proud she was to have been a Goldwater Girl. She said how proud she was that her political beliefs were rooted in conservatism. Once a Goldwater Girl always a Goldwater Girl right Gene “not even Breitbart will hire me “Lyons?

        • YankeeClipper says:

          So what? It was her first foray into politics and she’s proud of that. Provide links to articles containing your quotes. Clearly, you don’t understand what Gene Lyons was talking about in his quote about Breitbart not be willing to hire him. You do understand snark, yes? Ooops, clearly you don’t.

          • Gene Lyons says:

            Like my being on the Clinton payroll, the Breitbart quote is imaginary.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Not even the Onion will hire you. You are a failure. Maybe you had some talent 40 years ago. Now Conason who is also on the Clinton payroll feels bad for you so he throws you a bone now and then. After all you still have several payments on that trailer you live in. Such a loser.

          • Gene Lyons says:

            I get 30 or 40 similar emails from anonymous right-wing jerks like you every day. Have done for years. It’s always entertaining seeing what people who know nothing about you think will really sting.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Obviously I have hit the target or you would not have replied to me. Once a failure always failure. Do you think your idiot friends will still nominate this turkey even after she is indicted? Feel the Bern.

          • Gene Lyons says:

            Caught red-handed manufacturing a fake quote and still quacking? That takes real moxie. As for Clinton’s indictment, don’t bet anything you can’t afford to lose.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            So you did not answer the question. Are you still going to support Hillary as the nominee if she is indicted?

          • Gene Lyons says:

            Not gonna happen.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            So the fix is in. How would you know that? Comey has already said this is not a security review and Hillary will not receive any special treatment. How can you be so sure?tThe IG report is terrible. So I ask in the event the payoffs do not go through and she is indicted, Do you still support her as the nominee? Hillary or bust?

          • Gene Lyons says:

            And the fabricated quote?

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Go to uncut.com for a recording of the 1996 interview where she says how proud she is of having her political upbringing rooted in conservatism and how proud she was to have been a Goldwater girl. This quote is documented all over the Internet. Easy to verify even for you.

          • Gene Lyons says:

            The quote you fabricated was supposedly me.

          • Bill Byrd says:

            @A Real Einstein – how did you come up with that screen name? You clearly are not such a real Einstein, unless you’re referring to the bagel shop.
            Gene Lyons is one of the more perceptive political analysts in this myopic “every man is a pundit” world.
            If you read any of his work over the long period he’s written, you’d know that.
            He’s on his own payroll.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Gene Lyons and perceptive political analyst in the same sentence is hilarious. Thanks for the belly laugh.

          • KarenSez says:

            You are projecting again.

          • plc97477 says:

            I, for one, understood what you were saying and appreciate your article.

          • Babs4score+1 says:

            I also appreciate and understand what you are saying. You and Joe are my all-time favorite journalists. Integrity, intelligence and knowledge follow, you wherever you go–a rarity in your profession.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            So do you live in a double wide or a park model?

          • Ken Stevens says:

            Spoken like a true FOX-BOT/Right Wing Nut. I love Bernie and am not fond of Hillary but there is a right way and then there is the wrong, destructive way which threatens to give us President Trump. If Bernie supporters contribute to that you will have greatly tarnished the great senators legacy and his ability to continue his good work in the future. Please think about this before you continue to cut off your nose to spite your face. Please.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            We speak the truth. Hillarys wounds are self inflicted. If you want to win in November then don’t select a flawed target rich candidate like Hillary. She is not the nominee yet. That is our point. In my opinion Bernie will mop the floor with Trump and the polls confirm that. Apperently Trump agrees as he is on the record of wanting to run against Hillary and just chickened out on a debate with Sanders. Trump wants nothing to do Bernie. You want to win then put up the candidate that will receive the full support of Dems and carry the independents and millennials. This is a no brainer.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            It seems that the Clinton campaign is spending a lot more time on how best to blame Bernie for her loss in November as opposed to strategizing on how to win on November. It is never Hillarys fault. Is it?

          • Ken Stevens says:

            I’m not a Hilary supporter. I supported Obama over her and have supported Bernie. I have no problem with Bernie taking the fight all the way to the convention as long as in a positive, competitive spirit. Not trying to attack or drag Hilary down but simply by contrasting his positions with hers. Who’s to blame matters little to me if trump wins. I will be too depressed to care.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Other than contrasting his positions against hers what has he done?

          • Babs4score+1 says:

            Then stop reading what they write, you “Not-so-“A_Real_Einstein.

          • jmprint says:

            You are stating to sound like Trump. Are you sure you are not a Trumpster?

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            I am sure. I hate Trump more than Hillary. Never voted Rrpublican in my life. However Bernie has exposed the democratic establishment for what it is and is deeply depressing. Hillary will be the last of her kind. If ultimately nominated (I still question that) I will fully support her and then work for a progressive congress to deliver to a new progressive President in 2020. She will get one term and will be very disliked but as Bernie says she is still 100 times better than the alternative. Unfortunately Trump has a very good chance of beating her which will really set the progressive movement back.

          • jmprint says:

            Trumps rating will be going down sooner then you think. If Hilliary wins California, Bernie needs to shut it down, or go after Trump with a vengeance. And stop harping about Hilliary. NEVER TRUMP!

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            I do not see Bernie dropping out until the Comey releases the FBI investigation or the convention. Bernie will make his case to the Superdelegates at the convention. My guess is even if they do indict the Superdelegates will not budge. That is going to make for a long four years under Trump. Are you going to support her nomination if she is indicted?

          • jmprint says:

            She will be in the white house before Comey ends the investigation.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            I don’t think so. I have a feeling this going to rap up in July. If not we will have a bigger problem dealing with her resignation and the damage to the party. In this case her VP pick will be really important. Are you going to support her if she is indicted by democrats?

        • flyinjs says:

          She is a moderate who will cross the aisle. You MUST cross the aisle to get anything done in balance. Being hard headed on both sides only causes the Trumps to come out of the woodwork.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Who is she going to cross the aisle with. The folks that have run a dozen bogus Benghazi investigations? They hate her! They would not work with Obama what makes you think they will ever work with her. I think you need your head examined.

          • charleo1 says:

            Crossing the Isle to try and find common ground with zealots, ideologues, and raving idiots, that hate the 90% of the Country, and all Democrats, because both can’t agree with them,100%, is frankly pretty nutty, if it’s just to, “get things done.” What pray tell then are we planning on getting done? It becomes very much like dealing with terrorist threats.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Agreed. The only way to get things done is to have a Progressive President with a Progressive legislature. So the question becomes is which candidate has a higher likelihood of creating movement where a majority of those elected aspire to progressive causes and are not beholden to their donors. See Brand New Congress.

          • Ken Stevens says:

            You are right but I would rather have a place holder like Clinton than someone who would threaten to blow everything up like Trump.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Of course. I am not Bernie or bust but am all in for Bernie until l he is officially not the nominee.

          • flyinjs says:

            I am relying on a Senate change to go along with a Hillary Presidency.

          • Ken Stevens says:

            Bernie has always compromised on legislation. He is a pragmatic realist if you actually look at everything he says and has done. He DOES draw lines and he does advocate strongly for his positions, but he has NEVER been a “my way or the highway” legislator and has frequently made it clear that this approach does not work.

        • jmprint says:

          Who would want to work for Breihart?

      • RED says:

        Do you have difficulty understanding the difference? Elizabeth Warren may have been a Republican, so you say, I have no idea but I know today she fights hard for progressive reform and for the American people. Now Clinton may not be a Goldwater Girl anymore but she is still just as much of a hawk and any the Rep Cons! $15.00/hour minimum wage? No thanks says Clinton, we don’t need that. Universal healthcare? Na, we got more people coverage, good enough, besides, can’t people just pay for their healthcare like me (Hillary)?

        • flyinjs says:

          Shame on you Red, trickle up as in $15.00 per hour where every last cent would go back into the economy as people can not afford to save it. You can trickle down all you want, give all of the corporate welfare you want, but you can not get companies to expand and create jobs if there is no WORLD market to sell to. Understand WORLD market. Trump is making WORLD enemies which is quite fine for a protectionistic conservative bent on stubborn pride!

        • KarenSez says:

          “I have no idea”
          Well, we do agree on that.

        • Babs4score+1 says:

          If you think HRC has not fought hard for the American people then you are woefully ignorant. Against healthcare? Really? She was excoriated for attempting to get health care coverage in 1993. But does she get points for that, or for anything else she has accomplished in her years of dedication? No, of course not. Better to continuously berate this woman. Bah on you.

      • charleo1 says:

        Warren, the most well spoken advocate by far, of the Democrat’s case for socio/economic fairness, and justice, that served as one of the premier cornerstones of FDR’s New Deal. And yes, that’s very okay!

      • Ken Stevens says:

        You miss my point which is that we should NOT be judging anyone, be it Bernie OR Hillary, on positions held 30 years ago bra positions held now.

    • CrankyToo says:

      No doubt. This piece is drivel. Shame on Gene’s Lyin.

    • KarenSez says:

      “…his well articulated positions on the economy…” You mean, the ones that have been written about in that damn corporate media, like the New York Times, long before the primaries and that were the basis of things like Occupy Wall St., etc? Those positions are now “his creation”? Hahahahaha!

      • Ken Stevens says:

        He never said they were his creation, many reflect policies that were once in effect but have since been voted down to the detriment of the working class and the general health and stability of the economy.

  2. pepe nero says:

    A man comes along, actually a man who has been there all the while, to offer a glimmer of hope to a nation and a world headed for the cliff’s edge.Here a man no one owns-he is his own. Against a woman whose jumpsuit is covered with the logos of the true ruling powers of the world. She is owned, he is not. She has no dream, offers no hope or change, he does. Should she win things are certain n to continue along g the get worse by the second path. With him there is a chance of slowing it down, hopefully someday reversing it.
    So who is this person who wrote this idiotic, vitriolic, hateful rant. A person with a death wish perhaps or one in need of a scapegoat for all of his/her woes. One who has obviously been indoctrinated by the system-=meaning the media of course, since they do the shaping of what they want us to be

    • A_Real_Einstein says:

      Gene Lyons is oon the Clinton payroll. He is a hack and is fully aware that as everyday passes Hillary watches her support and her chances to be Presidentfade away The Clinton internal polls have her losing in CA so expect a lot more of this kind of attempt to take Bernie down. They have done a lot of opposition research and this is all they have. Bernie is the cleanest candidate ever to run for President. The establishment fears him and the corporate media hates him. He is exposing the whole system and people like Gene Lyons for exactly who they are – cockroaches. Ignore this everybody else will.

