Or other forms of pork as the case may be.

Wrong. Unlike Hillary supporter here who freak out and scream that any criticism of her is whaa unfair and right wing, most Bernie supporter candle'll with finding him flawed on some issues.

And there was also at least one syntax error.

to focusing upon a spelling error, they are not worth responding to. They have already exposed themselves.

If we like 99% we can live with the occasional flaw.

I dubbed it Berniemania early on but just like every other DU fad, this one will also burn its self out.

it may make sense to start posting at DU again just to undermine Bernie.

I don't see why a socialist is going to be happier with any of the other candidates than they might be with a Democratic Socialist, like Bernie. Granted, Democratic Socialists are not socialists. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1280&pid=6844

So, hey, go for it. With any luck, we can ensure landing a dove like Hillary in the Oval Office.


Profile Information
Member since: Wed Sep 24, 2008, 09:34 PM

who must never be questioned. The first holy law of her acolytes is:

And lo I say unto thee, all word of doubt about our lady of wall street, is evil and cometh from the demons of the right.

I even recommended this thread.

Sanders' supporters, generally, have the luxury of not being thin skinned.

I guess you missed this part of the article:

I say to you 'Feh.'

Isn't it ironic that you seem to be cheering for an author that is guilty of the high sin of purism that most of you Hillary supporters would accuse those of us that support Sanders of? Perhaps a bit more attention to the entirety of the content of such articles might be good advice for you?

Personally, most of those of us that are supporting Sanders have had to be pragmatic over the years and can deal with a few small warts here and there. I don't think you are doing your candidate any favors on this one Tarheel.

I find it highly amusing, and very thin skinned of BS supporters who dish it out on a fairly regular basis, but can't seem to take it. I hope you're equally outraged when the situation is reversed. Buckle up. You're in the big leagues now, and as both an Obama and Hillary supporter, I can tell you, it's gonna be a bumpy ride. People are gonna say things about BS that you won't like. Some may be true, and some may not. I'll admit that I don't give a shit about Bernie Sanders, whether the article is true or not. Not my problem.

My "advice" to you is take your own advice.

I am sorry you can't see the irony.

I plan on voting for whatever Democratic candidate wins the nomination. Based on the tenor and tone of your response I am not entirely confident you will. In fact I am not completely convinced you are even a Hillary supporter. I don't think you are here to discuss issues reasonably or to try to convince anyone of anything. I think you are here just to wreck up the joint. I could be wrong but your tone is very antagonistic and feels like bait to me.

I am not biting.

I will vote for the Democratic candidate. Period.

think" of "my tone". As I'm fairly certain I know who the party's nominee will be, I will also be voting for the "Democratic" candidate, in both the primary and the general election.

I disagree with him on it, but what a little liar the author is, on one thing after another.

I so detest that rag. Always have always will. Liars suck shit and I don't care where there political loyalties lie.

Got it.

I agree with her about the F-35. duh. I said that. There was other stuff in the article that was bullshit. And yeah, I detest The SW and Counterpunch and all yellow journalism. Maybe it's right up your gracious lordship's alley.

Please enlighten those of us unfamiliar with this "rag"

Obviously, cali's view of Bernie is that he's the best candidate. His support for the F-35 doesn't align with that view. So, in your warped reading, cali must be dismissing those allegations as lies, right?

Except that, if you trouble to read her actual post, you'd see that you were wrong. In fact, if reading a post before you attack is too much effort for you, you could in this instance get away with just reading the subject line: "I don't like bernie's support for the F-35".

As for the underlying piece from the ISO loyalist, I think I read pretty much the same thing in 1968. It was ink on paper rather than pixels on a screen but otherwise it was pretty much the same. This infatuation with third-party or nonparty politics was garbage then and it's garbage now.

