Type to search

A Democrat That Can Win Is What We Need

Campaign 2016 Congress Featured Post Memo Pad Politics Top News

A Democrat That Can Win Is What We Need

Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders

In my estimation, there’s only one presidential candidate in 2016 fully capable of doing the job, and she’s anything but a natural.

As Hillary Clinton has also been the target of maybe the longest-running smear campaign in American history — including roughly a dozen partisan Congressional investigations and a six-year leak-o-matic “independent counsel” probe led by the fastidious Kenneth Starr — it’s no wonder some voters mistrust her.

Overcoming that suspicion is her biggest challenge.

Republicans have predicted her imminent indictment for 20 years. You’d think by now they’d have made something stick, if there was anything to it. But it didn’t happen then, and it’s not going to happen now for an obvious reason: in a democracy, political show trials endanger the prosecution as much as the defense.

Anybody who watched Hillary’s one-woman demolition of Rep. Trey Gowdy’s vaunted Benghazi committee should understand that.

Meanwhile, one of the best things about Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign is his unwillingness to smear his opponent. Too bad many of his most passionate supporters aren’t so fastidious. With Iowa’s make-or-break moment approaching for Sanders, it’s getting nasty out there.

It’s not so much the tiresome attacks on anybody who disagrees with them as a corrupt sellout. (My corporate overlords, of course, dictated that sentence.) It’s the seeming belief that people can be browbeaten into supporting their guy.

Some are a bit like Trump supporters–although normally without the threats. That too may be changing. Recently a guy visited my Facebook page saying people like me deserve “to be dragged into the street and SHOT for…treason against not only our country and our people, but the ENTIRE [BLEEPING] WORLD.”

My response — “Settle down, Beavis” — sent him into a rage.

But no, Hillary’s not an instinctive performer, although her stage presence strikes me as improved since 2008. A person needn’t be “inauthentic” (pundit-speak for “bitch”) to be uncomfortable in front of an audience.

As for authenticity, few Democrats could work a crowd like North Carolina Sen. John Edwards.

President Obama nailed it during a recent Politico interview:

Hillary does better with “small groups” than big ones, he observed, before putting his thumb heavily on the scale. He described Hillary as a fighter, who’s “extraordinarily experienced — and, you know, wicked smart and knows every policy inside and out — [and] sometimes [that] could make her more cautious, and her campaign more prose than poetry,” he said.

Even so, she came closer to defeating Obama in 2008 than Republicans have. “Had things gone a little bit different in some states or if the sequence of primaries and caucuses been a little different,” the president said, “she could have easily won.”

Indeed. As non-endorsements go, the president’s remarks couldn’t have been more complimentary. “She had to do everything that I had to do, except, like Ginger Rogers, backwards in heels,” he added.

Obama wisely said nothing critical about Bernie Sanders, but nothing particularly warm either. “Bernie came in with the luxury of being a complete long shot and just letting loose,” he observed. The president said he understood the appeal of Sanders “full-throated…progressivism.”

Well, Mr. Hopey-Changey as Sarah Palin calls him, certainly should.

Seven years of trench warfare with congressional Republicans, however, have brought out the president’s inner pragmatist. Which Democrat is best-positioned to consolidate the Obama legacy and move it forward?

First, one who stands a good chance of being elected.

Look, there’s a reason Karl Rove’s super PAC is running anti-Hillary TV ads in Iowa. Bernie Sanders “radical” past makes him a GOP oppo-research dream. Never mind socialism. Did you know he once wrote a column claiming that sexual frustration causes cervical cancer?

That in the 1970s, he called for nationalizing oil companies, electric utilities, and — get this — TV networks? Asked about it, he deflects by noting that Hillary once supported Barry Goldwater. Yeah, when she was 16. Bernie was in his mid-30s when he called for confiscating the Rockefeller family fortune. How most Americans hear that is: if he can take away their stuff, he can take away mine.

Sure, many people went off the rails during the Seventies. Most aren’t running for president. Bernie strikes me as a fine senator and a decent man. However, the current U.S. Congress has voted 60 times to repeal Obamacare. And he’s going to give us single-payer “Medicare for all?”

No, he’s not. Assuming he could find a sponsor, it’d never get out of committee. I doubt I’ll live to see single-payer health insurance in the USA. And I’m younger than Bernie. A complete retrofitting of American health care simply isn’t in the works. The votes just aren’t there, and they won’t materialize by repeating the magic word “revolution.”

President Obama says Hillary represents the “recognition that translating values into governance and delivering the goods is ultimately the job of politics, making a real-life difference to people in their day-to-day lives.”

Hard-won reality, that is, as opposed to fantasy.

Photo: Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton (L) and Bernie Sanders (R) smile at the crowd following the First in the South Presidential Candidates Forum held at Winthrop University in Rock Hill, South Carolina November 6, 2015. REUTERS/Chris Keane

Gene Lyons

Gene Lyons is a political columnist and author. Lyons writes a column for the Arkansas Times that is nationally syndicated by United Media. He was previously a general editor at Newsweek as wells an associate editor at Texas Monthly where he won a National Magazine Award in 1980. He contributes to Salon.com and has written for such magazines as Harper's, The New York Times Magazine, The New York Review of Books, Entertainment Weekly, Washington Monthly, The Nation, Esquire, and Slate. A graduate of Rutgers University with a Ph.D. in English from the University of Virginia, Lyons taught at the Universities of Massachusetts, Arkansas and Texas before becoming a full-time writer in 1976. A native of New Jersey, Lyons has lived in Arkansas with his wife Diane since 1972. The Lyons live on a cattle farm near Houston, Ark., with a half-dozen dogs, several cats, three horses, and a growing herd of Fleckvieh Simmental cows. Lyons has written several books including The Higher Illiteracy (University of Arkansas, 1988), Widow's Web (Simon & Schuster, 1993), Fools for Scandal (Franklin Square, 1996) as well as The Hunting Of The President: The 10 Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton, which he co-authored with National Memo Editor-in-Chief Joe Conason.

  • 1


  1. Otto Greif January 27, 2016

    Obama worked with Hillary but he’s not enthusiastic about her at all.

    1. TZToronto January 27, 2016

      And few here are enthusiastic about you. Why are you here, and how much do they pay you?

      1. Otto Greif January 27, 2016

        Don’t you find that interesting? He knows her well.

        1. Steve Batchelor January 30, 2016

          The one thing we find interesting is that your age more than likely surpasses your IQ.

          1. Otto Greif January 30, 2016

            Average black IQ is 85.

    2. Independent1 January 28, 2016

      And you know that Obama is not enthusiastic about Hillary how?? You don’t have enough brains to get out of the rain – how could you possibly know what Obama is thinking?? And you clearly don’t!!

      Obama is determined not to be a major factor in determining who will run for the Dems in 2016 so he wouldn’t overdo his enthusiasm for any candidate.

      1. Otto Greif January 28, 2016

        He hasn’t shown any enthusiasm for her, that’s how I know.

        1. Steve Batchelor January 30, 2016

          Your belief’s are still trying to come to terms with the world being round and not square and that the sun doesn’t revolve around Earth, Otto!

    3. jmprint January 28, 2016

      They had their differences, just Like Bernie and Hiliary do, but both men know, this women is a very intelligent women, she will do and fight for our causes and she will get things accomplished. Here she was drilled for over 8 hours and stood firm, Trump, is questioned on his vocal words and he freaks.

      1. Otto Greif January 28, 2016

        Why the lack of enthusiasm then?

        1. Independent1 January 28, 2016

          What is it you don’t understand by: Obama is intentionally trying not to influence who is nominated to run in 2016???

          1. Otto Greif January 28, 2016

            Why? Surely he knows more than anyone what a great President Hillary would make.

    4. Steve Batchelor January 30, 2016


  2. Otto Greif January 27, 2016

    “delivering the goods is ultimately the job of politics”

    Gibs me dat.

  3. docb January 27, 2016

    The President keeps his cards close to the vest ..He will not come out for either of them until the primary is done!

    1. yabbed January 28, 2016

      If you don’t read President Obama’s words as an endorsement of Clinton, you are very politically naive.

  4. TZToronto January 27, 2016

    Just because single-payer is unlikely to be the law of the land, that’s no reason not to try. If the party of greed and where’s mine? can vote 60 times to repeal Obamacare, the Democrats can try once for single-payer.

    1. JPHALL January 27, 2016

      While true, we both know that the majority of politicians are cowards. That is true of both Republicans and Democrats. That is why nothing gets done on guns and other issues. Remember that back in 2010 there were Democrats that voted against the ACA.

      1. @HawaiianTater January 27, 2016

        Nothing great is ever accomplished in life by people who don’t try because they’re told they cannot succeed.

        1. Steve Batchelor January 30, 2016

          That’s a great and honorable quote but the thing I keep coming back to is are we going to bet our lives on it. This country isn’t going to change overnight no matter what Bernie supporters want. We,as a Country have done this to ourselves by not voting,especially during non Presidential years. Getting us to where we want to be is going to take at least 2 more Presidential cycles.
          I would love to see the change happen overnight but I’m not going to bet my life or my children’s or my grandchildren’s life on it!

          1. @HawaiianTater January 30, 2016

            You can look at our own history as a country and see that massive change can happen in short periods of time. It may not be “overnight”, as you put it, but it can happen a lot quicker than you think it can. People are pretty fed up with what has happened to our government. The right person could come along and cause upheaval of the whole thing. Time will tell if that is Bernie or not. What I can tell you for certain is that Hillary will not be creating any massive change. All she will deliver is tiny increments of betterment, just barely enough to keep people from not revolting, while the system continues to screw over the population. Meanwhile, we’ll be back in the same boat every four years with a population that is ready to explode.

            I think it’s time to push the button and nuke the whole thing. It’s better than the status quo of holding our ankles and being expected to smile through the process.