      • YankeeClipper says:

        Yawn. The usual diatribe against anyone that dares to speak/write well of Sec’y Clinton and/or unfavorably about Sen Sanders; “he’s/she’s a hack, on the payroll!” Do some research into who Gene Lyons is, you might be totally surprised but, then again, probably not.

      • pepe nero says:

        Thanks, your response is appreciated. Let’s hope that ‘Yankee Clipper’- below- will soon sink. Frankly, I never could understand how anyone with a sane mind could even remotely consider the Clintons worthy of any office down to and including local dog catcher.

    • susannunes says:

      Gene Lyons is spot-on. You can check your misogyny at the door. Go ahead and vote for the equally unelectable Donald Trump.

      • A_Real_Einstein says:

        Based on the IG report I am afraid Hillary is going to jail. The FBI investigation is taking so long because they have since recovered all of the deleted emails. Those emails are going to get her convicted of money laundering. The Clinton Foundation is the problem. There are also a lot work related emails that she did not turn over. That is also a felony. When she wiped the server clean she committed another felony of tampering of evidence. Articles like this are carefully placed in order to deflect what is coming. You are being played.

        • KarenSez says:

          LOL!!!! You fool.

        • A.T. says:

          Turning over the emails didn’t become a law until 2 years after she was out of office. Powell has never turned over any emails to anyone. Not illegal.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Not true. The laws were changed in 2009. According to the IG report she broke the rules and the FBI is determining if she broke laws. Powell had to use personal email to communicate outside the govt because the technology at the time would only allow intra office email back then. Politifact has already rendered your claims as being false. Also Powell did not operate his own private server without permission. Finally she refused to cooperate with this investigation under the supervision of democrat John Kerry. She is in big trouble and thus we get articles like this. So will you still support her nomination if she is indicted?

          • jmprint says:

            You said it, she broke the rules, not laws. If they indict her for deleting emails they have to go after Bush, he destroyed his.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            The IG determined that she broke the rules and the FBI will determine if she broke laws. I am sorry but pretending that there is no FBI criminal investigation going on is pure fantasy. So will yup I still support her as the nominee if she is indicted.

          • King of America says:

            The FBI – as you have been repeatedly told – are not randomly investigating Clinton to see if she broke any laws. They are investigating if any classified information was accidentally released, as they are constitutionally obliged to do.

            I hope that helps! Stop spreading idiotic conspiracy theories!

          • A.T. says:

            “The law was amended in late 2014 to require that personal emails be transferred to government servers within 20 days.”

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Different rule. The IG said she willfully violated the rules when she failed to turn over any of her WORK related emails upon leaving the State Dept. she also failed to turn over ALL of these work related emails last year. Finally she may have tampered with evidence when she wiped her server clean during an investigation. This is all really really bad news.

          • A.T. says:

            You said it yourself. “Different rule.” Rules are not laws. It is clear that she violated rules. She will not be indicted for violating rules.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Which is why the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation to determine if laws were broken. The IG report was an internal State Department review at the supervision of John Kerry. That was not a criminal investigation and Hillary was not compelled to cooperate. Which begs the question of why she refused to cooperate? Hmmm

            And we wonder why now 60% of the electorate does not trust her. That includes 40% of democrats like me.

      • elw says:

        Gene Lyon’s remarks sound angry and are absurd. I was surprised to read such rubbish coming out of him.

      • Ken Stevens says:

        So I’m not a fan of Hilary but love Elizabeth Warren and Rachel Maddow; am I a misogynist?

    • KarenSez says:

      You are what is known as “full of sh*t,” merely repeating conservative talking points about Clinton. Are you a right-wing troll?

      • pepe nero says:

        you g’wan need has you mouth washed out wit laundry soap & de man, de ma, I spoke of, is Bernie not Trump so don’t get you gander up so quickly ms. Karen Sez you assume too much, too soon,

    • jmprint says:

      A hope with no realization, no thanks. I think we must vote to keep Trump out, Hilliary can do that for us, and more.

  3. Anna says:

    Oh, please. All Bernie wants is to undo Reganomics and reestablish a middle class. Medicare for all and extending public education thru grade 16 is a way to accomplish this. These socialist programs already exist. Expand them and put a floor under the middle class! Not a radical idea AT ALL!

    • susannunes says:

      His past kills him. He also doesn’t work well with colleagues. Those are fatal to any candidate.

      • RED says:

        Well, Clinton works really well with people, at least the ones who hand out 5 to 7 figure checks. And definitely what we need is more cooperation among the people who have made us the leader is prison population, poverty, and war starting. Heck, if everyone would just get on board and be a team player, we could have this climate change and mass extinction done lickety split, in no time!

      • palsifar says:

        Sanders holds rallies that attract thousands upon thousands of people … Clinton holds fundraisers that cost thousands upon thousands of dollars … when it comes to “colleagues” looks like Sanders looks to the American people while Clinton looks to other plutocrats …

  4. RED says:

    Truly disgusting and actually explains why our country is so messed up whine it is filled with people like this author. So the first premise is, “i don’t like Bernie Sanders because he reminds of people who didn’t like my record collection”? Well, heck that’s how we ought to pick our leaders, although personally I don’t even have any record anymore. Then let’s move on to paint Sanders as a Commie, that’s always good. Because as Americans, we must hate and fear that word forever, regardless of the fact that our country has started more wars, has more people in prison, & probably has higher rates of poverty than the Soviet Union ever had (although that’s just a guess, not a fact). But no, we must commit with whole heart to be against those who ever dares to look at the rest of the world and question what our country was doing. And instead we must rally behind those that have continued to start wars, supported our inexorable slide in to poverty, and damn near destroyed the planet!! ‘Cause that’s way better than a guy who hung out with Marxists in the 60’s!!! There are speeches after speeches of Sanders behind about everything from the Iraq to the Panama Papers to NAFTA. Yet still, he is the crank. He has refuse nearly all corporate money, and he is the crank. Well, one thing is for sure, Hillary Clinton is very much in the main stream of politics and the U.S. political class, absolutely, and Sanders is not. And it’s that political class that has brought us to the point of the lowest standard of living in all the industrialized countries, the highest prison population, an illness could make you bankrupt and homeless, hell having a child can bankrupt you, our kids are buried in debt to pay for endless war, surveillance, the arms industry, and corporate welfare. But Sanders is the crank? Sure, genius!

  5. charleo1 says:

    And so, we are to suppose this is the establishment Dem’s. way of reuniting the Party to face one of the most dangerous demagogues to ever be nominated for the Presidency? To stupidly dismiss, and discredit the very issues that have served to inspire nearly the entire Left Wing of the Party, by vacuously smearing it’s courageous, and in many instances absolutely correct, solitary messenger? Which I believe begs a question that is on the minds of many of Sander’s supporters today: If not for Burnie Sanders, Then who? Which DNC approved candidate would be talking about wealth inequity, the skewed economic system, the enormous amount of money in a pay to play system, where only the very rich seem to have any influence on public policy? Lopsided, and wage demolishing trade deals? Or, the enormously corruptive effects that unlimited amounts of money has had in just the last few years since Citizens United? Have had on not only the economy, and voting rights/labor rights. But on the promotion of an economic structure that now works almost exclusively for the elite, by crippling the very processes of democracy as most understand them. These are the issue of our time for the Democratic Left, and woe be unto that Democrat who runs for high office, and chooses to believe otherwise.

    Now this is not to discredit Hillary Clinton. Only to mention these were not her issues specifically touched on in the announcement of her candidacy. Although to be fair, perhaps she would gotten around to them if not the endless questions surrounding her private server, the subsequent unfinished FBI investigation, and yet another subpoena by Republicans in Congress, over her role, or lack of it, concerning the Benghazi tragedy. Issues that still plague her campaign, and cut into her credibility today. Providing angst even among her most ardent supporters. And columnists like Mr. Lyons, if they were being completely honest, and evenhanded, would admit those fears, even as they were pointing out Sander’s youthful flirtations with radical Leftism. Which, by the way, are not disqualify-ors, for anyone witnessing what has come about over the past few decades. Much if it with the help of establishment type Dems, now happily supporting Hillary. Including, but certainly limited to her present husband, former President, Bill. These concerns are real, and extremely valid. And must be respected, if the Party is ever to be reunited.

    • KarenSez says:

      “Now this is not to discredit Hillary Clinton. Only to mention these were not her issues…” Of course, they have been her issues, but maybe you didn’t notice because $$ is not her only issue, as it is Sanders’. Endlessly repeated.

      • charleo1 says:

        I hear you. But aren’t $$ power? Is it not the case that more, and more of those $$ are being funneled to the top of half of one percent, instead of advancing, and helping to fund important goals such as universal healthcare, and educational opportunities for all, among other things?

  6. Dan Bahr says:

    Whether we like it or not, these are the arguments the GOP will use if Bernie gets the nomination. They don’t have to be true; they don’t have to be current; they don’t have to be relevant. The great unwashed masses across this country will buy into them and the alleged lead Bernie has over Trump in the polls will quickly disappear.

    • charleo1 says:

      If the RW doesn’t scare the hell out those who know them, they don’t know them.

    • A.T. says:

      This. It’s been proven multiple times that almost none of what Trump says is true, yet his minions absolutely eat up every word.

  7. elw says:

    WOW! The National Memo has gone to the dark side. I had to go back twice and make sure I was on The National Memo site, while reading this absurd commentary. If you have to go back to the 70s and 80s to find something bad about Bernie, I would say you are desperate, silly and not thinking straight – I do not know how to excuse the lies.

    • KarenSez says:

      Maybe you could figure out how to “excuse the lies” if you could actually identify some. Since there aren’t any, I know you’re up sh*t creek, but still…

      • elw says:

        “Let’s pass over Sanders’ newspaper columns fantasizing about rape and suggesting that cervical cancer is caused by sexual frustration.” I call that a lie. What newspaper columns is he talking about? If you think a entire commentary that is basing it entire premise on information from the 70s and 80s is factual is great, than I think your last line applies to yourself not me.

        • YankeeClipper says:

          You call it a lie but, it’s true:

          http://www.snopes.com/bernie-sanders-essay/

        • elw says:

          Here let compare Hillary’s behavior to Bernie’s in the 70’s.