I found this Truthout article which identifies what the concerns are, who supported the initiative, etc.,

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/29389-will-the-f-35a-fighter-bomber-be-based-in-burlington-vermont-in-2020

Incidentally, for the record, I also disagree with Bernie on the F-35 and his vote on the Israel war, but have still sent in an affordable nonspectacular donation. I am also not exactly a worshipper of the ISO and think you are right to be critical of the very unreliable Counterpunch, tho I think "detest" is more categorical than I am about them -- some of their stuff over the years has struck me as good.

But I didn't see anything in this column by a former Sanders intern that struck me as a "lie", though much that was (to my ears) the usual blather about how anything that has to do with the Democratic Party, from BCA in Berkeley CA to the Rainbow Coalition to Bernie Sanders is a waste of time. There's plenty of opportunity for action outside of the Democratic Party even for strong Bernie supporters, and even for the duration of his campaign. It is urgently important to me that he will get into the Democratic debates and raise issues to millions of mostly Democratic Party viewers that the mass base of the Democratic Party doesn't hear detailed or presented. I doubt for example that Jill Stein (who spokke at a panel I went to over the weekend at the Left Forum, along with Kshama Sawant, another politician I have contributed to, will lose much funding or activism due to Bernie, again even during his campaign. The notion that progressives somehow are drained by more progressive Democrats running is belied by the fact that there was NO upsurge, or even a noticeable 'bump' in progressive activism in years when no left candidate ran within the Democratic primaries, like 1996 or 2012. It is simply an illusion to think that there is any significant "distraction" from other work by the Jesse Jacksons, the Dennis Kucinich/Howard Dean (in 2004) candidates, or the Bernie Sanderses.

There is an argument for refraining from voting within the Democratic Party period, but I have yet to find the person, even those I highly respect, who condemns progressives for doing so in situations like this who doesn't strike me on this point of protesting overmuch -- and I don't mean street protesting and miilitancy, which I continue to support and to participate in to the extent I am able during all these supposedly horrible 'distractions'

if I were a Senator and had the opportunity.

It's not like a Universal Basic Income is coming up for a vote anytime soon.

Shit program, but good for Sanders refusing to put the people he represents out of work.

All of it. And from someone from their own locale.

Politicians make deals on behalf of their State all the time.
F-35 is not a pretty subject, but no point in hiding this truth.
I'm sure he had his reasons for bringing the deal to Vt.

This guy may be more electable than we think.

Bernie's not socialist enough for them?

MIC MIC MIC MIC MIC oh pay no attention to Warren looking out for Raytheon MIC MIC MIC MIC oh Sanders is just getting jobs for Vermont with the F-35 MIC MIC MIC MIC!!11!

That kind of honesty?

I happen to disagree on that point.

But if they're doing so while boosting Hillary Clinton, they're being pretty fucking disingenuous.

The article came from someone who doesnt think the Democratic Party is worthy of support. The fact that Hillary Supporters are lining up behind it- without seeming actually read the thing, surprise surprise- only shows how desperate some people are for anything with which to go after a perceieved threat to her "inevitability".

a group that is considered damn near a cult by other leftist activists!


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/International_Socialist_Organization


on edit: the socialist worker is their paper/site

I'm pretty sure they didn't read the whole thing.

and particularly with his running for president as a Democrat. I'd say that his running as a Dem was the impetus for all of this but in another thread, MADem informed me that the socialists have been calling Bernie a war mongering corporatist (does that shit sound familiar, or WHAT??!) for at least a decade.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1187&pid=14723

No one is pure enough.

and yes, 'that shit' does sound familiar!

"Ultimately, neither Sanders nor any other politician can lead us to the alternate society we fight for. We must build it for ourselves..."

That quote is enough to ignore that entire article as far as I'm concerned. Yes, I like anarcho-socialism but we are on a website about election politics, why the hell would I listen to someone that basically advocates sitting out of elections almost completely (as the author of this article does)?

Still he is miles ahead of anyone else on the playing field as an overall candidate imho.

If they were, they wouldn't be running for public office.