    2. Theodora30 January 28, 2016

      A lot of people seem to think that th only way to get universal, quality affordable coverage is through single payer. Tell that to the Germans, Swiss, Dutch, Japanese and a few others who have good health care systems with many private insurance plans from which to choose coverage. (Germany has 200+). Germany has had this system (Google “Bismarck health care model”) since the late 1800’s and it is very successful and popular. Heck, even our Medicare program allows the choice of private insurance through Medicare Advantage plans, making it a system with a public option. If the private insurers don’t measure up people can choose the government program.
      Getting a public option would be hard enough but a lot more doable in a country that has been inundated with anti-government propaganda for years with little push back from progressives or the “liberal” media. If our feckless insurance companies do not shape up then we will transition to a single payer system. The other important thing to fight for is giving Medicare the ability to negotiate drug prices.
      Singie payers is a red herring.

    3. yabbed January 28, 2016

      Wake up. Democrats have tried for decades to advance health care options in this country, including a universal plan. It will not pass Congress. For Sanders to give up the Democrats huge accomplishment of getting health coverage expanded and to remove the preexisting conditions exclusion is nothing but pie in the sky stupidity. He’s a unicorn salesman, not a seasoned politician with an attachment to reality.

    4. jmprint January 28, 2016

      I do want single payer, but the only way it will work is to get ALL the insurance companies out of the loop and do you know how many people make a GOOD living of insurance? TOO MANY.

      1. James Ryan January 28, 2016

        Actually, you can just put in a public option administered by Medicare and then watch how fast people leave the private insurance market.

        1. Steve Batchelor January 30, 2016

          Not going to happen unfortunately any time soon unless we can miraculously win a super majority in both houses of Congress.
          If Bernie couldn’t get it passed in his home state how do you believe he will get the Republicans assholes to agree to anything he proposes.

  5. @HawaiianTater January 27, 2016

    “A democrat that can win is what we need”

    If those are your only standards, then it doesn’t matter who we nominate, because all 3 (yes, even O’Malley) could beat the Republicans this year. Even a rudimentary understanding of how demographics and the electoral college works would tell you that. Hillary supporters like to claim Bernie is unelectable. Think that through. You think states that vote Dem in Every. Single. Election. are all of sudden going to vote for someone like Trump or Cruz just because the socialism word is scary? You think blacks/latinos/other minorities and single women are going to all of a sudden forget about how Republicans have treated them over the years? If that’s what you think, then I have a bridge to sell you.

    The simple fact of the matter is that there is no such thing as being an unelectable Dem this year. The alternative really is just that bad plus demographics and the electoral college are already the Republicans worst enemy. They have doubled down on everything they said they had to stop doing after getting their butts kicked in 2012. There are not enough angry old white Christians in the USA anymore to elect a POTUS and that is basically the only group of people the GOP is appealing to. No matter who gets the nomination, be it Bernie or Hillary, they will crush whoever the GOP limps out of the barn with. It’s time we stop listening to the people who tell us what we CAN’T do and start talking about what we CAN accomplish.

    Go big or go home. I’d rather go down swinging for the fences than accept the world as it is.

    1. yabbed January 28, 2016

      That is so not true. Middle America elects Presidents. Middle America is not going to elect a Socialist. Democrats are not going to vote for a pro gun, anti ACA candidate.

      1. James Ryan January 28, 2016

        Well, first of all he is not going to get rid of the ACA – he will put in the public option that should have always been a part of the plan and cut out the insurance companies. Two, this Middle American would vote for him for president in a heartbeat – if he gets the nomination.

    2. Steve Batchelor January 30, 2016

      Tater…I value your opinion because we think alike on a lot of things but in this I have to differ with you. Yes, Hillary will trounce whomever the clowns nominate because they won’t be able to besmirch her integrity…Been trying for 30 years and haven’t yet…On the other hand when Karl Rove and his band of assholes start in on Bernie by the time the conventions are over, if he wins, the word across every headline and and blog in America will be “Communist”. You know and I know it’s BS but do think that the stupid voters in this country aren’t going to let that sink in a little. Think about 3 or 4 months of that.
      While I being long winded…lol…Another problem for me is going to be the Presidential debates..Hillary will make whomever she goes up against look like a simpleton…I’m not convinced Bernie can do that, especially concerning foreign policy.
      I believe the country will be better off with Hillary as President and Bernie and Elizabeth controlling Congress and pushing Hillary to the left on all of the important domestic issues concerning us.
      Just my 2 cents!

      1. @HawaiianTater January 30, 2016

        Steve, you’re thinking in conventional wisdom when you talk about Bernie being called a communist and that it will somehow scare voters into electing a Trump or a Cruz. If you’ve learned anything during this election cycle, it’s that conventional wisdom no longer applies. That might have worked if, you know, the Republican party wasn’t imploding and they were actually putting forth a strong candidate with broad appeal. No matter how unelectable anyone might think Bernie or Hillary is, the unelectable is much stronger on the other side of the aisle.

        1. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

          Even though it was 40 years ago, I think that paper he wrote in the Vermont Voice? about a woman fantasizing about 3 men raping her will destroy him. Seriously. Even though it was in the mid 70’s, it will give a lot of women the “ick” factor.

          1. @HawaiianTater January 31, 2016

            Meh, it’s not as big a deal as you might think it is. It’s not enough to swing an election to a Trump or a Cruz. Some stupid fiction from 40 years ago is not worse than the ick factor Trump and Cruz present live and in person.

    3. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

      I have one word “Bush”

      1. @HawaiianTater January 31, 2016

        Dubya stole his first election and the 2nd one was during a time of war that had Americans scared stupid, as shown in their votes.

  6. FireBaron January 28, 2016

    Tater, TZ, Granny, Paul and company, I recently heard from our friend and fellow poster Dominick Vila. He is still alive and with us, but has been going through a family crisis. He needs all of our support and prayers. For those who are not “believers” please forward your “positive thoughts” to him and his family. He hopes to be back with us soon.

    1. Theodora30 January 28, 2016

      That is a shame. I miss his thoughtful comments – something that is in short supply.

      1. CrankyToo January 28, 2016

        I’m very sorry to hear of his troubles, but encouraged to know he’s still with us. His is an important voice of reason.

    2. plc97477 January 28, 2016

      Oh thank God. I’m sorry he is going through some issues but I’m glad he is still with us. We all miss him.

    3. jmprint January 28, 2016

      Thanks for the information, I was wondering and had been praying that all was well.

    4. Steve Batchelor January 30, 2016

      Thank you…So glad to hear Dominick is at least physically OK and hope he gets his problems sorted out. My thoughts and prayers for him and his family!

    5. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

      Sending all positive thoughts his way…. Love to his family.

    6. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

      Thank you. My best to him.Tell him he’s missed.

  7. itsfun January 28, 2016

    Character counts and I believe Hillary has none.

    1. yabbed January 28, 2016

      And I believe the berniebots who show up on comment sites and spout Hillary Hate are GOP operatives or paid trolls of AIPAC or the NRA.

      1. itsfun January 28, 2016

        Compromising the national security of my country for her own gain shows a complete lack of character. Lying to the families of the victims of the Benghazi murders shows a complete lack of character. She did those things, and no one has to be paid to point it out.

        1. jmprint January 28, 2016

          What difference did it make whether they were killed over a video or spontaneous combustion, they died and it wasn’t Hillary’s fault. Trump has done more harm with his vocal cords against America then emails that didn’t affect anyone. You are like other republicans, don’t care for the clowns that are running, so you will vote for Bernie just so that Hilary doesn’t make it to the white house.

          1. itsfun January 28, 2016

            She lied to grieving families! The emails compromised national security. You seem to think these are wonderful attributes for a Presidential candidate. Don’t give me the ole she didn’t know they were classified. It is part of the SOS job to know what a classified document is. If she doesn’t know the difference, then she isn’t qualified to be a letter carrier.

          2. yabbed January 28, 2016

            You need to turn off Fox News. It’s making you silly.

          3. itsfun January 28, 2016

            The families have been interviewed on TV. Are you believing they are lying about what they were told by Hillary?

          4. Independent1 January 30, 2016

            The mastermind of the attack said the original reason was the video!! What is wrong with you???????

          5. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

            So what???

          6. itsfun January 31, 2016

            So what? You are just fine with Hillary lying to grieving families? What else is she lying about?

          7. Polana January 28, 2016

            At least her computers didn’t get hacked like some others including pentagon. Who cares. Let the Benghazi rest. She testified for 11 hrs + and after millions of dollars spend they couldn’t fins squat. Trump would be crying after 1 hr of interrogations. R U are grievieng family member? How do U know how they REACT?/ None of them spoke against her why do U??? It would be better that the Republicans stop using the Benghazi family as their props. Shame.
            Shame on you 2.
            Through my travels actually the world speaks very well of her and as a woman how she understands the need for education, jobs, environment and Peace. Even Putin have respect for her Faux News will not tell U that/ Leave your cage and travel more beyond the borders of your cave.

          8. itsfun January 29, 2016

            We don’t know if her computers were hacked or not. Do you think our enemies are going to tell us if they hacked her computers? Benghazi happened and you just can’t ignore it because you like Hillary. I have seen and listened to the family members of the Benghazi victims and every one of them say Hillary lied to them. They do speak against her and I speak against her because she can’t be trusted to ever tell the truth and has committed crimes with her personal server use and having secret and top secret documents on it. This has been proven by the FBI. A American general was convicted for allowing confidential documents to be seen. He also may lose his rank, costing his thousands of dollars. Believe it or not, even men understand the need for education, jobs, environment, and peace. Open you eyes and actually see what she is doing and has done. Maybe you spend to much time traveling and listening to Muslims, Socialists and buying into their propaganda.

          9. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

            Experts can tell if a computer is hacked. Oh my gawd, turn off the GOP garbage and go out and take a walk on he park and think for yourself. Maybe read the book 1984.

          10. itsfun January 31, 2016

            I spent 32 years as a data system analyst, the last 5 as a IT Security Officer. Learn a little bit about the field before you start telling me what can and can’t be. Why read 1984 Hillary and Bernie want us to live it. Try reading the book by Karl Marx and you will see the progressive agenda.

          11. Independent1 January 30, 2016

            What is wrong with you?? The mastermind of the attack said the original reason for the attack WAS THE VIDEO!! SHUT UP ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!

          12. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

            Itsfun, there us something deeply wrong with you. She told the families what everyone thought had happened, which actually turned out to be the final resolution. Are you being obtuse on purpose, or are you stupid and we should just pat you on the head and humor you?