          Hilliary was fired in 1974 by Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of Hillary Rodham on a investigative committee. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

          Why?

          “Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

          Dan Calabrese
          2008 for North Star Writers Group

          • King of America says:

            Holy crap. She was once fired before most people here were born? STOP THE PRESSES.

          • elw says:

            So a line written in 1972 and taken out of context is enough to disqualify Bernie, but being fired for unethical behaviors and lying is not when it Hillary. Right!

          • King of America says:

            Where did I say that? Oh right, I didn’t. Weird.

            Sorry that you have nothing but right-wing smears in your arsenal – if I believed you had any capacity for introspection I’d advise you to maybe think about that.

          • elw says:

            You need to go back and read the whole string maybe then you will understand the reference. You can call me all the name you want, but you should learn to read first.

          • King of America says:

            Even the most cursory fact-checking would have shown you that the story you credulously posted was entirely false. Zeifman was never Clinton’s boss, and he never had any power to fire her.

          • elw says:

            You put your two cents in on a string that was discussing that claim by another commenter – I assumed that was what you were talking about but clearly you missed the whole point of the conversation and now I understand why you make no sense, good bye

          • King of America says:

            I’m sorry, but I don’t see how pointing out that you posted a COMPLETELY FALSE anecdote about Clinton has anything to do with what other people say.

    • charleo1 says:

      Persuasion, and fair presentation of fact are not Mr. Lyon’s strong points as a journalists, IMO. For example a Democratic Socialist, like most of our NATO Allies, is not a Communist, like they have in China for example. Where U.S. Gov. trade policy, and U.S. Corporations have showered billions of U.S. dollars in support of their brand of Communism. While at the same time, crushing Labor Unions, and driving down American wages along with it. So who’s the big bad Communist? And who is covering for the big bad scammers?

      • elw says:

        Well he certainly showed that in this column. I have always thought that when someone is called a Socialist, it is because there is noting really bad to say about that person. They still calling Obama a communist and Socialist and look at how clean his Administration has been. It is all about coming up with something that will turn peoples attention away from the real issues.

        • charleo1 says:

          Exactly, It’s all a form of fear mongering via label, or association.
          They called Martin Luther King a Communist, illegally tapped his phone, and attempted to blackmail him into renouncing the movement, that was after all, calling for equality. Something that a true Capitalist controlled system avoids like the plague. Calls it Collectivism, and acquaints it with Marx, and swears it’s doomed to fail. It’s been effective, as long as most people are doing well.

    • Steve Perron says:

      Pretty damn naïve if YOU Can’t see it in front of your own face!!! Too bad someone has to point it out, and you still don’t believe!!! Just like BERNIE!!! Birds of a feather!!!

      • elw says:

        Proud to be a “birds of a Feather” with someone like Bernie. Your comment says more about you than me.

    • silverhuntress says:

      Again, you need to do more research if you think Bernie Sanders is the best candidate. All the things he’s saying he’s for is the same thing the Democratic party has been for for a while now. He can talk a lot & he can draw a crowd but he doesn’t know how things work or how to fix them. He has a bad attitude, he’s arrogant, he lies & I could go on & on. He hasn’t been treated unfairly, if anything he been treated with kid gloves. Good luck

      • elw says:

        If you think a candidate that has a number of Federal agencies investigating her is the best candidate available, you have the problem not me.

        • King of America says:

          Nobody is investigating Clinton. Sanders, on the other hand, genuinely IS being investigated by Federal agencies for campaign financing violations. By your own claimed standards, you should be supporting Clinton.

          • elw says:

            Did you read the IG report? Strange not one word of Sanders being investigated by Federal agencies in the media, only stories about Hillary multiple Federal investigations.

          • King of America says:

            Yes, it’s weird how the allegedly pro-Hillary media doesn’t ever point out Sanders’ shortcomings.

          • elw says:

            That makes sense coming from people who are using something written in 1972 and taken out of context as proof that Sanders is not qualified to be President.

          • King of America says:

            What does that have to do with anything I said? Where did I mention 1972 at all?

  8. charleo1 says:

    Liking, or even loving traditional Country, and Western Music, in no way means one is, or ever has been racist.. For God’s sake, who thinks like that? But let’s be honest, Country Music, at least in the beginning, and since the advent of mass recording technology, and business structure of the record industry itself, C&W. was a totally segregated genre of music for nearly 40 years after the death of depression era recording star Jimmy Rogers. Until the signing of it’s first African American singer by the name of Charley Pride. Who was signed to a very tenuous RCA recording deal in 1966. Charley’s strength, as far as the record execs were concerned, was his ability to sing, “White,” while being Black. Perhaps they gleaned, as Elvis before him, was widely touted for the opposite. It’s an interesting fact, that no promo pics were sent out as was customary to radio stations in the South, accompanying Mr. Pride’s first chart single, “The Snakes Crawl at Night.” As it turned out, Country music fans did not care nearly as much about the singer’s race, as they loved his unique and compelling voice, and his even more compelling, to his primarily White audiences, his no chip on his shoulder, I love you all, attitude that marked his rise to legendary status in the field. In case you haven’t guessed, big fan here of both Country Music, and Charley Pride!

  9. palsifar says:

    Our system is corrupt and has been rigged by both parties … at heart, the Republicans really only care about the interests of the top one percent … but the dirty little secret about the supposedly “progressive” Democratic power elite is that it really only cares about the interests of the top five percent … that’s why 95% of the $14 trillion in new wealth created during the “progressive” Obama Administration has gone, why we have so-called Democrats like Mark Warner giving speeches saying that the problem with this country is that the one percent have too *little* influence over our political policy and why Hillary Clinton’s first campaign hires were lobbyists for the private prison industry (of all gawdfersaken enterprises) … what we increasingly have in this country is a return to Plantation economics, where the top five percent are accumulating almost all of the national wealth through rank exploitation of the rest of us …

    Sanders, Clinton and Trump all recognize this … Clinton is cynically complicit in it for her own profit, Trump is cynically exploiting it for his own vainglory, and only Sanders seems sincerely willing to do something about it as a matter of principle …

    So engage in all the name-calling and character assassination you want, there is a reason why Sanders is the most admired politician in America at this time, and it has everything to do with policy and nothing to do with personality … and Clinton better get on board with the populist impulses that Sanders is advocating or she will lose and lose big this November … because given four more years of the same and an erratic wild card, it’s pretty tough to figure out exactly *which* would be the lesser evil in the end …

    • A_Real_Einstein says:

      Bingo

    • silverhuntress says:

      If you think Sanders is the best candidate, you need to do more research….he’s only out for himself…he doesn’t know how to fix anything.

    • MichaelC says:

      My friend, the attempts at character assassination have been coming at HRC from Republicon and other right-wing political operatives for decades. The sad thing is that after pledging not to engage in negative campaigning, that’s what Bernie proceeded to do and has done since. He and his managers and his disciples call HRC all manner of evil. I’m surprised they haven’t added “Satan” to the list. Only someone who is blind to these realities could make the kind of charges you and your compadres throw out on a daily basis.

      • A_Real_Einstein says:

        Please elaborate on this negative campaigning. He does not talk about Bill, he took the emails off the table , no discussion of Whitewater, Vince Foster, the affairs. No talk of Benghazi, the Clinton Foundation etc…..
        Bernie talks about policy and does distinguish himself from his competitor in thoughtful dialogue. He does not lie or project against his competitor. It is the Clintons that engage in this not Bernie. He is the cleanest candidate we have ever seen which is why even with deck completely against him he is so competitive. Hillary would die for his approval ratings.

        • MichaelC says:

          Bernie Sanders and his surrogates, including campaign manager Jim Weaver and his $800,00/month media guru Tad Devine, constantly accuse her of being “corrupt” which has a precise legal meaning. They have also said she can’t be trusted to nominate Supreme Court justices committed to reversing Citizens United — particularly ludicrous since she was the injured party in that case. The surrogates have attacked her as a war monger. The other so-called scandals you mention are bogus products of fevered Reublicon imaginations, but it doesn’t stop Sandernistas from repeating them. Bernie does not lie? He’s raising money on a lie, telling his disciples he can win the nomination by persuading superdelegates to ignore the popular vote.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            I have never heard Bernie or his official campaign refer to Hillary as corrupt. Supporters will do and say anything in a close contest . Can you please provide your source for your allegations. By the way Superdelegates are not bound by the popular vote. Their responsibility is to nominate the candidate that has the best chance to win in November. Nobody is being lied to. Bernie will make a very compelling argument at the convention before the Superdelegate vote especially if he wins in CA and Hillary continues to tank in the polls.

          • King of America says:

            “tank in the polls (that I am unskewing in my mind)”

            FTFY

          • MichaelC says:

            If you haven’t heard it, my friend, it can only be because you weren’t listening or decided to shut it out. That charge has been going on almost non-stop for months. Weaver and Devine say it more directly than Bernie but tying her name to corruption suffuses his campaign. Incidentally, the superdelegates have never voted against the popular vote getter since they were instituted in 1982 and first voted in 1984. In fact, one of the rationales for superdelegates was to ensure that the candidate who won the popular vote would win the nomination. Two things for you to read:

            http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/15/bernie-sanders-runs-anti-hillary-clinton-ad-a-corrupt-campaign-finance-system/

            http://www.uexpress.com/cokie-and-steven-roberts/2016/5/25/sanders-plays-a-dangerous-game%20%3E%20%20%3E

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Hmmmm
            I did not see anything in your post or the articles that shows where Bernie or his campaign has ever made a personal attack against Hillary or referred to her specifically as corrupt. What is true was a comment made by one of his surrogates that referred to Hillary as a Wall Street whore. That was torally unacceptable and they immodiately apologized for it. But that was not Jeff Weaver or bBernie. Bernie has never run a negative campaign. Jan Sanders who actually runs things won’t allow. The advertisement that you refer to calls the campaign finance corrupt and insinuates that Hillary or anyone that takes money from that system is not going to do much to fix it. That makes sense and not saying that Hillary is corrupt. That is a big stretch. Yes Superdelegates have not been around very long and if the Superdelegates are always supposed go with the will of the people then what is their purpose? We would only need pledged delegates then. And how democratic is it then to have 450 delegates commit to one candidate before any votes have been cast or any other challengers have declared their candidacy. What is up with that?

          • King of America says:

            Smears, various lies, wilful ignorance of the role of super delegates.

    • gococksri says:

      Actually, nobody engages in character assassination and name-calling quite like Bernie’s Bro’s. Well, except for Trump.