Franklin Roosevelt had a mistress - I'm sure Eugene Debs had flaws.

I think it is a healthy exercise to expose Sanders now. I don't like the stand on Israel apartheid and Palestine and I don't like the F-35. What I do like about Sanders is that he is much less hawkish than the other candidates and I believe his sincerity on income inequality and publicly funded education and health care.

To have those issues even presented in a campaign puts the left in a much better position than we were in four years ago. Sanders - in a departure from the meme of 'American exceptionalism' mentions making the US more like Northern Europe who are NATO members and participate in that institution to varying degrees. To Sanders' credit, he has a vision that is unlike the status quo.

There is an argument to be made that Sanders' candidacy as a Democrat prevents movement toward a pure social revolution - third party wise. That argument holds that the Sanders candidacy is being used as bait when Hillary will win all along...Momentum within the past week should be evidence that there is no need to buy that... If it happens that Hillary wins the primary, I for one don't intend to vote for her; others may, some will. If nothing else, Sanders participation is helping the left wing of the Democratic Party create a vision of who it is and where it wants to go.

who think that shrilly screaming "I'm not Thin skinned!1one!" will prove how non-thin skinned they are ( ) that is very interesting article. Thanks for posting it.

"the bizarre and needlessly feverish defense from Bernie supporters"

Where exactly do you see anything fitting that description in this thread?

He made it up.

Running and putting people on ignore for even the most minuscule criticism of the wild-eyed behavior of Sanders supporters here and pretending you can't see any of that even when it's been pointed out to you is an excellent way to show how non-thin skinned you are.

Keep up the good fight, guys. You're an asset to your organization.

unable to see, that are so busy checking the recs and "refuting" people's posts applauding the OPs courage in posting this on All Bernie, All the time Underground, instead of actually responding to the article.

Thanks for playing.

Me asking for evidence of your claim is the evidence, eh?

You have nothing useful to add. You win an ignore.

has allways looked like infiltration bullshit carried around by 30 year old professional students trying to hit on coeds .Thats my shitty opinion and don't take it personally especially if it rings true .

maybe I'm good for something ......naw

Where no matter how far left you are on the spectrum, someone is always further to your left, claiming you're a sellout.

Someone should tell Kristen that Trotskyites thought Debs was a cartoonish capitalist stooge.

Moreso than discriminating because of age. Bernie is sharp and has the message for our times.

"Had I done my research, I would have discovered Sanders' frankly hawkish positions on foreign policy. It only takes a brief search to uncover his ardent support for Israeli apartheid, his repeated authorizations of funding for the U.S. military budget, and even his initial vote for Bush's original Authorization for Use of Military Force resolution that began the war on Afghanistan. I would have even discovered pictures in the local newspaper of activists I knew being thrown out of Sanders' office for protesting his support of the U.S. bombing of Yugoslavia."

Sounds like Sen Sanders is a Democrat.

He sounds like a Dem, but he won't say he is. This is why I find this OP very interesting.

Just imagine in the debate with a republican chickenhawk, this issue is brought up by the chicken and he lays into Bernie for supporting the military.

It could happen.

I'm not sure we're ready for the socialist tendency discussion. In a nutshell, just like there are left, center and right wings of the Dem/Rep parties, the same goes for socialism.

There are going to be critiques from the left of Bernie. I doubt they will burn up the airwaves, since the U.S. as a whole doesn't know what to do with this area. But if you've liked sites like Jacobin, SW or WsWs on FB, you'll get a taste.

And in fact is actively arguing against supporting the Democratic Party.

So I'm not sure why Democratic Underground should take her seriously.

Since the OP disses both Bernie and Hillary, the circular firing squad has taken on a whole new meaning.

I don't think they read the whole thing.

is SOP for Clinton and that's A OK! So at least we know consistency is not very high on the priority list. But now, as always, they're are very, vewy concerned.

I see you!