          13. itsfun January 31, 2016

            Their is something seriously wrong with a Presidential candidate that try to excuse her incompetence by lying to the families of dead victims. She has lied about dodging bullets in Bosnia. It also has been proven she and the administration knew it wasn’t a video that caused the murders.

          14. Independent1 January 31, 2016

            Why do you keep lying about this issue? You’re the flatout liar!!!!!!!!

        2. ray January 28, 2016

          I think you are.

        3. greenlantern1 January 28, 2016

          Ever hear of Ahmed Abu Khattala?
          He is an actual, Benghazi, murder defendant!
          Will the e-mail, between him and Terry Jones, be demanded?
          YOU BETCHA!!

        4. meridaest January 29, 2016

          False charges = Character attacks without evidence to back them up = Republican talking point lies.

          1. itsfun January 29, 2016

            So every family of the victims are lying and only Hillary is telling the truth. The discovered classified emails are not there. Top Secret emails that some Congressmen and email investigators aren’t cleared to see don’t exist either. Like it or not, you have to accept what is being discovered.

    2. greenlantern1 January 28, 2016

      Trump has character?
      Did Nixon?
      Spiro Agnew?
      John Mitchell?

      1. itsfun January 28, 2016

        I don’t recall saying anything about Trump, Nixon, Agnew or Mitchell.

        1. greenlantern1 January 28, 2016

          Your silence speaks volumes!!

        2. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

          Or Reagon, Bush, Cheney.

    3. Independent1 January 28, 2016

      And which of the worthless Republican clown-show candidates do you think would have people from around the world standing up and supporting them because their actions actually ended up saving their lives?? As Hillary did during a program intended to recognize women who had been a major influence in promoting the lives of women??

      Hillary has more character in her little finger than any GOP wannabee has in their whole body!! Not one of those clown-show candidates has enough compassion in their body aside from for themselves, to do anything for anyone unless there was money for themselves involved!!

      See this about Hillary:

      But that night in the theater two years ago, the other six brave women came up on the stage. Anabella De Leon of Guatemala pointed to Hillary Clinton, who was sitting right in the front row, and said, “I met her and my life changed.” And all weekend long, women from all over the world said the same thing:

      “I’m alive because she came to my country and she talked to our leaders, because I heard her speak, because I read about her

      .””I’m alive because she went on our local TV and talked about my work, and now they’re afraid to kill me.

      “”I’m alive because she came to my village, put her arm around me, and had a photograph taken together.”


      1. Steve Batchelor January 29, 2016

        Thank you!

    4. ray January 28, 2016

      we know you don’t have any.

      1. itsfun January 28, 2016

        and you do??

      2. James Ryan January 28, 2016

        and you prove the author’s point.

    5. Steve Batchelor January 29, 2016

      Character counts for what?
      I guess you know Hillary personally?
      You’re doing just what the Rethugs want…Character assassination by proxy.
      I don’t know either personally but what I’m assessing both by is what I believe to be the best shot at defeating any clown they nominate in their circus of a convention.
      They haven’t got a prayer of assassinating Hillary’s chances of getting elected because they have been trying for 30 years and haven’t succeeded yet. Sure they have maybe made people not think all that kindly of Hillary but if she wins the nomination she will make whichever Rethug that wins their nomination look like the clown he is in any and all debates.
      On the other hand if Bernie wins the nomination it will be open season on someone that they have never tried to besmirch before and when they get done I will bet my bottom dollar that too many people will believe he’s a communist to get elected.
      So, my question for you is…Will you vote for Hillary in the general or will you let the Republican Party ruin this country?

      1. itsfun January 30, 2016

        I wouldn’t vote for Hillary if she was the only one on the ballot. Bernie is a admitted Socialist. Bernie and Hillary have a lot of the same ideas. Hillary just won’t admit she is a Socialist. Have you seen where the Obama administration just admitted she had something like 27 “Top Secret” documents on her personal server. Trying to say they weren’t marked is no excuse at all. If the Secretary of State can’t tell a “Top Secret” document from a personal one, that person has absolutely no qualifications to be the Commander in Chief.

        1. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

          And you just won’t admit that you’re brain washed by right wing propaganda easily debunked “news sites” and fat radio jocks. Why on earth do you believe that stuff? 27 “Top Secret” documents on her personal server? What on earth is “Top Secret”? Do you live in the 1950’s? Are you aware of what is customary or normal protocol that everyone does in those offices? Or are you just like an old gossiping hen, being told stuff that you really don’t know what on earth is really done because you read Newsmax, and Breitbart, and garbage like that. She isn’t being investigated, you know.

          1. itsfun January 31, 2016

            In case you didn’t know, the Obama administration just admitted to 22 Top Secret documents on her personal server.

            This will give you information on what Top Secret classification is. Talking about or putting top secret document in harms way is not normal protocol.

          2. Independent1 January 31, 2016

            All of which were unclassified at the time she received them. And the receiver of a document does not necessarily have the authority to classify them.

          3. Independent1 January 31, 2016

            My suspicions are that itsfun is posting from the RNC. So no amount of logic is going to keep itsfun from spewing rightwing lies and distortions of the truth.

        2. Ken Stevens January 31, 2016

          It’s fun you obviously don’t understand how the classification process works. Things as benign as Christmas lists get classified as secret or top secret. To assume that someone should know an unmarked document is classified is ridiculous. Besides, why did nobody investigate Colon Powell for using a private server?

          1. itsfun January 31, 2016

            Colon Powell is not the issue here. The issue is Top Secret government documents being put in harms way. The General got 2 years probation and a fine for allowing confidential documents to be compromised.

          2. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            GW Bush didn’t.

          3. itsfun February 1, 2016

            didn’t what? Are you saying two wrongs make a right?

          4. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            Are you saying the punishment should be greater for Hillary, when there was none for anyone else?
            Plus Bush deleted over 22k of his emails.
            Get over it. It’s a faux scandal as the right is in terror of her. Nothing more.

          5. itsfun February 1, 2016

            How about the General? He got fined and 2 years probation for allowing confidential data to be seen. Its not a FOX scandal. Even the Obama administration admitted to 22 top secret documents being found on her server. Top secret documents can contain information that can get people killed, countries attacked etc. That is why they are top secret. You need to accept the facts and not defend someone that allowed top secret documents to be exposed. This is not a scandal, but a crime instead.

          6. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            You miss the point that anything can and has been reclassified. Plus there is no evidence she sent any of these, only received them.
            Keep hoping it’s a crime.

          7. itsfun February 1, 2016

            No I am not. First part of her job was to know what a “top secret” document is. Second, just keeping top secret documents on a unsecured device is against the law. She is trying to say let the public read them and decide if they are top secret. She knows damn well that the top secret documents cannot be released to the public. Now there is evidence she had the classifications removed then mailed them. I doubt if she goes to prison though, as she is proving she is above the laws of the land. How can you want someone that is saying they don’t know what a top secret document is to be the Commander in Chief?

          8. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            You keep missing the point. I don’t know if it’s intentional or you are “special”. Either way, as many times as it’s been explained, if you haven’t gotten it by now, you won’t .

          9. itsfun January 31, 2016

            Classified information
            Classified information is material that a government body claims is sensitive information that requires protection of confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Access is restricted by law or regulation to particular groups of people, and mishandling can incur criminal penalties and loss of respect.
            en.wikipedia.org · Text under CC-BY-SA license
            Classified information – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
            People also search for
            Government Security Classifications Policy
            Information sensitivity
            Sensitive Compartmented Information
            For Official Use Only
            Special access program
            See more
            See more about Classified information

          10. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            There is also a failure to recall just how many people in higher positions than Hillary used private email servers.’I know life didn’t exist for the right before Obama but here’s a refresher:

            “In 2007, when Congress asked the Bush administration for emails surrounding the firing of eights U.S. attorneys, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales revealed that many of the emails requested could not be produced because they were sent on a non-government email server. The officials had used the private domain gwb43.com, a server run by the Republican National Committee. Two years later, it was revealed that potentially 22 million emails were deleted, which was considered by some to be a violation of the Presidential Records Act.”

            For 20 + years the right has been trying to create a faux scandal that will stick. Now that they know she can beat them, this is the latest one they hope will derail her enough to let them win. Simply because they have no merits on which to win so their only hope ever is trying to make someone else look worse than them.

            I didn’t want to see GW go down on this. I was holding out for war crimes. There is some comfort that he and his shadow president can’t leave US soil without some other country nailing them.

        3. pjm19606 January 31, 2016

          Hillary is a Socialist having taken all those millions from corporate America? Wow, lay off those drugs.

          1. itsfun January 31, 2016

            Read her interviews and learn what she believes in and what she wants, then read what a Socialist is and what the Socialists want.

          2. pjm19606 February 1, 2016

            Really? All these are recent shifts on Clinton’s part not core beliefs she has held for decades. Clinton is “pandering” and if nominated will , once again, reduce the American election for POTUS to another case of “the lesser of 2 evils”. You should read the book, “Madame Bovary” by Gustave Flaubert. Could be Clinton’s life except for the final misfortune which Clinton may yet realize.

      2. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

        Steve, itsfun is a Right wing nut job so he would probably vote for someone who would harm this country like Nixon or Reagon or Bush … All of them committed actual criminal acts in office. Actual criminal acts in office. And never impeached. And our democrat lied about a blow job, and even though the impeachment was overturned by the Senate… They still did it, while they were all having affairs. Those are Republicans. So he will probably vote for someone like Trump or Cruz (or any of the others) who will harm this country so badly it might not be able to be fixed by the next Democrat President who is hassled the entire time he is in office. I have seen this my entire life and it sickens me.

      3. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

        “It” is a clown bus supporter all the way.

  8. Theodora30 January 28, 2016

    I find it sad that so many on the left get bamboozled by right wing character assassinations of Democrats – probably because the media aids and abets them. I remember arguing with Democrat friends about how the MSM was going along with right wing lies about Gore – lies Rove and company used to make sure people did not know about his tremendous contributions over so many years like playing a key role in the creation of the Internet. Gore pushed Congress for years until he convinced them to fund it. The media knew full well of this and that he never claimed to have “invented” the Internet but they were having too much fun trashing him and fawning over Bush for being more fun to hang with. Here is Vint Cerfand Bob Kahn – the “Fathers of the Internet” – defending Gore and praising the important contribution he made in getting the Internet created.