      As to popularity contests, let’s talk about the fact that Secretary Clinton has been named “Most Admired Woman in the World” twenty times during her time in the public eye—the last time was this past December. Eleanor Roosevelt, named thirteen times, runs a distant second. She has been suchly honored because she actually has accomplished things, not talked about them nor borrowed bumper sticker slogans to name them. Twenty times!!! Must have been doing something right. Meanwhile, Bernie has done, well, nothing—his most laughable comment was that his “legislative effectiveness” came through “amendments.” Too funny.

      By the way, do you think you could get him to stop voting against the Brady Bill?

    • rhetoric_phobic says:

      Clinton could make more money not running for president .

      • A_Real_Einstein says:

        How much more does she need?

        • rhetoric_phobic says:

          How is that even a revenant question? Have you asked the same question of the one percenters on the right?
          The Clintons have made contributions to the greater good in higher amounts than those who have run for any office on the right.

      • A_Real_Einstein says:

        Then why is she running for President? What is she promising to do and how?

        • King of America says:

          JAQing off.

        • rhetoric_phobic says:

          The comment inferred she was running for the money. Thus my response.
          Your questions has no bearing and if you were smarter you wouldn’t have to be asking it.
          It’s nothing more than a mouth dump on your part.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            So what Is her message? What is her vision? Why should anyone vote for her? What is she going to try to accomplish. She does not seem to provide any detail on these questions. Can you?

          • rhetoric_phobic says:

            Yeah, right. Do some research.
            I learned a long time ago, it’s a waste of time trying to educate those on the right. They only like what feeds their fears and feelings. Facts be damned.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            So no message. No vision. Just the status quo. Now you know why she will lose. At least Bernie has a message.

  10. A_Real_Einstein says:

    I have a question for all the Hillary supporters on this Hillary propaganda website. Will you still support her nomination if she is indicted? I have yet to find a Hillary supporter who will answer the question.

    • silverhuntress says:

      That’s because she will not be indicted. There’s your answer….and btw, she is the ONLY one I’ll vote for!

      • A_Real_Einstein says:

        Good to know. If she is indicted then you will serve her up as a sacrificial lamb to Trump in November? What flavor of crow do you prefer. She is definetely going to be indicted.

        • jmprint says:

          And when you find out she is not, will you support the democrats in the mid term elections?

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Always have and always will unless a new progressive party arises that is even more in line with my values. See Brand New Congress.

          • King of America says:

            Yeah, “always have and always will” – except for the fact you spend all day every day here, posting right-wing Clinton conspiracy theories.

          • silverhuntress says:

            I want nothing to do with Bernie Sanders or anything that he has a hand in. Thanks but no thanks.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            That is your perrogative. It does not sound like you know what Brand New Congress is though. I suppose you prefer the current GOP led obstructionist congress of today. Me I would personally prefer a congress which is dominated by progressives who do not spend all their time fundraising and are not beholden to their special interest donors. You might want to further research thIs. Crazy me.

          • King of America says:

            smears (various).

      • A.T. says:

        Agreed. We know she will not be indicted.

      • Electric Bill says:

        You are delusional if you are so very sure she will not be indicted. I certainly hope she is. She is a crook, and, I don’t know where you ever got the idea Bernie is the bad egg… I voted for Bill Clinton and was a Clinton supporter until only recently, when I started finding out all the dirt they managed to sweep under the rug.

        The Clintons have been amassing millions from their political connections; Bernie is only worth $300,000, and has never had the FBI, the cops, the IRS or even the Boy Scouts investigating him. The guy is clean; the Clintons are not.

        Stop demonizing Bernie– you discredit yourself to do so. The ones that are out to get him are the Koch Suckers, Wall Street, the bankers, The Fed, and Big Pharma. No wonder there are so many people such as yourself that don’t like him, but have no solid facts to attack him! Nothing but anonymous rumors started by the Devils I just listed!

        • rhetoric_phobic says:

          How is she a crook? Be specific.

        • silverhuntress says:

          Research Electric Bill…..Bernie/Jane not as pure as they’d like you to think!

        • King of America says:

          It’s weird that you think the Koch brothers, who have spent hundreds of millions of dollars attacking the Clintons over the last three decades, are somehow more worried about Sanders than Clinton.

    • MichaelC says:

      According to experts who went on record, there were a number of attempts to “hack” the Clinton email server by foreign interests including China, South Korea, and Germany. All attempted hacks on the Clinton email server failed, unlike official government systems. “From Edward Snowden’s theft of millions of classified national security documents, to WikiLeaks, to a hack of OPM that compromised personal information of more than 22 million people, the scope of recent breaches into private and top secret government servers is sweeping and well documented. Even White House emails sent and received by President Obama were compromised. Anyone who attempts to argue that the contents of Hillary Clinton’s email would have been more secure on a government server must contend with these facts.” http://correctrecord.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Email_SecurityMatters_report.pdf

    • Paul Bass says:

      As the Libertarian VP noted, you have to have intent to commit a crime, no intent, no crime. HRC WILL NOT be indicted over email.

      If a meteor hits HRC before the election, we will deal with THAT equally likely event. Go away w/ your false Dem support, yet toeing the GOP hillary lie!

      • A_Real_Einstein says:

        It may or may not be the email. I think her real trouble will be the bribery and money laundering that occurred in the Clinton Foundation. My guess is the FBI had discovered all kinds of illegal activity in the deleted emails the so called personal emails that Hillary attempted to eliminate when she wiped her server clean which also may have been a felony. We already know she did not turn over all of the work related emails which is another felony.

        • Paul Bass says:

          WRONG AGAIN! NO FELONIES! ZIP, Nada, No Misdemeanors either!

          AGAIN, all these SAME activities were done by the two previous REPUBLICAN SS.

          STOP SPREADING REPUBLICAN LIES, you’re better than that!

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Then why is Democratic administration conducting a criminal investigation and what is taking so long.? Should be an open and shut case. This was supposed to have ended in October of last year.

          • spktruth200 says:

            The FBI just investigated Cheryl Mills…they have already called other top officials at state…they get ALL the information FIRST, Hilary will be the last to be called…if she lies and they have the evidence she has committed perjury…she is indicted. Why do you think the Dem establishment are so concerned she will be they are talking about putting Biden in the race with Warren as his VP.

          • King of America says:

            I get that you don’t understand complicated things, but the DOJ is actually legally obligated to investigate any question of classified documents being accidentally published. The investigation is not performed by the “Democratic administration” and they do not set the timetable.

          • spktruth200 says:

            Stop repeating the billboard lies of the establishment corporate owned media. If you haven’t done the research yourself, your the foolish one. There is no vast right wing conspiracy anymore, even the most progressive in this country have read the oppositional research on all the candidates…next to the Fraud Trump, Hilary is a neo con, billboard liar, power hungry woman who has been working against the 99% all her career.

          • King of America says:

            The only lies here are yours. Stop spamming them.

          • bardgal says:

            No, they’re not. stop feeding the troll.

        • rhetoric_phobic says:

          Your guess? Is that like all the other faux scandals the right tosses up against the wall to see if any will stick?
          A felony , really? Sigh.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Except this criminal investigation was instigated by the Obama administration and will be decided by Obama’s DOJ. The investigation itself is being conducted by the FBI which also directly reports to Obama. Sorry no vast right wing conspiracy this time. Are you this stupid or just throwing stuff out there?

          • spktruth200 says:

            the FBI are non partisan, they leaked…if the Clintons get away with these crimes, NO one will ever be prosecuted for their crimes against the citizens…bigger than Watergate.

          • King of America says:

            What “crimes”, exactly? What the heck is wrong with you that you think this is acceptable?

          • rhetoric_phobic says:

            Speaking of stupid, you said your guess was… based on nothing.
            News flash Einstein. Just because something is being investigated doesn’t mean there is a crime. Often investigations actually clear people. But either way, the mouth breathers are going to say it’s some conspiracy. They are a party in need of a scandal because they can’t win on their own merits.

        • King of America says:

          “The bribery and money laundering that occurred in the Clinton Foundation”.

          And there you have it – straight from the Koch brothers to A_Real_Einstein, via the discredited “Clinton Cash” book.

          • spktruth200 says:

            That didn’t come from the Koch Bros…that came from publications (OTHER THAN THE CORPORATE OWNED MEDIA) you know the media that’s is informing and educating the public…kinda like what the founders had in mind when the only industry in the Consitution mentioned is the press…to educate and inform, not owned by corporations who hire talking heads to deliver billboard lies as if its true.

          • King of America says:

            100% false. Every word of it comes from Clinton Cash, published by Rupert Murdoch and created by the Koch brothers. Every word of it has been thoroughly discredited. E.g.:

            http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/04/20/clinton-cash-author-peter-schweizers-long-histo/203209

            Again, you are smearing a charity in order to get your way. Every bit as disgusting as anything the Republicans have ever done.

        • Robert Kowalke says:

          You are a real Einstein. Conspiracy theories, a new Congress, bet you even believe in the Easter Bunny because that is what it is going to take to fund all of Bernie’s ideas.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Have you gone to the Brand New Congress website? Check it out. I think it is something we can all get in on. My guess you are older and your best years are behind you. I am sure you that your main concerns are just about making sure that your SS check keeps coming and Medicare premiums stay the same. It is inderstandable you want to just maintain the status quo. However My best years are ahead of me. I need action on climate change right now. I have my own social safety net to worry about. I have two daughters to put though college. So I understand your generation gets scared when they hear someone talking like Bernie about expanding Medicare to everyone. You are worried you will lose what you have. How sad. How selfish.

          • Robert Kowalke says:

            Nice attempt to stereotype but totally wrong. I’m a long way from collecting SS and I have kids to put through college myself. But I’m old enough to remember all the “Bernies” that came before such as George McGovern, Walter Mondale, and Michael Dukakis which the ultra left thought were the greatest thing since slice bread and once the election came they all got creamed. Jimmy Carter was more centrist than liberal but at least his campaign against Reagan was close which should tell you something. Take a lesson from LBJ and at least be able to count the votes before it happens. It was not until Bill Clinton came around that this party could actually make things happen. As for the Brand New Congress Website, not going to happen until the Democratic Party stops losing white male voters. Not to say they are better than anybody else, but they are a substantial voting block that used to support this party but not anymore. Why do you think that is?