    Liberals mock people on the right for being bamboozled by right wing propaganda yet they are far too often taken in by it, too, especially when the MSM plays along. I thought after the debacle of Bush II (which I believe would never have happened without the MSM’s viscious trashing of Gore) and the WMD scam that outlets like the NY Times, the WaPo and the networks all promoted, people on the left would have wised up and become more sceptical. Even Obama admitted this week that the media was biased against Hillary in 08. (Remember Tweety’s thrill up his leg?) Apparently I was wrong.

  9. bdirnbac January 28, 2016

    Hey Gene, you missed the news all over the internet that in head-to-head polling Bernie “Schlongs” Trump and the other GOPers better than HRC. So MAYBE BERNIE’S THE DEM THAT CAN WIN? Furthermore, he doesn’t advocate endless US military action in the Mideast as HRC does (she’s the hawk neo-cons love). Bernie hasn’t taken million$ of “donations” from big bank employees, nor at least $12Mn in speaking fees over two years. Will she as POTUS represent us or Lloyd Blankfein/Jamie Dimon? http://read.bi/1GjPGc5

    Poll: Against Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump Would Get ‘Schlonged.’ A new national poll finds Sanders would beat Trump if they went head-to-head in the general election. By Tim Dickinson December 23, 2015. “Bernie Sanders would beat Donald Trump 51-38 in a general-election match-up, according to the latest poll from Quinnipiac University. Or — to put it in the course vernacular that Trump introduced to America this week — the billionaire would get “schlonged” by the democratic socialist. “Sen. Bernie Sanders hammers him,” said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac poll. Hillary Clinton, the poll suggests, would also put Trump in his place — “Hillary Clinton tops him,” added Malloy — though by a more modest 47-40.
    […] http://rol.st/1O3sYWa

    1. yabbed January 28, 2016

      Yes, and by polls we should be addressing President Romney. Sanders can’t win a general election. 50% of Democrats say they would not vote for a Socialist. No one in Middle America is going to vote for an old geezer Socialist.

      1. Steve Batchelor January 29, 2016

        Not when the rabid jerkoffs like Karl Rove make Bernie to look like a Communist. They will say socialist when they start but I will bet everything I own that they won’t wait long to start calling Bernie a Commy!

        1. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

          They’re sharpening their sickles and polishing their hammers and waiting for the moment they can tie them to Bernie. They are praying Bernie gets the nomination. Put a lot of money on that bet.

      2. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

        🙂 Romney so believed the polls, he still has his victory fireworks.

    2. Independent1 January 28, 2016

      Sorry, Bernie is an overachiever. He is pushing for changes that may be good but are not doable by the country at this time (both financially and with respect to driving our economy), and are not as crucial in getting enacted as he’s making them out to be – that’s especially true of single-payer. It is not the be all end all that he tries to trump it up to be!!

      And Bernie quite candidly, does not have the temperament to be president. He clearly does not know how to negotiate without screaming at people. That’s not how presidents deal with issues especially dipolomacy.

      1. plc97477 January 28, 2016

        Screaming at people will turn off a lot of dems. If he has a chance he needs to show restraint and try to keep his trumeters under control.

      2. Ken Stevens January 31, 2016

        Bernie has been one of the best at working across the aisle. He never lets idealism get in the way of getting the work of politicians done. He’s the first to say when you need to compromise you compromise. But he is never going to let politics stop him from saying what he thinks needs to be said. And remember, sometimes the idealist’s solution is the necessary solution. Just because something may not get done doesn’t mean it’s not doable and sure as hell doesn’t mean you should stop fighting for it. Anybody read any biographies lately of people like Washington, Lincoln, Ghandi, Mandela, FDR, King, Johnson, Kennedy? If JFK had thought like some of you good folks the Cuban Missle Crisis would have ended in nuclear war. I am also concerned about how Bernuw would handle some of his ideological baggage from 35 years ago. That’s what the debates are for. I hope he gets some tough questions to see how he handles it. Personally he’s my choice for now, but I will support Hillary 100% if she wins. And she has plenty of time to win me over.

        1. Independent1 January 31, 2016

          I agree with everything you posted. And what you posted reinforces my belief that if we hope to be able to move forward on any of the things Bernie is pushing for – a lot of which I agree with, like with Senator Warren, we cannot afford to lose Bernie out of the Senate. And I still just do not feel, that Bernie has the correct temperament to be a president. And I would say the same thing about Senator Warren. Their both two extremely passionate people who will fight hard to push for what they believe is the best for our country which is exactly who we need to keep in Congress – I just don’t see that many really electable people to with the same passion that would replace them. And unfortunately, as we’ve seen over the past 7 years – having a president who’s very passionate about what he or she thinks is right for the country – doesn’t by itself allow many things he or she wants to actually happen. Because there have to be enough people in Congress who support what a president hopes to accomplish.

        2. yabbed January 31, 2016

          Bernie hasn’t a single friend in the US Congress. The Democratic Party leadership seriously dislikes him because he has consistently voted against Democratic Party gun legislation. He’s a lackey of the NRA and AIPAC and a total goofball. He campaigned once on government confiscation of the Rockefeller fortune and wrote an article claiming sexual frustration caused cervical cancer. The man is a lunatic.

          1. Ken Stevens January 31, 2016

            Yabbed you are just slinging mud that is mostly untrue. National Review article from July 27 , 2015 talks about how well liked and respected Sanders is on both sides of the aisle because he works so hard with them to achieve bi partisan legislation. Names names and gives quotes. He never claimed ANYTHING about Cervical cancer, he quoted a journal called Psychosomatic Medicine where it correlated several life stressors with increased cancer risk in general. It also said that women with cervical cancer also tended to have poor sexual adjustment. First, this is NOT saying that “sexual frustration” CAUSES cervical cancer! Secondly, it was NOT a quote from Sanders, but rather from a medical journal. Concerns about some of Sander’s far left politics are legitimate and need to be discussed thoroughly and honestly. But the mud slinging just hurts everyone, be it against Hillary or Bernie.

    3. Steve Batchelor January 29, 2016

      The problem with your whole comment is two pronged…
      1. Who was polled?
      2. If Bernie wins the primary he will have the weight of the fascist on the right like Carl Rove and the rest of the clowns digging up every little thing in Bernie’s life and they will make him to look like the socialist he states he is, but the problem with it is that by the time the ReThugs get finished with him people will think he’s a Communist.
      But, you say they will go after Hillary too…Sorry, but they have been doing that for 30 years and haven’t come up with anything to stick yet and don’t believe they will ever.
      I really do believe in what Bernie has to say and love that he has pushed Hillary further to the left but I don’t believe he’s got a prayer in hell to get anything he says he’d do if elected through a Congress that would make what they have done to President Obama look like a stroll in the park.
      My hope is for Hillary to win the election, trounce any of the clowns in the general and Bernie and Elizabeth Warren will be her backbone in Congress.

  10. greenlantern1 January 28, 2016

    I am truly puzzled by the Benghazi e-mails.
    Ahmed Abu Khattala is an actual Benghazi, murder defendant.
    Judge Christopher Cooper was nominated by President Obama!
    He was confirmed by the unanimous vote of the senate!
    He has already denied a motion, by Khattala, to quash his extradition.
    He will be tried here.
    Not Libya.
    He will be tried by constitutional law.
    Not SHARIA “law”.
    Any objections?
    As Hillary has already pointed out; the attack was not spontaneous.
    The movie was made beforehand.
    Will the e-mail, between Khattala and Pastor [?] Terry Jones, be asked for?

  11. Sanity Please January 28, 2016

    Sanders is unelectable so long as people continue to chant that mantra and drink the Kool Aid the media is feeding them through the Clinton campaign. Hillary Clinton had her chance in 2008. What makes her any more appealing this time around? She’s a phony, people know it, and they instinctively distrust her. That’s why her campaign is in a tail spin. I don’t care if her resume is 10 pages long; she is a calculating, manipulative politician who will do or say anything to be president. People are responding to Sanders because they’re getting the
    genuine article, not some chameleon who changes colors depending on what crowd she’s in front of. Sanders’ message will the same today, tomorrow, and in January 2017. He’ll take the fight to the Republicans and be in their face every single day. Sanders 2016!

    1. yabbed January 28, 2016

      Sanders has announced that he would be handing over to the GOP what they have wanted desperately: the death of the ACA and the return to millions of Americans without health care and the reinstitution of the punishing preexisting condition clause in health insurance policies. Sanders’ pro NRA votes is a guarantee that there will be no gun control measures passed and that every NRA bill will get his signature. Sanders, owned by AIPAC, is certain to continue and increase the transfer of our hard earned tax dollars to the war criminal state of Israel. He’s a fraud on liberalism.

      1. Robert Hodge January 28, 2016

        i don’t believe a thing you just said. Evidently, you’ve not been paying attention.

        1. yabbed January 31, 2016

          Nothing I said is anything but the hard truth. Look it up for yourself unless you fear serious disillusionment. Sanders is a huge fraud.

      2. Ken Stevens January 31, 2016

        And Hillary won’t support continued U.S. financial and military aid to Israel? Whether you support such aid or not, the reality is any President with the possible exceptions of the Pauls would do so. Saying Sanders would dismantle the ACA is just ludicrous. He is saying he will do everything in his power to get Single Payer, he has never said he thinks it will come easy. But people saying it is impossible underestimate his ability to talk common sense to people in a way that almost forces him to listen. They also forget what FDR and Johnson were able to do. If they hadn’t been willing to buck the congenital wisdom I hate to think where our working class would be. In any event, he is certainly not going to hold the government hostage if he doesn’t get his way, or collude with Republicans in gutting the ACA. That is just crazy Palinesque talk. Sander’s would be the first to say that Obama did many great things. But in the end he wasn’t tough enough with Wall Street and has given short shrift to many Progressive concerns on economic policy. This was not forced on him; he began it before taking office when he excluded Robert Reich and Larry Krugman from his economic team because they couldn’t promise not to challenge a centrist, pro establishment philosophy. This is where I don’t trust Hillary, I fear she will follow the same path as her husband and Obama and the working class will be further marginalized even as she fights for Women’s issues and education and protecting the ACA (good things to be sure). But this country needs more to stop the further degradation of the working class, before it’s too late. I don’t know if Bernie can win that fight, but I know he will be able to present his case as honestly, forcefully and simply as possible u encumbered by political or special interest pressures. The American people deserve this. They deserve to have the chance to hear the hard truth not dressed up or candy coated. In the end they will have to decide anyway through their congressmen. I’m just not sure that Hillary is up to this monumental effort.

        1. yabbed January 31, 2016

          You drank the kool aid.

        2. Steve Batchelor February 12, 2016

          I’m all for what Bernie has to say but I can’t see him getting anything of what he proposes past Congress. Case in point…He couldn’t even get single payer to pass in his home state and you think he’s got a chance in hell to get it past the loony tunes asshats in Congress?
          I think our best chance to get anything progressively done in the next 8 years is to elect the only Democrat with a chance to defeat the Rethugs in a general election…Hillary Clinton…and then for Bernie and Elizabeth Warren to keep pushing Hillary’s agenda to the left.

    2. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

      I’m not drinking any Kool-aid. I’m pragmatic.
      I’m supporting Hillary and have been since committed to running. I also have nothing bad to say about Bernie because he will be my candidate if he wins the primary.
      Unless you are a Trump supporter and mouth breather, you should should be prepared to support the Dem candidate who wins the primary. Unless of course you like what the right offers.
      You obviously learned nothing from Obama’s election. Sanders will change nothing then those who thought he was going to change the world will turn on him. We aren’t electing a monarch and unless we take back the house and senate Sanders will be in the same position as Obama.

  12. FT66 January 28, 2016

    Hillary is the most qualified and who can do the job as anticipated. She can multi-task as she understands very well how the work is and can be done. She has a third arm (Bill) who she will consult anytime she needs help. Those who are saying she is not trustworth, in other words they are saying we hate her for nothing. I don’t get it at all. They don’t trust her because she will sell the country, or run away and disappear? What do they don’t trust her in? We have watched her in different debates how knowledgeable she is in different issues. Sanders is concentrating only on domestic issues. He seems to be out of the league in foreign matters. A president has to be acquianted to do both and more. Those who are saying Sanders is doing better in match-up with GOP contenders. Thats only on Popular Votes. They forget that in order to win election he has to win Electoral Votes as well, of which is an uphill battle for him. Making comparison of these two dem contenders, Hillary comes as the best person posed to win the election.

  13. Robert Hodge January 28, 2016

    I just scanned the comments and i’d like to address a few over arching points. First, lets NOT pull a ‘Trump’ and start defaming either Clinton or Sanders. Either one of them is FAR AND AWAY better than ANY republican (I usually spell it republiCON, but I’m trying to stay civil….) who could bring about another bushco disaster. (I’m not being snarky, it WAS a disaster!) Next, stop saying Bernie Sanders will siphon off votes thus assuring a Klown Kar victory (see? even I am having a hard time of it!) He is running for the SAME position as Clinton and has stated that he’d support whomever the Democrat nominee was. I would hope that Clinton (and thereby supporters?) would do the same? You know who is ‘unelectable’? TRUMP! So, vote for WHOMEVER you feel is going to best serve your interests AFTER they win the Primary. The PRIMARY is where you/we decide that, and as stated…either of OUR candidates is faar and away more ‘electable’ than the opposition. Thats for sure!

    1. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

      As a Hillary supporter and grown up, I will support Bernie and campaign for him if he wins the primary. That’s the difference. Those who are supporting Bernie and I know a couple, miss the big picture and won’t commit to throwing their support to the other Dem candidate. The same people who supported Obama until they didn’t have their wish lists met then turned on him. Time to grow up The alternative offered by the right is nothing but destruction.

      1. Jim Thomas January 31, 2016

        No, we do not “miss the picture” at all. Our point is that continuing to support the corrupt right wing Democratic Party will only result in more of the same results we have seen under Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, which is Neo-con foreign policy, the hollowing out of the middle class, full tilt support for the 1% and more and more inequality. All the 99% get from these establishment Democrats is rhetoric and tokenism. They will give us the social issues because their owners, the 1%, does not care about that. They say they are defending the social programs when in fact they are effectively reducing benefits. Bill Clinton gutted the AFDC program. Barack Obama used a fraudulent inflation measurement to keep the seniors from getting any increase in their Social Security payments when, in fact, their food costs and the costs of other necessities such as health care was in fact increasing substantially. I am not convinced that change can be effected through our corrupt electoral system regardless of who is elected as President. But I am very sure that it will not happen if we continue to elect people like Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. If there is any hope for change via the electoral system the Democratic Party must be revolutionized by progressives refusing to play the game of “lesser of two evils” or another party must take its place. My best guess is that the necessary change will not occur through the electoral process and there will be blood in the streets in this Country. Whether that results in any positive change cannot be foreseen. I hope that in the 2016 election other progressives will join me in refusing to vote for Democratic Party politicians who are not true progressives (and there are very few who are). I urge you to stop voting against your own interests and support only those who meet true progressive standards. There are a lot more progressives in this Country than most people realize.

        1. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

          You sound like a mouth breather from the right trolling.

          1. Jim Thomas January 31, 2016

            Nope, just a rational thinker who has figured out that continuing to support Democratic right wingers makes no more sense than supporting right wingers of the other party. So, goodbye Carolyn. It appears that you are not capable of rational thought or civil discussion. I will not waste any more time with you.

          2. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

            Rational thinker is questionable.
            Yeah, your temper tantrum for not having your wish met will accomplish a lot.
            Buh Bye.

  14. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

    I still would prefer Elizabeth Warren … But will vote for Hillary Clinton. Nothing against Hillary. I am contributing to HC’s campaign.

  15. Jim Thomas January 31, 2016

    I think Bernie Sanders would get more votes than Hillary Clinton. The “conventional wisdom” to the contrary is fueled only by “pundits” such as you. I will not vote for Hillary Clinton. I, like many other many progressives, will not buy the “lesser of two evils” argument and vote for a Neo-con who is a shill for Wall Street and a poster girl for neoliberal economics.

    1. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

      Hillary Clinton is not a neoliberal. Go look up neoliberal.

    2. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

      Here, I looked up neoliberal for you, because you don’t know what it is:

      Classical neoliberalism’s respect for tradition, combined with its pragmatic approach to progress, endeared it to conservative movements around the world looking for a way to adapt to the changing nature of the modern world. This saw it adopted by conservative movements, most famously in Chile under Pinochet, the United Kingdom under Margaret Thatcher and in the United States of America under Ronald Reagan.

      1. Jim Thomas January 31, 2016

        And continued by every president since Reagan, including the Democratic Party presidents. You do remember who gave us NAFTA & CAFTA & repealed Glass-Stegall, don’t you. The present president is selling the TPP like the shill for the 1% he is. You do realize that Hillary is owned by the 1%, do you not? She supports all these policies. Yes, I know that she has, dishonestly, tried lately to pretend to be a progressive. That is a very bad joke. I understand very well the meaning of neoliberal and that is what Hillary Clinton is.

        1. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

          So you think Trump is a better choice?

    3. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

      Well if you are Sanders supporter and he doesn’t win the primary and you have a temper tantrum and sit out the general, you may as well be a right wing mouth breather.
      Let’s be grown ups folks. The greater good depends on it.

    4. yabbed January 31, 2016

      That is right off the GOP operative handout for posting trolls.

  16. yabbed January 31, 2016

    Bernie Sanders is a complete fraud. He’s a misogynist, chauvinistic old creep who never had a paying job and lived on unemployment benefits until the NRA got him elected to the government payroll where he has languished for decades, doing nothing much. He went to the USSR on his honeymoon, had photos of Karl Marx and Eugene Debs in his office in Burlington along with a Soviet flag on the wall. With a University of Chicago degree, he was too good to work so he lived in rented rooms where he stole electricity from a neighbor by using an extension cord and was evicted for nonpayment of rent. He has a hippie days love child he tried to pass off as a child of one of his wives in his official biography. He has been a loser all his life, with his hatred of success and dreams of income redistribution to put some bucks in his pocket without having to actually get a job. HIs Socialist Utopia is downright un-American and his disdain for women, African Americans, and immigrants is so outdated and stale. He’s nothing but a unicorn salesman.

    1. Cloudherder January 31, 2016

      OK, I’m voting for Hillary. Heh. Actually we were all like that in the 70’s ….except Bill and Hillary Clinton apparently. I lived in a decorated Paisano Bread Truck and went to concerts. Far out.

      1. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

        Why would you think Bill and Hillary didn’t participate?
        Not all were drug addled, some of us were serious hippies (didn’t inhale. 🙂
        Look up some photos of them. They inhaled.

    2. Sergio January 31, 2016

      That’s some major bullshit that you’re spewing. Sounds like you’ve drank hard from the $Hillary bullshit

    3. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

      No he hasn’t been a loser all his life. Not by a long shot and he’s not un-American in any sense. Never the less, if he should happen to win the Dem primary, I will vote for him as the best candidate in the general because he will be. There is absolutely no one on the right offering anything for the greater good.
      It’s time to be grownups. I don’t care if you are a Bernie fan or a Hillary fan. It’s not the time to have temper tantrums and sit out the election if your choice doesn’t win.
      No one can make themselves look better by trashing the opposition in their own party. It’s the time for unity. The greater good depends on it.

      1. yabbed January 31, 2016

        He’s not even a Democrat. He has consistently voted against Democratic Party legislation to strengthen background checks and close guns show loopholes. I would have more respect for him if he had run as what he is: a member of the Socialist Party or an Independent. As it is, he’s a blooming hypocrite.

        1. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

          To be clear, I’m supporting Hillary. However, he is eligible to run on the Dem ticket and has caucused with Dems many times in his long career, often to give us a majority. As an Independent, he has supported the majority of the same issues Democrats support. If we went issue by issue on what Hillary voted and what Bernie voted I’m sure there are issues where Hillary’s votes gives different people heartburn too. I’m sure because some give me heartburn. 🙂 However, I’m a pragmatist. and when digging into the reasons why, satisfied in my own mind the circumstances dictated that decision at that time. I’ve also done the same with Bernie and gun control. He hasn’t voted against background checks and closing gun show loopholes but he did vote against the Brady Bill because of certain aspects of it.