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Because we give them no reason to vote for us. We have no message, no vision. In their minds we have nothing to offer. They also feel there white priviledge is disappearing and we are taking it from them. Obama ran and won as Progressive and accomplished a lot and set us on a path toward a more liberal and diverse society. One thing is true 80% of the electorate believe that our campaign finance system is corrupt and the billionaires pick our representives for us and maintain a rigged economy hay has all the wealth and income going to the top. That message resonates with everyone. Bernie’s economic policies benefit everyone. Look at the exit polls in the open primaries and you will see that Bernie is bringing the white working class voters back to the party specifically for resistance to free trade and NAFTA. What has Hillary have to offer them? What is her message and vision for all of us other than status quo which is completely dysfunctional govt.

          • Robert Kowalke says:

            You are kind of a sad angry little man. Correct in we give them no reason to vote for us but the whole white privilege thing is just ultra left wing spew guilt trip. Just like the whole thing about me collecting my SS checks was way off base. Do you have to lead off every discussion with insults? Are you a Republican troll? Obama, whom you seem to enshrine, has hardly been a progressive and his Pacific Rim Trade Agreement is not any better then NAFTA. I do not know how you compare polls but I compare the Democratic and Republican exit polls together and we are still loosing white male voters which as I said used to be a bedrock of our support. If you think proclaiming yourself as a socialist, not necessarily a bad word, and giving away free stuff is going to achieve election results just keep deceiving yourself and see where it gets us.

        • spktruth200 says:

          As Harper reported the Clinton Foundation was illegally tied to her illegal server…Hilary delivered weapons to tin pot dictators all over the world and billions went to the Clinton Foundation…it was a crime of collusion the two of them had, when she was named Secretary of State….1100 foreign donations to the Clinton foundation…only 1% of all that money went to poor people…do some research and stop making yourself look stupid.

          • King of America says:

            This is shameless. You are smearing A CHARITY that has one of the highest transparency ratings in the world. Not one word of your drivel is true.

            You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            I think you replied to the wrong poster. The Clinton Foundation mess will be all over the news cycle shortly. Hopefully the last nail in the coffin. This must happen before the convention or we are screwed.

          • King of America says:

            “Any day now”, although you have been posting these thoroughly discredited attacks for months now. Attacking a well-performing charity because the people didn’t vote “correctly”. A new low.

          • Ann Waldrum says:

            Guess that is why they got a “A” rating as a charity.

          • King of America says:

            Not only that, but they’re probably one of the most – if not the most – most financially transparent charities in the world. It’s remarkable that this particular hill is the one the conspiracy theorists have chosen to die on.

          • Ann Waldrum says:

            I understand but have no illusion that the conspiracy theorists will ever die. When you have people as smart and successful as Bill and Hillary are, they are frightening to many folks. Most of those frightened folks live in a world defined by fear and, hence, become very dangerous.

        • Blueberry Hill says:

          No crime there either. Only your wishful thinking.

          ..

        • bardgal says:

          Your spaghetti isn’t sticking to the wall….. needs more cooking.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            We will see. Hopefully Comey will release the results of the FBI investigation to Loretta Lynch soon. Then we will know. If she is indicted for the emails the charge will be unintentional espionage. What has a lot of people worried or in my case hopeful is the 30,000 emails that were deleted are now in the hands of the FBI and that might be what is taking so long as this has led them to investigate other things potentially like the Clinton Foundation. Who knows?

      • Blueberry Hill says:

        Absolutely, and he is a prior Federal Attorney General, and says she committed no crime. There will be no indictment, as there was no intent. Get used to it.

        ..

    • rhetoric_phobic says:

      Because it’s a stupid question. Indicted for what? She committed no crime. Would you vote for Bernie if he is indicted? My question is as relevant as yours.

      • A_Real_Einstein says:

        No I would not for vote for any candidate that is under a criminal indictment. However Hillary is the one under an FBI investigation and her stories seem to change by the minute.

        • King of America says:

          Except that 1) that is totally false and 2) it is still totally false

          • spktruth200 says:

            King of America…big ego there. You obviously haven’t read the IG report either dimwit.

          • King of America says:

            So insults are meant to convince me that she is guilty of a crime which isn’t actually a crime. I see. Sorry Sanders lost and you can’t come to terms with that – not my fault you’re a sore loser, and it doesn’t justify one second of the abuse you’re posting.

        • rhetoric_phobic says:

          Her stories seem to change by the minute?
          That’s a crock.

          • A_Real_Einstein says:

            Not really. Originally stated that she would answer any questions about her emails. The IG reported she and her staff refused to cooperate with State Department investigation.

            Originally she said that none of her emails contained sensitive or classified information. Now she says that nothing was classified at the time.

            She said that she had permission to operate a private server from her home. The IG reported that she absolutely did not have permission and purposely kept this a secret.

            She said that she had turned over all her govt related emails to the State dept. Now it turns out that she did not.

      • spktruth200 says:

        Dimwit, dummy, you don’t know anything. READ the damn IG report…she is guilty.

        • King of America says:

          Guilty of what?

        • Blueberry Hill says:

          The IG report not only has errors in it, it is not an indictment, admits that she did nothing illegal. It is all a political smokescreen, just wait and see how it turns out. The previous SOSs used personal computers themselves (remember it was a new technology for them), and YES Colon Powell did use his personal computer (that is just 1 of the errors in the “report”. No one is guilty until a jury says one is guilty. A jury won’t be needed as no crime was committed. There are a lot of false accusations, that is about it. Trey Gotti was caught red handed by the FBI altering her emails, he should be going to jail for that.

          ..

        • rhetoric_phobic says:

          The question was indicted for what? There is no crime.
          Stay stupid, your party depends on it.

        • bardgal says:

          I did. It’s states specifically that no laws were broken. Apparently you’re the one who needs to read it. Or read it again, until your comprehension catches up.

    • spktruth200 says:

      The answer YES…they know all the oppositional research on her, don’t give a damn….just like the Trumps supporters, he could kill someone on 5th ave, and they would still vote for him…Hilary is closer to an indictment than they know…doesn’t matter indicted or not, TRUMP will beat her to death with it…and he will win…she wont be able to take him down…no one has been able too…his trash mouth and the research he has on her, will destroy her. Bernie has it too, but too decent to use it…

    • Blueberry Hill says:

      Yes, we know all the stuff that the rethugs, and bernie butts, and trumpolene have done nothing but make up and spread crap that was not against the law while she was there. She did NOT vote for any of the trade bills Sanders lies about. She wasn’t in congress for the first one; she was a Senator only for the 2nd one and voted NO on it; the third one isn’t even up for vote yet, and she is not in congress and won’t even be voting on it. That is a humongous lie that Sanders spreads in every one of his speeches, and he knows that he is lying as he knows when she was and when she was not in congress for the votes on this. SHE HAS NEVER STARTED A WAR. She voted with the MAJORITY in congress to GIVE THE PRESIDENT AUTHORITY (NOT war) and sanders knows he is lying about that and what that vote really was. Sanders now is trying to take over the Dem Party and push REAL DEMS out. He is not a Dem and even named as a delegate a guy who is not a Dem. He isn’t a Dem, and that is why he doesn’t care if he destroys the Dem Party, in fact it looks like that is his whole goal. He is so selfish that he would destroy it if he doesn’t win and get his own way, just like a spoiled child who wants what doesn’t belong to him.

      ..

    • bardgal says:

      Name one thing she can be indicted FOR. No laws were broken. She cannot be indicted just because you think she should be, and you don’t like her. That’s not how the law works.

  11. bromeando says:

    I believe in a guy who’s never had an actual job in his life, and has spent
    said life moaning about how he should be able to pick other people’s pockets
    legally. The man is penniless, and has something like $65,000 in credit card
    debt. He’s a real economic guru. I want him with the national check book. NOT.

    • spktruth200 says:

      You don’t count being a representative or a senator an actual job…dimwit. He is not penniless, he is not a billionaire or a millionaire…did you see his taxes of 2014…$200,000….living in the same home for years…you know like us.

      • King of America says:

        So why he won’t release his taxes?

      • bromeando says:

        Democratic Socialism: a form of socialism with a democratic government; the ownership and control of the means of production, capital, land, property, etc., by the community as a whole —
        combined with a democratic government

        So, are you in favor of the government owning and managing the means of production?

        I’d be concerned with Sanders releasing only one year of tax returns.

  12. CDL66 says:

    “The guy who’s going to end up with about 300 fewer pledged delegates and more than 3 million fewer votes doesn’t get to say ‘you beat me, but you must adopt my position.’ It’s preposterous and arrogant, which of course means he will do it.”

    Wouldn’t be the first time. Ted Kennedy did the same thing, while 1,000 delegates down in 1980. Mind you, it didn’t work out well for Carter.

    • spktruth200 says:

      The candidate who worked in collusion and fraud with the DNC before ONE vote was cast…cant be president. In March 2015 the DNC, Clintons and 33 super delegates met to create the Hilary Victory Fund. They would get over a billion from the lobbyists and then told the super delegates WE will fund your campaigns if YOU become super delegates for Hilary. In April she filed with a fist full of delegates…you call that democracy…no that’s the vile Clinton machine with tentacles into every state demorat machine to make sure she (the establishment candidate) would be elected, even if they had to use voter suppression, voting machines that flipped votes…yeah, we know.. Howard Dean (google it) in 2004 went on TV and showed how a vote could be flipped in 20 sec. with a source code…they used it everywhere…but there were so many Bernie supporters all over this country, they couldn’t fake them all. If Bernie wins California it PROVES Hilary has slid so far down, even the establishment dems will be worried about their own seats….and give their vote to Bernie…that’s what is going to happen. Trump already beats her….

  13. Viir Exeter says:

    Hillary already did expose him: While Sanders could not provide a single piece of legislation that Clinton supported (or blocked) that offered proof of her being influenced by Wall Street, she slammed home an example of Sanders being influenced—and changing his voting because of influence—by the NRA. She noted that he’s been a reliable supporter ever since that first election loss.
    The second example of Sanders not comprehending what was happening in the debate came when he literally contradicted himself on the issue of climate change.
    He criticized Clinton’s pragmatic approach to energy policy and in particular fracking, by stating, “Incrementalism and those little steps is not enough. Not right now and not on climate change.”
    Unfortunately, Sanders answered the opposite way on a pointed question about the difficulty of transitioning to green, or sustainable, energy. Sanders replied that we will “not phase out tomorrow…” implying that we should, you know, take our time. Within seconds Sanders was both against, and then for baby-steps.
    Unbelievably bad debating by Sanders. But much better debating for Clinton.”