          No candidate exists who is going to satisfy all the people all the time. Hillary checks most of the boxes for me personally and she has the experience dealing with hyenas on the right which is imperative as I see it. However, should Bernie win the primary, I would support him because he checks almost as many boxes and there is no one on the right that does in any way.
          My fear is that we will become so rigid in our choices that we lose sight of the fact that both candidates meet more of our criteria than they don’t and we flush this by sitting out the election because we didn’t get our first choice and that would be insane.considering what is at stake.

        2. Steve Batchelor February 12, 2016

          That may be Yabbed but he is light years better than any asshat the Rethugs are willing to ante up.

  17. Irene Pomianowski January 31, 2016

    Thank you..the last sentence says it all…..”Hard-won reality, that is, as opposed to fantasy.” As President, Hillary Clinton has the experience, intellect, and strength of character needed to protect and advance the progress made by President Obama.

    1. David January 31, 2016

      Strength of character? Ha! What country are you living in?

      1. Steve Batchelor February 12, 2016

        Been watching Faux News I see!

        1. David February 12, 2016

          Do you really want to go there? Okay, let’s start with ‘dodging sniper fire in Bosnia’.

          1. Steve Batchelor February 12, 2016

            Ok…She misspoke and owned up to it….Didn’t really read into the whole thing because it’s so trivial as to say so what!…What is Bernie going to answer when he is asked about his communist leanings when he was younger or his visit to Communist Russia with his wife? I”m not saying I believe any of what I asked but when the Rethugs get finished with Bernie he will be portrayed as Stalin’s right hand man.

          2. Carolyn1520 February 12, 2016

            The right is sharpening the sickles as we type.
            They won’t come after Bernie though until they believe he is a threat. Only someone they know can beat them.

          3. David February 12, 2016

            “Misspoke”? A nice euphemism for “lie”. Next, helped herself and Bill to about $200,000 dollars worth of publicly owned furnishings when they left the White House. Had to return them after the outcry became to great.

  18. danc45 January 31, 2016

    I thought this was a poorly written article. Because Hillary has “survived” years Republican “hit-jobs” is the justification to reward her with the Presidency. If that’s the case solicit candidates from the TV show Survivor. The article lacked any facts of Hillary’s achievements. Actually none were given, but she “survived.” I have questions about her achievements of Secretary of State. What were they? I have followed John Kerry’s performance in that job, and I have noted some very great achievements. I think he was a great Secretary of State, but was he elected President? No. It should have been obvious to Hillary that the America people are looking way beyond change. Change happens regardless. America is looking for inspiration for what could be. Democrats and progressives are dreaming of things far bigger than each of us. THey are thinking of what could be. They yearn for a JFK and Robert Kennedy to tell us what could be. Hillary only speaks of limitations, as if she were an appointed governor of achievements. We don’t need a Presidential candidate who throttles aspirations and dreams. We need one who harnesses that energy to achieve those dreams. Our country is totally screwed up. Not by people receiving welfare or food stamps, but by people selfishly hogging wealth, at the expense of almost everyone else. TGhen, instead of those extremely rich people wanting to pay it forward, they try to propagandize the people that they earned it and that giving them more will incentivize growth. It’s all a lie. The rich don’t do their share. Hell, they don’t even fight in the many wars they create. They rationalize their psychotic greed and selfishness by saying others shouldn’t people shouldn’t be “redistributing” their money. Oh, really? Isn’t that what a society is all about? Hillary now represents this rich class of people who is more interested in personal enrichment than being an inspirational social leader. Like almost all the rich, she’s mostly in it for herself. Bernie offers a new and overdue view that people exist to benefit each other. None of that comes from the obscenely rich. It is the ordinary man who invents and improves our society. Bernie promises a more egalitarian socity, recognizing everyone’s contribution. He offers all humans dignity and self-esteem, not “affluenza.” It is Hillary who looks to throttle peoples’ dreams and aspirations, while she judges what is reasonable and unreasonable. When looking at our countries possibilities, Hillary asks “why,” while Bernie asks, “why not.”

    1. A_Real_Einstein January 31, 2016

      Well said. Neither candidate will will accomplish much legislatively without a supermajority in the Senate and control of the House. Our next President will only be able to move his agenda through executive actions and agency excersizes. So I am voting for the candidate that wants to break up the banks instead of taking hundreds of millions in campaign contributions from them. The candidate that voted against the Iraq war not for it. The candidate that wants to expand Medicare and remove the profit incentives from our health care system. The candidate that promotes free tuition at all State Universities. The candidate who will end the discrimination in the criminal justice system and raise these people out of poverty through a bonafide infrastructure spending package putting 13,000,000 young man and women to work. The candidate who end Citizens United as opposed to one that benefits from it. FEEL THE BERN

      1. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

        You also missed the message. Bernie hands will be as tied as Obamas were and in the same way those who didn’t get their wish lists met, will turn on Sanders.in the same way.
        I want a president who has experienced walking through fire in the current political climate.

        1. A_Real_Einstein January 31, 2016

          Ah let us not give up the fight before it has begun. Let’s not accept less than our children and grandchildren deserve. Be part of the solution not the problem. Join our revolution and FEEL THE BERN.

          1. yabbed January 31, 2016

            We went there with McGovern and got our heads handed to us. No thanks. It’s a losing proposition to vote for Socialist Sanders.

          2. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

            Sanders has not had 20+ years of dealing with the right in the same way Hillary has.either .

          3. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

            I’m not feeling the Bern but it’s not because I’m settling. I support Hillary Clinton. This isn’t a revolution, it’s an election with much at stake.
            If we’ve learned nothing else, it’s the right is no less a danger to the greater good than when Obama was gridlocked by them. I want someone in there with a proven record of knowing exactly what she will be dealing with. She is prepared.

          4. A_Real_Einstein February 1, 2016

            Prepared for what? To have her legislative agenda blocked like Obama for the last 5 years. We need a political revolution which sweeps lots of Progressives into the House and Senate giving us the vast majorities we require to make true progress like in the first 2 Obama years. Hillary will never create that kind of movement. Bernie can! In fact Bernie IS! FEEL THE BERN

          5. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            Prepared to deal with realities.
            Enjoy your fantasy of sweeping lots pf progressives into the house and senate. giving us the majority. Bernie will never create that kind of movement either. To think he has that ability is what will ultimately disappoint you. Before I was a grown up, he would have appealed to me also. Like I said there’s too much at stake to be enamored with a catchy slogan.

          6. A_Real_Einstein February 1, 2016

            How sad. I guess I will have to explain to my kids how folks like you lost their way. How you gave up on your principles, your dreams and your quest to provide a better country than you found it. I will explain how intimidated you became and sold out to the Military Industrial Complex, the Federal Banking System and Wall Street. Hillary will sell us out in heartbeat if she thinks that what she needs to do get re elected. Revolutions do not come easy. Stand and Fight the status quo and FEEL THE BERN.

          7. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            You can make up any fantasy you choose. Try explaining why they are seeing a mouth breather in the white house because some democrats didn’t support the ideals of their own party when their first choice didn’t win the primary and they had temper tantrums and didn’t exercise their right to vote to prevent that from happening.
            Grow up!

          8. A_Real_Einstein February 1, 2016


            Obama is the greatest President of my lifetime. This is the president who gave Universal Healthcare after Hillary failed. He saved the American auto industry from extinction, the financial services industry from self destruction and the global economy from depression. He has done more for progressives than any President has before him. You need to get back on your meds.

          9. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            I have no clue what comment you are referring to but it wasn’t one of mine. I said nothing derogatory about Obama and wouldn’t. I supported him from the beginning and still do. Furthermore Hillary didn’t fail. She didn’t get the support for it. You should learn the difference.

            While you are “Feeling the Bern”(which is probably covered by the ACA) consider how Bernie wants to deconstruct the ACA with his unreachable single payer plan.. While ACA will change and evolve over time, it is fantasy to think Bernie can bring in single payer in one or two terms. The same people are in congress plus a few more even more rabid ones. Ain’t happening.

            Perhaps you need the meds.
            But it also might be a condition that no med can fix.

          10. A_Real_Einstein February 1, 2016

            You referred to the mouth breather in the Whitehouse. Who were you referencing?By the way when your proposal does not get enough support that means it does not pass and you failed. Bernie has no intention of dismantling the ACA unless we can replace it with single payer and take the greedy health insurance industry out of the equation. I am disgusted by people that would flat out lie and fear monger others in believing thdBernie would take away their access to affordable Heath care. He is the champion of the people and does not make unforced errors like operating a private unsecured server dealing with extremely sensitive information and knowing that her enemies will use that against her. What in the world was she thinking when she knew she was running for President and taking in millions in speaking fees from the banks and Wall Street. How stupid does she think we are ? Talk about arrogance. Bernie has more credibility in his pinky than Hillary ever will. She is blowing it again. FEEL THE BERN

          11. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            I explained it as a post script in my last comment because it dawned on me, you didn’t comprehend my reference was to a future right wing mouth breather in The White House.
            I’m disgusted that anyone would be naive enough to believe single payer is even a possibility in the current political climate. It’s disingenuous for a candidate to even put that out there knowing full well it won’t be occurring any time soon.
            It didn’t pass but it’s not because Hillary failed. It failed to pass.
            Oh you’re one of those who buys into the email faux scandal. Sorry for you.
            LOL Keep dreaming.
            Buh bye.

          12. A_Real_Einstein February 1, 2016

            I am disgusted by anyone who refused to believe that we could put man on the moon. Refused to believe a social insurance program that would provide affordable health care to elderly and disabled. A social security program that keeps millions out of poverty. I guess you already have yours so screw everyone else. Even though you have given up on me and my children, I have not. Why in the world would she set up her own private server as Secretary of State and then take millions in speaking fees from our enemies. Talk about a lack of judgement. Why?

          13. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            Keep deflecting Sparky.

          14. A_Real_Einstein February 1, 2016

            Keep beating that old drum of we can’t.

            Yes we can.
            Yes we did.
            Yes we can do it again.

            Single payer will happen sooner or later.

            What I do not understand is what motivated Hillary to make these unforced errors. Was it arrogance? Is she afraid of success? It does not make any sense to me. Why?

          15. Steve Batchelor February 12, 2016

            Why do think Bernie or anyone for that matter can get single payer passed into law when Bernie couldn’t even get it passed in his own state…Keep drinking your bern Koolaid.

          16. Steve Batchelor February 12, 2016

            The one thing all of the bern victims seem to forget or just don’t want to acknowledge is that Bernie couldn’t even get single payer passed into law in his home state…How they think he can get it pass the Rethug Congress is just plain BS dreams. I love that Bernie is pushing the buttons that he is but pushing buttons is just pushing buttons and most of them are unrealistic.
            What I want to see is Hillary get the nomination, destroy the Rethug, mouth breather as you so aptly say, and win the election then have Bernie and Elizabeth push Hillary’s agenda to the left.

          17. Carolyn1520 February 12, 2016

            Same here, That’s exactly what I’m hoping for.

          18. Steve Batchelor February 12, 2016

            Carolyn…Sorry I wan’t here to help you try to knock some sense into one of the Bern victims.

          19. A_Real_Einstein February 1, 2016

            It was only 5 years ago when we held the Presidency, the House and a supermajority in the Senate. We will need a true progressive to get us back like Bernie, the most disciplined politician I have ever seen. Hillary wants to take us back. Bernie is going forward and American public will respond. This is our time. Join the revolution. Dare to dream about what can be. Buck the establishment. FEEL THE BERN.

          20. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            I didn’t feel like once again typing this all out as to how long we held the house and senate. You’re wrong and here’s a cut and paste of the facts:

            “Lies are easy to get away with if they are repeated often enough and given voice by many different people. Repeat a lie often enough and that lie often becomes conventional wisdom. Repeating a lie doesn’t change the lie into the truth, it changes the people hearing the repeated lie. They begin to accept the lie as truth. One huge example: ‘Iraq has WMD.’

            Lies make it impossible for people to communicate with each other……lies make it impossible to, as the Villagers often talk about it, have a real “conversation.”

            One particular lie, often stated by right-of-center advocates, is the statement….”if Barack Obama wanted to increase taxes on the rich, stop the wars, pass a budget…blah, blah…..he could have chosen to do so because he had “total control” of the House and Senate for two full years.”

            Sometimes the “two full years” is omitted from the statement……but the lie is spread nevertheless, by the “total control of Congress” phrase.

            Let’s clear that all up, shall we?

            Starting January 2009, at the beginning of the 111th Congress, in the month that Barack Obama was inaugurated president, the House of Representatives was made up of 257 Democrats and 178 Republicans. There is no question that Democrats had total control in the House from 2009-2011.

            Even with numerous “blue-dog” (allegedly fiscally conservative) Democrats often voting with Republicans…..Speaker Pelosi had little difficulty passing legislation in the House. The House does not have the pernicious filibuster rule which the Senate uses. A majority vote in the House is all that’s necessary to pass legislation, except in rare occurrences (treaty ratification, overriding a presidential veto).

            Okay, that’s the House during the first two years of Barack Obama’s presidency. For a lie to prosper, as it were, there needs to be a shred of truth woven inside the lie. It is absolutely true that from 2009-2011, Democrats and President Obama had “total control” of the House of Representatives.

            But legislation does not become law without the Senate.

            The Senate operates with the 60-vote-requirement filibuster rule. There are 100 Senate seats, and it takes 60 Senate votes for “closure” on a piece of legislation….to bring that piece of legislation to the floor of the Senate for amendments and a final vote….that final vote is decided by a simple majority in most cases. But it takes 60 Senate votes to even have a chance of being voted upon.

            “Total control”, then, of the Senate requires 60 Democratic or Republican Senators.

            On January 20th, 2009, 57 Senate seats were held by Democrats with 2 Independents (Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman) caucusing with the Democrats…which gave Democrats 59 mostly-reliable Democratic votes in the Senate, one shy of filibuster-proof “total control.” Republicans held 41 seats.

            The 59 number in January, 2009 included Ted Kennedy and Al Franken. Kennedy had a seizure during an Obama inaugural luncheon and never returned to vote in the Senate…..and Al Franken was not officially seated until July 7th, 2009 (hotly contested recount demanded by Norm Coleman.)

            The real Democratic Senate seat number in January, 2009 was 55 Democrats plus 2 Independents equaling 57 Senate seats.

            An aside….it was during this time that Obama’s “stimulus” was passed. No Republicans in the House voted for the stimulus. However, in the Senate…..and because Democrats didn’t have “total control” of that chamber…..three Republicans…..Snowe, Collins and Specter, voted to break a filibuster guaranteeing it’s passage.

            Then in April, 2009, Republican Senator Arlen Specter became a Democrat. Kennedy was still at home, dying, and Al Franken was still not seated. Score in April, 2009….Democratic votes 58.

            In May, 2009, Robert Byrd got sick and did not return to the Senate until July 21, 2009. Even though Franken was finally seated July 7, 2009 and Byrd returned on July 21…..Democrats still only had 59 votes in the Senate because Kennedy never returned, dying on August 25, 2009.

            Kennedy’s empty seat was temporarily filled by Paul Kirk but not until September 24, 2009.

            The swearing in of Kirk finally gave Democrats 60 votes (at least potentially) in the Senate. “Total control” of Congress by Democrats lasted all of 4 months. From September 24, 2009 through February 4, 2010…at which point Scott Brown, a Republican, was sworn in to replace Kennedy’s Massachusetts seat.

            The truth….then….is this: Democrats had “total control” of the House of Representatives from 2009-2011, 2 full years. Democrats, and therefore, Obama, had “total control” of the Senate from September 24, 2009 until February 4, 2010. A grand total of 4 months.

            Did President Obama have “total control” of Congress? Yes, for 4 entire months. And it was during that very small time window that Obamacare was passed in the Senate with 60 all-Democratic votes.

            Did President Obama have “total control’ of Congress during his first two years as president? Absolutely not and any assertions to the contrary…..as you can plainly see in the above chronology….is a lie.”

          21. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            Crickets huh?

          22. Steve Batchelor February 12, 2016

            One thing on that that you are leaving out….Hillary is contributing to the down tickets in many of the states we need to turn blue while from all that I have read Bernie hasn’t done anything on that regard…Bernie is so tunnel visioned on his campaign he can’t see his nose to spite his face.

  19. jimmy midnight January 31, 2016

    Gene Lyons, the pro-Clinton operative who speculates that Sanders, if nominated, would only carry Vermont and Massachusetts: Gene, people who write carefully and have a modicum of human respect, reference other people with pronouns of the “who” class. Don’t call people “that.”

    Conventional wisdom often turn out to be not all that cussed smart. I’ll be caucusing for Bernie in the State of Maine come March, and fully expect to end up voting for Secretary Clinton come November.

    She is a thoroughly decent, only minimally corrupt, real-world human, who will serve us well as President, and be a better general election candidate for having been nudjed non-violently to the left by Bernie. If he was our nominee, I expect he’d also win. Current polls actually show him doing better than Hillary in matchups against most, if not all, Repubs.

    1. yabbed January 31, 2016

      Bernie Sanders cannot win a general election. The GOP negative ads would decimate Sanders. I can see now the ads with photos of Karl Marx and Eugene Debs alongside that Soviet flag that hung on his Burlington office walls. We will be shown Bernie and one of his wives on their honeymoon in the Soviet Union. We will see Bernie campaigning as a hippie freak and promising to have the government confiscate the Rockefeller fortune. We’ll be gifted with his pornographic, misogynistic, chauvinistic “sex essay” in which he says men masturbate to visions of women in submission, abused, on their knees and that women fantasize about being raped simultaneously by three men. And then there is the column he wrote that claimed sexual frustration caused cervical cancer. The man is a loony tunes.

  20. Sergio January 31, 2016

    Gene Lyons’ article titled “A Democrat that can Win is What We Need” is the biggest pile of rubbish that I’ve read! The conclusions reached to vote for Hillary because she’s the only one that can win is not true. Bernie Sanders is polling BETTER than she is versus ANY of the Republican “candidates!” Hillary’s biggest albatross to the voters is that she is viewed as untrustworthy. That is why she lost to then candidate Obama in 2008 and why she would have a much tougher time than Bernie against the GOP. This is nothing but pure propaganda for Hillary Clinton and is such a biased article! Hillary does not have the progressive credentials like Bernie does and she has time and time again let the polls dictate which way she should go

    1. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

      Spoken like a true Bernie fan but you missed the message and the big picture.

      1. Sergio January 31, 2016

        The message and picture of this article is nothing but a bid to vote for Hillary because, according to this author’s bias, she’s the only chance to keep a Democrat as POTUS. It’s completely biased and bullshit. This is journalism at its worst. There’s nothing to back up the claims made, no facts whatsoever.

        1. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

          Specifically what in the article is not factual? I just reread it and there is nothing I see that isn’t already well documented common knowledge. Perhaps the author assumed he was addressing people who actually knew each candidate’s history.

          1. Sergio January 31, 2016

            For starters how the author says that Hillary has the better chance to beat the GOP and this is not true. Bernie outperforms her in every poll against Trump and Cruz.

          2. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

            What current creditable poll would that be?
            You said for starters. What else?

          3. A_Real_Einstein February 1, 2016

            All of the polls. Go to Real Clear Politics website and see for yourself.

          4. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            I asked the question because I already knew the answers. I have looked at all the current credible polls and that is not the case.

          5. A_Real_Einstein February 1, 2016

            Then you are blind. The facts are that almost EVERY legitimate poll shows Bernie doing much better than Hillary against potential GOP candidates. You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts. You can disagree with results but you cannot deny them.

          6. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            Show me the one I missed,

          7. A_Real_Einstein February 1, 2016

            Go to realclearpolitics.com and look for 2016 polls. The most recent one last week was conducted by Marquette University showing hypothetical match ups of Bernie and Hillary going against three of The GOP front runners. In all cases Bernie destroys them by double digits while Hillary only beats Cruz and Rubio by a single point. Keep tabbing down and for the most part this is the pattern. At the moment Bernie runs a lot better than Hillary against the GOP candidates. This probably explained by the fact that Bernie is much more like able and trustworthy at this point in time. His net positives are incredibly high.