    Debate coach: Bad night for Bernie (4/15/16)

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/15/opinions/debate-coach-democratic-debate-graham/index.html

    • spktruth200 says:

      Wrong….Sanders has fought against Everyone of those sick corporate trade deals…and if not for him the Vets wouldn’t have got $15B. The pukes voted against it and so did some corporate owned dems. They all love war, but hate those who make it home..cuz they view them as useless eaters and losers….they didn’t die.

    • Candide Gunn says:

      She LIED… and the Clinton News network…that donated millions to her campaign by the way…LIED. All mass media in this country are owned by just 6 corporations…and 5 of those donated to her campaign…she can’t be trusted. Fracking is killing people in this country right now but you don’t care how many Americans die because you are a corporate dem and money is the most important thing in the world to both you and Clinton.

      Bernie won all the debates…all the MSM lied in favor of Clinton even when the polls showed he won by as much as 80%.

      You sheep are going to be the death of all of us.

  14. gococksri says:

    I appreciate someone finally noting just how much of a pass Bernie has been given not only for past positions but also for present ones, though finding much detail on his present ones almost requires an electron microscope. He has zero foreign policy chops and reacts to foreign policy inquiries with his default position: “Break up the Big Banks.” His signature domestic policies, while exciting in their potential, not only lack detail but are clearly, in this moment, not economically sustainable, not always the best way to approach a problem (Ms. Clinton is very right and Bernie is very wrong per the Big Banks; shadow banking is the real issue, though Bernie knows little about it), and fail to take into account social/cultural issues that defy one overriding principle or solution; i.e., they are bumper-sticker slogans rather than well thought-out policies.

    Bernie has also come to imagine that it is not a revolution but his revolution. It is as if he feels as though he embodies or incarnates the “revolution.” Hence, any critique of policy or him almost rises to the level of blasphemy. And, unfortunately, as the comments on this board indicate, he’s got a lot of followers who seem more than willing to mete out the ancient punishment for blasphemous statements or inquiries.

    Hypocrisy? An advocate for “the working man,” Bernie has never been one. And his railing against “the establishment” sounds a dissonant note given that he’s been living off The Man for over forty years, enjoying the salary and perks that only come to those who are part of “the establishment” in D.C. Furthermore, “the rigged system” he curses is the system that has provided him with the party contacts, machinery and Rolodex one needs to run a national campaign—if the Democrats have a “rigged system,” he should have run as an Independent. He should have, anyway, given that he hasn’t and won’t put the time in to enjoy the spoils of the party system. He’s been a Democrat for 15 minutes and, worse, won’t even say he will be “loyal” to the party in the upcoming campaign and elections.

    And I can’t understand why Jane is unable to click “Submit” on Turbo Tax so they could release those returns.

    One word for Gene Lyons: Duck! Bernie’s crowd does not take differing opinions very well. Petulance. Holding their breath. Stomping their feet. And all that.

    • palsifar says:

      Sanders has shown a lot more loyalty to the Democrats’ professed principles than the Democrats themselves do … case in point … count how many supposedly “progressive” Democrats are in support of the TPP … starting with our president …

      • King of America says:

        Yes the TPP conspiracy theories are definitely what we should be shaping policy on. That makes lots of sense and isn’t a perfect illustration of what this article is talking about, probably.

    • A_Real_Einstein says:

      You have entirely missed the point. Bernie is not about what is but rather what will be. His foriegn policy is very easy to understand based on how he has voted in the past. He will significantly reduce military spending to pay for other things and continue to move toward a very light footprint around the world. He will be a champion of peace and would prefer the US to be respected as opposed feared. This is very different than Hillarys position.

      • rhetoric_phobic says:

        He will? I think not. It may be on his wish list but what he would be able to accomplish is out of his hands unless we take the majority in congress.

        • A_Real_Einstein says:

          Correct that is our plan. See brand new congress. That is what our movement is all about. A House, senate and SC dominated by progressives. We can do this!

          • King of America says:

            Yes Sanders’ plan of “TBD, I’m too busy to think how that will work, that would be HARD”, as specified in his Rolling Stone interview, really seems like a good one. I mean, this guy is running for President and has no idea how he will get things done.

          • Candide Gunn says:

            He told you a thousand times how he was going to do it but you had your head so far up Clinton’s backside that you couldn’t hear him.

            Now he has signed up over 14,000 people to run for office as progressive democrats in just about every county in the country and at every level…the revolution is going ahead without you and the rest of the corporate dems who are selling the country to the highest bidder and electing bought and paid for corporate shills like Hillary Clinton.

            She is leading you like lambs to slaughter to her corporate masters and ever lower wages and repeal of worker’s rights… you are just too blind to see it.

          • King of America says:

            Good job replying to a month-old post about your failed candidate.

          • Candide Gunn says:

            You will eat those words and pray for Clinton to get impeached as soon as she starts her first war or sells more Americans to her corporate masters in the medical insurance scheme to bleed the middle class dry.

          • King of America says:

            Sorry you’re a sore loser! Not an excuse for supporting a fascist like Trump, which is what you are doing!

          • Candide Gunn says:

            I didn’t lose, Clinton cheated …she could never win in a free and fair election because only 28% of voters are democrats, the 47% of voters who don’t belong to either party hate her and 80% of those supported Sanders… banning Americans from voting is cheating and it is unethical and anti-American but it is the only way losers like Clinton and Trump can steal elections.

          • King of America says:

            Except that you’re lying. She won without cheating, and by the largest margin in 30 years.

            I hope that helps!

          • King of America says:

            … I don’t ever click on your links, but the documents that THE SANDERS CAMPAIGN hacked? I mean, wow. Victim blaming.

          • Candide Gunn says:

            You are scared of the truth and you are a liar

          • King of America says:

            Sorry you’ve got nothing but personal attacks! That’s what happens when you’re a conspiracy theorist, though!

          • Electric Bill says:

            King of America: I voted for Bill Clinton and Barack Obama both times… I, was too lazy or blind to actually check such links as the ones Candice sent you… whatever it was, at some point I started becoming disturbingly aware of such things as the highly illegal activities at The Clinton Foundation, and exactly what the TPP was and, why it is one of the most disastrous pieces of legislation ever, and that Clinton is behind it even if she and her running mate both were in favor of it until recently and then saying they were against just to get the support of Bernie Sanders— even though her body language tells, me she’s lying again.

            So long as you turn a blind eye to what she has been up to, there is no way you’ll ever get it right.

            And, YES, if you had the guts to Google such things as “120,000 voters purged from rolls in, Brooklyn” (Bernie’s home town), or checked to see that here have been several other verified massive voter fraud schemes in states including California, Arizona, and New Jersey, you, can be smug and confident in believing a total falsehood.

            The very fact that you would be so daft as to tell Candice “you never click on her links” shows your utter blindness.

          • King of America says:

            Yes, all those “highly illegal” activities at the Clinton Foundation, and a bunch of other mythical things that never happened.

            You are a joke.

          • Electric Bill says:

            “Mythical things that never happened” indeed… of course, she is pure as the driven snow, simply because you, are too afraid to look at the mountains of real and circumstantial evidence around the two of them: Bill and Hillary, and The Clinton Foudation. Of course they are beyond reproach, so long as you refuse to take off the blindfold.

            NOW tell me who the joke is… without even looking at both sides of the issue, and putting this blind faith in them, you show you lack confidence in the very stance you take.

            You are afraid to look at the “Clinton Cash” documentary that is on YouTube… you have these heroes, and you are terrified of realizing you had your money on the wrong horse. Sad.

            “You’re a joke”. Sling mud. That is what people do when they don’t actually have an argument against evidence they cannot refute. That is desperation.

            The most you can, say about Bernie is that he is, weak on foreign policy, which may have been true, but is, something that any candidate can remedy. But criminality is something of an entirely different sort… Bill and Hillary have been covering their tracks for years… and dozens of the very people that could have testified against them keep turning up dead—more than 90 of them— name one other politician who has unfortunately had so many people just happen to have died under odd circumstances or been outright murdered right before they were to have testified against these terrible people… murder victims such as Mary Mahoney, and Seth Rich.

            Bill Clinton would have gone to jail decades ago if Mary had not been shot in the head along with two of her coworkers immediately before an investigation into his asexual harassment— and this was before other such cases as Gennifer Flowers, Monica Lewinsky, and dozens of others. Those would have been minor indiscretions except for so many of them getting shot, but there were other murders and “awkward” deaths of their friends and employees such as Vince Foster, who had two bullet holes in, his body plus unexplained bruises on his neck, even though the autopsy ruled it a suicide. Very troubling, right before the Whitewater investigation in 1993… boxes of files had been removed from Forster’s home immediately afterward. This kept the Clintons out of trouble again… nearly a hundred times people kept dying, and, ir, was so convenient to the Clintons for one criminal matter or another

            But, like millions of others who idolize the Clintons, understandably, you turn a blind eye… and call others “a joke”.

          • King of America says:

            OK, sorry you’re nuts.

          • Electric Bill says:

            Serial troll: all you know how to do is attack .. don’t have the intelligence and discernment to look over evidence and either present a flaw in someone’s logic, or to say, “ah, alright, I admit that looks like it make sense”. Never look at any evidence that might corrode your position, that could get very embarrassing.

            You never even present a logical defense for your opinion… nothing but slinging mud.

            If we were in a court fighting this as a legal case, do you think you would win by libel and slander, or I would by actually offering some proof and logic?

          • King of America says:

            Yes all I do is attack (which apparently means “point out that what you posted is 100% debunked right-wing gibberish”).

          • Kristikdrozd says:

            “my room mate Mary Is getting paid on the internet $98/hr”…..!gd288ur

            two days ago grey McLaren. P1 I bought after earning 18,512 Dollars..it was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k Dollars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly payouts..it’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over hourly. 87 Dollars…Learn. More right Here !gd288u:➽:➽:.➽.➽.➽.➽ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsExcellenceGetPay$98Hour…. .★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★::::::!gd288u….,….

        • Candide Gunn says:

          He has already signed up over 14,000 people to run for office as progressive democrats and he has been campaigning for and raising funds for progressive democrats all over the country in the last few weeks. He has done more for the democrats in a year that Clinton has done in her entire career.

          He won the nomination, the cheating and the rigging of elections and purging voters in the most progressive areas and all the other nasty stuff Clinton and her DNC and several super PACs has done is positively unAmerican.