          8. Carolyn1520 February 1, 2016

            Okay thanks for letting me the poll you are hanging your hat on.
            “Each round of the Marquette Law School Poll will involve interviews with more than 700 Wisconsin registered voters by telephone. Unlike many state polls, the Marquette Law School Poll includes cell phones as well as landlines to help ensure a representative sample of all Wisconsin residents. The poll interviews over four nights, which improves the ability to reach voters who may not be available on a particular night. The full questionnaire was designed by the Marquette Law School Poll team, led by poll director Charles Franklin. Interviews are conducted by professional interviewers and managed by LHK Partners Inc of Newtown Square PA, a well respected survey and market research firm.”

            I wouldn’t buy victory fireworks just yet, based on it. 🙂

          9. A_Real_Einstein February 1, 2016

            Interesting. I think if you tab down you will see this pattern among other scientific poles. I really like the website.

          10. Steve Batchelor February 12, 2016

            Here’s the problem with any poll you look at NOW…What do you think Carl Rove and his band of slime will do if Bernie wins the nomination? First words out of their mouth will be “Socialist Communist” and it will be repeated so many times that 50% of the citizens will believe it and it will get a Rethug asshat elected President. You might be able to live with that but I can’t. Hillary has been demonized and lied about by the Rethugs for over 20 years and NOTHING has stuck so they really have no ammo to use against her that they haven’t tried before and struck out with. Once Hillary gets whichever jerkwad wins the Republican nomination in televised debates she will bury them.
            Keep up your fantasy where you think Bernie can win the election.

          11. A_Real_Einstein February 12, 2016

            You may want to watch Fox News for about 30 seconds and they already know who Bernie is and even leads Trump by 20 pts on their poles. In this cycle any Democrat can win if he lays out the correct message. He is running on an economy that is rigged and we must destroy the current corrupt political campaign finance system that is ending our democracy. His message is clear and he is the only candidate that even wants to do this. Please join us and say no to establishment politics and the status quo. Don’t vote out of fear. Yes we can!

          12. Steve Batchelor February 12, 2016

            This will bust your fantasy…The Republicans want to see Bernie win the nomination because they know they can beat him in the general after they decimate his character or a better metaphor would be raking him over the coals. There have been rumors that Carl Rove has even been contributing to his campaign…Why is that…Because they are afraid of Hillary and know she will destroy any Rethug in the run for President…You can feel the Bern all you want…It might just get him the nomination but I doubt it…Have you seen the video where Bernie calls for a runoff against President Obama during the 2012 Presidential Election because he believed the President wan’t “left” enough. If that gets spread then you can kiss Bernie’s nomination goodbye because all of the black caucus voters will vote straight Hillary which I see happening in South Carolina to start…From the numbers I’ve seen Hillary has a 96% chance of winning South Carolina.

          13. A_Real_Einstein February 12, 2016

            Let’s hope she does not get indicted first. And what happens when she is forced to release the Goldman transcripts. Her 47% moment?

          14. Steve Batchelor February 12, 2016

            Why is it that rumors are floating around that has Carl Rove contributing to Bernie’s campaign for the nomination….The Rethugs know they can beat Bernie after the character assassination campaign they will bring out while they are deathly afraid of Hillary because they have tried to besmirch her integrity for 25 years but for the most part have failed. If you don’t think that every other word coming out of the Rethugs will be “Socialist Communist” if Bernie wins the nomination then I’ve got a bridge I want to sell ya!

  21. Aaron_of_Portsmouth January 31, 2016

    The real problem is not the dearth of sensible candidates—it’s much deeper than that due to a fundamental flaw in a system of governance that depends more on showmanship, the support of vestiges interests and back-room manipulators, ties with big-business, and a system that puts a premium on selling yourself.
    With the current system of governance in America so heavily-flawed, and with a foundation that is rotting on a daily bases for the past few centuries, it shows how irreparably damaged and hopelessly decayed are the rest of the systems of governance in the world.

    That America can still produce a system that outshines the rest of the world’s governments points out the hard and onerous task it will be to rebuild a new form of administrative order—one that works on the same principles, locally and nationally in each city, village and country, and can be applied internationally to link all the nations into a “woven pattern” wherein each village, city, and country maintains its own individuality, while functioning as an organic whole—much the same way as a fit and healthy human body works with a variety of different organic systems in a harmonic fashion. ( A body that is out of sync, or is diseased and dysfunctional at the level of the cells, tissues, organs, affects systems, which in turn poses a health
    hazard to the entire body and may lead to death if not corrected).

    That is the phenomenon we witness in the symptoms brought on by: Racism and the aftermath of slavery; the inequality between the genders; religious sectarianism; an infatuation with gun-ownership; a societal view of the worship of unbridled freedom; an economic model that promote and rewards greed and avarice; and the exaltation of the individual over the entire population(a peculiarity that is unique to the West; with cattle ranchers running amuck and taking over land as a result of this “me first” vision; conspiracy theories flying everywhere(another uniquely Western feature); police brutality of a particularly bestial nature; lead in drinking water as a result of political theories like the whimsical “Fiscal Responsibility”.

    All of these unhealthy symptoms and more are in large part a result of a major spiritual disorder that needs to be healed, and is exacerbated by a conceptually divisive political system which needs to be overhauled and replaced.

    These are things to consider when we cast our votes, interact with those currently
    in government(such as it is), and discussed among ourselves.

    Sounds like “pie in the sky”? Speaking unofficially, I commend to you the close
    examination of the Administrative Order of the Baha’i Faith, its electoral process
    which is the same locally, nationally(it is proscribed from operating nationally in
    certain Muslim countries), and internationally(from its Seat on Mount Carmel).

    Further details can be found by starting at http://www.bahai.org.

    Just the thoughts of a native son born and raised Jim Crow Jackson, Mississippi,
    back in the day.

    “The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established. This unity can never be achieved so long as the counsels which the Pen of the Most High hath revealed are suffered to pass unheeded.”

    (“Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh”, p. 286)

    1. pjm19606 January 31, 2016

      Really? The fundamental flaw is that we remain a Republic and not a Democracy. We still rely on a system over 200 years old which has sustained virtually NO evolution. Congress should be reduced to actuaries just taking “our” orders as we vote on EVERYTHING via our smartphones. Americans are STUPID!

      1. Aaron_of_Portsmouth January 31, 2016

        Whatever we choose to call a thing doesn’t alter the structural flaw. We can call it “Uuh-bop-shebam”, “Diddliocracy”, or what not. A name doesn’t define the intrinsic quality of a thing—it’s just an necessary part of human communication.

        As long as our ideals and motivations are flawed and aren’t informed by “spiritual principles” in the truest sense, then that which we create based on malevolence, fear of the unknown, and/or a philosophy of “us versus them” will be reflected in the finished product.

        Remember that the founding fathers when drafting the lofty ideals that make up the Constitution of America were not motivated by the principle of the “oneness of humankind” as enunciated by Baha’u’llah; “human” in their minds referred to the invented term “White people”, or anyone deemed close in appearance to the ideal of what a British citizen looked like. “Whiteness” was later conferred on darker-skinned Europeans in due time and with the attendant privileges—-black people, and to a lesser extent Native Americans, didn’t “match” that template, and were considered half-human and not deserving of the perks conferred by “whiteness”.

        This a major defect that must be corrected somehow, and mostly on a spiritual level. Laws can’t mandate a change in perception and attitudes, nor can a Religion of the past offer the required edification of heart and mind on this and other new social problems. Thus, the requirement of a New Revelation.

        “The Oneness of Humanity” a key feature missing in the framework of America’s sense of government, and a feature missing by-and-large by too many in the Christian community. Baha’u’llah makes the principle of “The Oneness of humankind” the axis around which His Revelation revolves.

        A house built on a shaky and unsound foundation is doomed to crumble in relatively short order.

        The problem with American governance is that “short order” turned out to be centuries, and it has prevented from aspiring to greater heights up to this point because of the lack of this key feature; time is rapidly drawing to the point on the clock-face that reads, “The Fall Of The Roman Empire”. This collapse will happen to other ancient and archaic systems in operation in the world which are ill-equipped to handle the unique problems posed by a planetary society that is linked as never before in the annals of human evolution.

        Fortunately, as we speak, a world-wide community of diverse races and ethnic groups are working together in a near-imperceptible manner and w/o fanfare in parallel, building an organic entity that will be available as “The Old Order” crumbles under it’s own weight and decay.

        You may not have expected such a lengthy reply but the time demands a fuller discussion of the plight of America and of the World.

        1. pjm19606 February 1, 2016

          Agreed for the most part. I have a problem with “spirits” though. We seem do discount that humans have brains, and for whatever reason, refuse to use them. There ar certain things that are “inherently good” in an of themselves. One of those is human life and this is the principle problem. Our government operates on the principles of Darwinism: Eat or be eaten andrefuses to recognize inherent intrinsic value.

  22. laurele January 31, 2016

    The only one living in a fantasy world is Hillary, who thinks she can break the law over and over again without consequences. This country can have single payer health insurance because electing Bernie is just the first step. We then elect a Congress that supports the agenda of the 99 percent. I am proud to be one of many Democrats who will never, ever vote for Hillary, not even for dog catcher. If she gets the nomination, I’m writing in Bernie Sanders or voting for Green Party candidate Jill Stein.

    1. Carolyn1520 January 31, 2016

      What law has Hillary broken?Over and over?
      “We then elect a Congress that supports the agenda of the 99 percent” Oh I think you’re far more familiar with fantasies than Hillary. 🙂

    2. Steve Batchelor February 12, 2016

      You’ve lost any common sense you might have had…For one, Hillary Clinton hasn’t broken any laws…You believe that because you’ve been watching Faux News…Secondly…If you do what you state and don’t vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination then you are more than likely allowing one of the asshats in the Repug Party to be elected President because there is NO way a 3rd party candidate can win the election.

  23. kimbanyc January 31, 2016

    Another arrogant entitled Hilbot…..

  24. yabbed January 31, 2016

    Sanders isn’t even a Democrat. He can’t win regardless.

  25. jimmy midnight February 1, 2016

    Conventional “wisdom” jumped into the rhetorical sack with fearmongering, and produced a disengagement baby.


Leave a Comment

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.