          • rhetoric_phobic says:

            Really? For weeks? Wow. That’s laughable.
            “He has done more for the democrats in a year that Clinton has done in her entire career.”
            That is pure BS as is your last paragraph.
            Hillary had more popular votes and that speaks volumes. No one could cheat or rig those.
            Positively UnAmerican?
            Grow up.

          • Electric Bill says:

            How can you be so naïve as to think defrauding an election is possible? It has been done repeatedly, such as the infamous “hanging chads” in the Florida contest between Gore and Bush.

            Just Google “computer programmer testifies he heloed rig Diebold voting machines”.

            This, was just weeks ago, in, court… the video IN COURT sjoes, his testimony.

            There is video IN COURT acknowledging that 120,000 names of voters were purged from the Brooklyn voting district, which is quite significant, since that is Brrnie’s, hometown, where he, is extremely popular according to, any poll such as Pew, Gallup and Harris.

            The names purged were of young voters with minority names such as “Enrico Galvez”, or “Willie Washington”. Bernie was heavily favored to win, but did not.

            Do a search in YouTube for “Hacking Democracy”, a 2006 documentary. There are dozens of clips from the documentary updating various parts, such as a hacker who demonstrated on camera how the machines could be manipulated to throw the election in whatever direction was desired, by any desired percentage, and without hardcopy backups, the fraud is undetectable. In many voting precincts, they deliberately have no backups, declaring everything “bulletproof” and unhackable.

            Despite proof that Diebold and other machines are hackable, someone simply declares they have been fixed and continue to be used.

          • rhetoric_phobic says:

            10 watts at the most.

    • A_Real_Einstein says:

      I have been listening to Bernie on the Thom Hartman show for nearly ten years. His positions have not changed since I have been listening. He is very specific on what he wants to do and how to pay for it. What would you like clarification on? Repealing Citizens United? Expanding Medicare? Free State University Tuition? Mandated child care and maternity and paternity leave $15 an hour minimum wage? Carbon Tax? Outlaw fracking? I will be happy to elaborate on any of these or any of his other positions.

      • Candide Gunn says:

        All of Clinton’s supporters are just as big of liars as she is, they are all totally ignorant of the world around them and they don’t want to know anything…they just lie to be lying.

        I have been a fan of Sanders for years also and there are thousands of videos of him saying the exact same thing since the 80s.

        He has been right almost every time he warned on the floor of the house or the senate about what would happen if they went ahead with their horrible plans like when he warned about the rise of offshore tax havens that Clinton pushed through and regime changes that Clinton was always pushing through.

        He has been right all his life and she has been wrong all of hers…she has never done anything for anyone but herself.

        I get that all these liars do not recognize an honest man when they see one since they apparently surround themselves with crooks and liars like Hillary Clinton.

        • Electric Bill says:

          Candide— to be fair, it would not be accurate to say all of Hillary’s followers are liars, too— it really is a matter ignorance and naiveté. It really is easy to be lulled into thinking someone is honest just because they look you in the eye and confidently coo, “Trust me.” It only requires someone be too trusting… in fact, it is the ones who are dishonest themselves that are more distrustful and willing to check out someone, else’s veracity.

  15. Otto T. Goat says:

    Hilarious.

  16. spktruth200 says:

    You must be employed by the vile David Brock. I am 73 and a life long democrat…I lived through the 60’s 70s and all of it. Your so ignorant of history you no doubt despised the protestors in the streets to end the horrific Viet Nam war of lies…just like the Iraq war of lies Hilary supported. Bernie Sanders is a brilliant, honest man loved by all his collegues on both sides of the ailes….Hilary only wishes she had the love from the people Bernie has…. HILARY cant win you idiots, Trump will beat her by a landslide….she is the most untrustworthy candidate next to trump ever to run. Bernie has had thousands and thousands at his rallies, while HIlary cant get 300! This isn’t 2008 morons, this is 2016 and citizens have turned against both establishment parties. they are a two headed corporate snake that needs beheading…Bernie will do it. If Hilary thinks Bernie supporters will come round to her…your foolish. We will vote for Jill Stein of the Green Party and build that progressive party. A vote for Hilary is a vote for the next President Trump.

    • A_Real_Einstein says:

      Amen brother.

    • King of America says:

      So if Sanders is so loved by the people, how come way less of them vote for him?

      • Siegfried Heydrich says:

        Do you know the technical term for crowds of people who don’t vote?

        Crowds.

      • Candide Gunn says:

        Cheating and rigged, corrupt elections…like the woman responsible for elections in NY who was suspended without pay for fixing the election for Clinton. She purged over 100,000 ballots JUST in the Brooklyn area where Bernie grew up… That was no coincidence… One of Clinton’s campaign team and super delegate bought a condemned house from her for $6 MILLION more than it was worth. Also no coincidence.

        • King of America says:

          Yes I get that you’re a sore loser, but that’s no excuse for conspiracy theories, or for supporting Donald Trump as you are doing.

          • Candide Gunn says:

            I didn’t lose… Clinton didn’t win… cheating is not winning

          • King of America says:

            Good news! She won by millions of votes, not cheating!

          • Candide Gunn says:

            She lost…she is pretty much universally hated by Americans and other countries, she rates only 2 points higher than Trump AND the ONLY thing she has to run on is fear of Trump.

          • King of America says:

            How did she get the largest victory margin in thirty years if she’s so unpopular?

          • Candide Gunn says:

            CHEATING… how dense are you? There are lawsuits all over the country for the cheating!
            The election person for NY has been fired because of the cheating!!

            http://usuncut.com/politics/brooklyn-voter-purge-official-fired/

            https://electionfraud2016.wordpress.com/tag/cheat/

          • King of America says:

            Yes, I get that you’re a delusional liar. So glad we have this opportunity to purge the left of fake progressives like yourself, willing to support a fascist and throw away half a century of civil rights gains because your white male revolution failed dismally.

          • Candide Gunn says:

            You are the fake… you are nothing but a corporate dem sucking the toes of Wall Street owned Clinton, the most corrupt woman in America…she is a REAL republican and she as done more harm to America than anyone but Bush.

            I am an old lady, an old hippie who has lived long enough to know wht is REALLY going on and when you grow up you will be ashamed of how stupid you were to sell your fellow Americans into the slavery of the corporations that own Clinton.

          • King of America says:

            OK, sorry you’re so mad about the inept and ineffectual career politician you pinned all your ridiculous fantasies on losing; it wasn’t because of a conspiracy, though, it was because he never bothered trying to appeal to the minority voters he’d alienated with his anti-immigration votes. Weird how they chose the candidate with the stronger civil rights record, exactly like polling said they would all along!

    • YankeeClipper says:

      BIG deal! I’m 69 and am a lifelong Democrat. I’ve been through as many, maybe more, elections than you. If you’ve been involved in politics so long, then you know very well, “thousands and thousands” at political rallies, like hundreds and hundreds of lawn signs, don’t vote in elections. Given Senator Sanders is 3 million votes behind Sec’y Clinton stands as living testimony that your assertions about thousands and thousands attending his rallies is empty rhetoric.

    • MichaelC says:

      With your screen name, how sad that you believe so many things that are not true. Leaving “love” aside — which isn’t terribly compatible with beheading — consider the fact that not one of his colleagues in Vermont leadership positions have endorsed him, and only one of his colleagues in the Senate. I’d say they know Bernie Sanders far better than you or I. And if Bernie Sanders were as brilliant as you say, he would have launched his revolution some time in the last 25 years he’s been in Congress. The best evidence that he can’t win is the fact that a majority of some 3 million voters have chosen HRC and not B.S.

      • Candide Gunn says:

        You corporate dems who are selling the country to the highest bidder are the REAL problem with this country…you fall for every corporate takeover and every corporate politician like the ones that would not endorse Sanders…the ONLY non-corporate candidate in the race.

        • MichaelC says:

          The self-righteous arrogance of Sandernistas like yourself would be irritating beyond toleration if it weren’t for the fact that it’s not going to be a factor in the general election. By his refusal to endorse HRC in order to continue raising money, retain Secret Service protection, etc., Bernie’s ego has relegated him to the footnotes of history.

    • bardgal says:

      I didn’t realize that older Boomers were ever Home-Schooled. Sad your education was so poor.

    • Robert Kowalke says:

      Yeah, and I bet you were a McGovern supporter. How bad did he get creamed?

  17. Yuriko says:

    How low will the Clinton supporters go to get her in office? I am from Orange City in New Jersey and this surprises me! I am ANGRY with how the Hillary supporters treat Bernie! The never ending stream of manufactured sewage from them! How can I support Hillary with this trash being thrown at us? #BernieOrBust You want rude, I am just the girl for the mission!

    • King of America says:

      OK, sorry to hear that you support Trump. Gross.

      • Yuriko says:

        I support Bernie, not lying Clinton supporters! Trash our candidate at her expense. You are driving Bernie and his supporters away. If she loses it is her fault not ours! I never promised to support her! I am voting for Bernie in New Jersey! I will pass this trash for all of the Bernie supporters to see.

        • King of America says:

          So you support Trump. Got it.

          • Siegfried Heydrich says:

            DRAMA QUEENS for DRUMPF!!

          • Yuriko says:

            I refuse to vote for someone that bashes me! 決して
            決して決して決して決して! I am saying no to Hillary the warmonger!

          • King of America says:

            I don’t really care how you justify what you’re doing – which, make no mistake, is supporting Donald Trump – to yourself.

          • Candide Gunn says:

            The hate coming from you Clintonistas is appalling. No wonder the Sanders supporters would not want to be aligned with such evil people.

          • King of America says:

            Sorry your unpopular and incompetent candidate lost because he was unpopular and incompetent! Better luck next personality cult!

          • Candide Gunn says:

            He didn’t lose and he is wildly popular… Clinton could not win in a free and fair election, she had to cheat to get as many delegates and she still didn’t win… she has to have super delegates to cheat for her.

          • King of America says:

            In fact, he did lose, and he is less popular than Clinton among everyone that isn’t a white male millennial.

            I hope that helps, angry Trump supporter!

          • Candide Gunn says:

            You are either the most clueless person here are just a flat out liar… which is it? Almost everyone in America hates Clinton, she has the lowest favorability rating of almost any politician in America … only 27% that right there is proof that she didn’t win…she cheated. Sanders has the highest favorability rating among all voters, not just democrats.

            Now if you want to worship the least honest, least trustworthy, least liked candidate that is your business but stop lying about other people it makes you look weak and pathetic and a sheep.

          • King of America says:

            It’s hilarious that you think you are in a position to call other people liars. Sanders is the least popular primary candidate in three decades.

          • Candide Gunn says:

            You are a liar… he is the MOST popular candidate in years. His likeability rating is 20 points above Clinton. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/06/27/clinton_i_understand_people_having_questions_about_my_trustworthiness_im_careful_with_my_words.html

          • King of America says:

            Hahaha yeah he polled at 40%, and in the end got a little more because of undemocratic caucus states. The was no point at which his polling average exceeded hers, and there’s no excuse for you supporting Trump.

          • Candide Gunn says:

            You are the one supporting Trump…if you had been a decent human being and voted for the better candidate then we would not have the 2 most hated people in America running for president…

          • King of America says:

            I’m supporting Trump how, exactly? This is the dumbest thing you’ve said during this hilarious meltdown, which – again – is over a months-old post.

          • Yuriko says:

            決してでよ!

        • Insinnergy says:

          “If she loses it is her fault not ours!”

          If you don’t vote at all, or vote for Trump, out of your sense of wounded childishness for not getting what you wanted, then Trump’s presidency is directly and specifically your fault.

          Politics is by it’s nature a game of compromise. It is very poorly suited to intransigent idealism… no-one ever gets exactly what they want. Instead you make the best choices you can.

          What you don’t do is throw your toys, and go hide under the bed, or protest vote for the orange-haired Caps-lock key. Because either of those options will likely get you 3-4 very conservative Supremes, and result in 40-60 YEARS of the Conservative Vision for Plutocracy, Racism, Sexim and Screwing Every Last Dollar Out of the Country… You know… American beliefs.

          TLDR: You fail to vote in your best interests and you are responsible for the result. (And will absolutely deserve the fruits of that result)

          • Yuriko says:

            I will vote Green Party and it is Hillarys and her supporters that make it impossible to support her. She has it won! Yet what the little Hillary bots say and write has forced my hand. I can just image how she will go back on her promises. Hillary and Trump both plan on cutting medicare and social security. She will cut my disability payments as well and cut back VA medical. It is as simple as this, I DO NOT TRUST HER!

          • Siegfried Heydrich says:

            Waaaaahhhh!!!! LOOK WHAT YOU MADE ME DO!!! Jesus . . . So, is your disability payment based on a mental issue? Because that would certainly explain a lot . . .

          • Candide Gunn says:

            Look over all the comments and see just how evil Clinton’s supporters are… There has never been such vile comments from Sander’s supporters anywhere on the internet…

          • King of America says:

            Sorry that you believe a bunch of nonsense, but it is no excuse for supporting Donald Trump.

          • Yuriko says:

            Compromise nothing, Hillary demands our surrender! I will never give her my quiet obedient consent! I bet she is working with Schultz to get Bernie out of the race.

          • bardgal says:

            “Surrender”? You’re not even a Bernie supporter. You’re a Trump sicko who’s trolling. back under your bridge, toddler.

        • bardgal says:

          Are you even old enough to vote? You sound like a toddler who’s never taken a Civics class.

    • TiredOfTheHaters says:

      No babe it’s the Bernie supporters who trash Clinton and us! That’s why there is a BernieOrBust. Is there a HillaryOrBust? No. You people are definitely rude, obnoxious, sexist, and GOP listening haters. Just check out your social media! Suing the Democratic Party and trying to persuade delegates is no way to run a campaign. Bernie is losing because it’s HIS own damn fault. Deal with it.

    • rhetoric_phobic says:

      You go rude girl.
      You’re a real credit to Bernie’s “revolution”.

  18. Yannick Neveux says:

    haha how old is this writer to still think socialism is communism and that even communism is the devil…the cold war is over dude! after so many decades of capitalism we now see some of the painful consequences and normal people would like to correct that…so looking at what is done abroad…yes, even in socialist countries is far from being stupid. The same way one can be pro-Jew but disagree with Israel policies, one can be more into socialism and not be pro Putin…evolve with your time body 😛

    • bardgal says:

      Old enough to understand that sadly, most Americans do wrongly equate socialism with communism, and every other ism ever, which have been labeled all bad by the GOP for the last half-century, on top of their systematically defunding public education so no one who graduated past 1980 has ever had a Civics class. All the GOP has to do is scream SOCIALIST 24/7, then Bernie will confirm that, and it’s done. There aren’t enough people who even know what socialism is to stop a Trump ass-kicking if Bernie is the nominee.

      • Robert Kowalke says:

        Amen sister. All these Bernie supporters seem to be a lot of Johnny come latelies and have no idea how Democratic candidates have been dogged with charges of being Socialists in the past and how that plays out in Peoria if they even understand what that expression means.

  19. RamKumar says:

    Haha, those university teachers were not wrong, this writer was a dimwit early in her life. Revolutions don’t happen after friendly conversations over Chinese tea, they happen when a large majority are screwed up systematically by elites. Clintons are those corrupt elites, they have taken money from cronies who have screwed the middle class. Middle class is revolting. Better get used to it and prepare for it.

  20. TiredOfTheHaters says:

    First of all, when has it been a crime to accept Wall Street speeches and keeping them out of people’s business? Only when she does it or when a male candidate does it? Mrs. Clinton has and still is running a legitimate campaign. Most accusations of her “wrong-doings” have been debunked. Also, it’s not up to her to expose B.S. for his b.s. It should have been the incompetent media. Instead they treated him like an angel. That’s how he got this far! Hillary has been falsely accused of enough stuff, she does not need to add fuel to the fire.

    • bardgal says:

      Plenty of male candidates have done that, and no one cares.

      • mary5920 says:

        Jerry Ford thought it was right to do so, and he earned quite a bit serving on corporate boards & giving speeches. He grew up poor and felt he’d earned the right through years of struggle.

    • Terry Casey says:

      when you and husband bank 140 million from speeches….that’s when.

      • TiredOfTheHaters says:

        So I guess Drumpf and Sanders are criminals too. Unless according to you the rules only apply to Hillary. Do better to hide your sexism.

  21. Adp3d says:

    Wow, did you know that Ms. Clinton used to be a staunch Republican? In fact she was a proud “Goldwater Girl”…

  22. Kristikdrozd says:

    “my room mate Mary Is getting paid on the internet $98/hr”…..!gd287ur

    two days ago grey McLaren. P1 I bought after earning 18,512 Dollars..it was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k Dollars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly payouts..it’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over hourly. 87 Dollars…Learn. More right Here !gd287u:➽:➽:.➽.➽.➽.➽ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsExcellenceGetPay$98Hour…. .★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★::::::!gd287u….,……

  23. John Spalding says:

    Let’s see; a writer for the Arkansas Times that lives on a farm in Arkansas and has written numerous books defending Hillary. I can see why his article is so “fair & balanced”. The least the National Memo could do is to provide a little background about their writers so we know where they’re coming from.

  24. Terry Casey says:

    what terrible writing……

  25. Ruth1940 says:

    Another pundit who hasn’t really listened to Bernie’s message! Dennis Harbaugh explained in a recent Courier letter to the editor (correct except that Bernie may win the nomination):

    “During the 2008 primary there were few policy differences
    between Clinton and Obama, by their own admission. The 2008 primary was an
    election about personality, gender and race. When it became clear in early June
    Obama had enough delegates to win the nomination, Clinton had no reason to
    continue on since her only goal was to win the nomination.

    “In contrast, there are significant policy differences
    between Clinton and Sanders in 2016. Rather than Sanders’ “ego getting the best
    of him” as Wikert suggests, actually it’s just the opposite. Sanders is leading
    a movement focused on numerous issues far greater than himself. He is trying to
    shift the ideological direction of the Democratic party, something that will
    necessarily involve issue discussions, media coverage and platform debates at
    the party convention. It’s called democracy.

    “Sanders and most Democrats will eventually get behind Hillary.
    Facts show at this point in 2008 only 60 percent of Hillary supporters said
    they would vote for Obama. Today, 72 percent of Bernie’s supporters already say
    they will support Clinton.”

    wcfcourier.com/news/opinion/mailbag/letters-to-the-editor-wednesday-june/article_31697b9d-2309-5d9e-9cf3-4e4f0fb284a4.html

    • mary5920 says:

      I don’t think you read the essay, and most of us certainly hear Bernie’s message. The vision is mostly good, but the policy details are sorely lacking, and the arrogance is grating. He doesn’t manage his own campaign staff successfully, which doesn’t bode well for any executive responsibilities.
      The essay is very good.

    • ErnestineBass says:

      There were few appreciable differences between Clinton and Obama in 2008.

      The same cannot be said of Clinton and Sanders in 2016.

  26. Lillian454255 says:

    I currently make around $6.000-$8.000 a month for freelance jobs i do at home. Everyone prepared to work easy freelance jobs for several hrs daily from your living room and get solid profit while doing it… Try this work http://ur1.ca/p7vwh

  27. esther25255898 says:

    I currently profit close to six to eight thousand dollars on monthly basis with an online job i found on internet. For anyone prepared to do easy online jobs for several hours daily at your home and get good paycheck for doing it… Try this gig http://self40.com

    sdrfdfedr

  28. David Hewitt says:

    More paid-for propaganda from the desperate ruling class. There is nothing to ‘expose’. Otherwise, she surely would have. So which is it? Is she evil or is she stupid? Take your pick!

  29. Electric Bill says:

    Gross misrepresentation of the fscts!!! (Don’t they call that lying?)

    Bernie did NOT lose New York badly as you say… This forum dies not allow posting links so you have to google, “120,000 voters purged from voter rolls in Brooklyn” and “investigation into, massive voter fraud in Brooklyn”.

    You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink. If you are too weak in your convictions that the Clintons, Loretta Lynch, DWS et al are pure as the driven snow, it is understandable why you would be afraid to do a few minutes of googling to find out how monstrouslycdirty the Clintons and the Clinton Foundation are.

    Yes, it is clear why you would be chastising Bernie backers for being “sore losers”.

    Searches:
    Clinton Cash
    Mary Mahoney murder
    Vince Foster murder cover – up
    Seth Rich murder
    90 deaths and the Clintons

    What other politicians do you know that keep having people murdered or die suspiciously right before they were to testify before the FBI or other investigative bodies? Not three or four– NEARLY A HUNDRED?

    One or two would be suspicious—how many dozens does it take for you to see a pattern? You just are not willing to see your heroes and heroines toppled? Calling people “conspiracy nuts” handles it all so nicely?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.