LOL

Not faked concern with inflammatory pictures. Obvious the difference escapes you.

Say you're not concerned about the same fucking issue. So full of shit it's incredible, but I still give you points for trying. Amazing amount of paranoia in that thread, the conspiracy theories are just hilarious.

More ridiculous than insulting, but still very insulting. And the two faced attitude- good luck talking about integrity now. That ship has sailed.

And feel more comfortable in the Bernie group, where people are saying things like "he marched on Selma, what else do they want"?

I'm can't say I'm impressed.

What wrong is that no one noticed how very fucked up that statement is.

I'm guessing it's possible, but obviously you'll keep trying. Going to alert now- is that your game?

and will be sitting in the corner for a bit.

On Wed Jun 3, 2015, 11:27 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
>
> Could you be more or a condescending jerk, Ivan?
> http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6776056
>
> REASON FOR ALERT
>
> This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
>
> ALERTER'S COMMENTS
>
> Bullying is not acceptable. Calling another poster a "condescending jerk" crosses the line, daring BrotherIvan to alert on their namecalling only makes it worse.
>
> You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Jun 3, 2015, 11:34 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.
>
> Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: I would hide both... But since I can't, i'll hide neither.
> Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: No explanation given
> Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: Baited ... Bit ... Alerted upon. Leave it.
> Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: No explanation given
> Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: Borderline. Bettyellen's got a way about her, but this would be time hide a subthread, if anything.
> Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: Take it outside! Both of YOU!!!!!
> Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: No explanation given
>
> Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

But it is kind of funny.

At least online there's no spit up or literal poop to deal with, ha ha.

Totally dismissing that HRCs leads over Republicans has evaporated. Whistling past the graveyard and all that.

Really do you want to go there? Who is more of a Hawk, Hillary or Bernie? Just let me know when and if you want to go there.

and I'll vote for that candidate.

So far, Bernie scores highest with me, in spite of the F-35 that is a total waste of taxpayer dollars and shouldn't be built at all.

he hasn't faced the national magnifying glass yet. The F35 issue, protecting gun manufacturers, a poorly considered Robin Hood tax, old "Shades of Grey" essays, a spouse who fights with liberal students/faculty...well, you get the idea. Drip, drip, drip.

Hillary has been attacked with every resource of the GOP thrown at her for decades. At this point, million dollar campaigns that invent imaginary criticisms attack Hillary regularly, and DUers who "love to hate Hillary" often fall for the bs and repeat it.

If Bernie were the nominee - he would face a billion dollar war chest with no limits. He would be completely overwhelmed with his very limited resources, nonexistent national organization, and minimal national experience. The GOP would love to face Bernie instead of Hillary.

I know that everyone imagines a great populist rising up to elect Bernie, but there is virtually no evidence that would happen. The Democratic voters have NOT come out for recent elections. The GOP has control of registration, elections supervisors, and voting processes in many states. When issues about Bernie are trumpeted over and over on TV, mail, internet, etc. - he simply won't have the money to fight back. That's how the GOP has won big elections, state elections, and local elections as a pattern over the last two decades, and we'll see it again.

Interesting post, because the author is exactly the person who has a concern over an issue that can be exploited by an attack ad campaign.

Believe that. Thing is, most of his supporters are of the "true believer" variety. To them, anything critical of "Bernie" is a lie or part of some kind of orchestrated smear campaign. We've seen as much in this thread. But most covet the struggle more than they care about winning elections so "Bernie" going down in a blaze of glory would be honorable and preferred.

discuss the issues. I've mentioned some key issues worthy of DU multiple times:

-A path to citizenship for millions of undocumented people living in the US
-Reasonable international relations - not just based on armies and oil, but experience
-Women's right that are still under fire decades after the attempted ERA
-Rights for children, including the right to education and health care

Usually, the threads devolve into bash-attacks on old RW memes.

What's interesting, is that you can take the "anti-status quo, blind desire for a natural politician"; and just substitute a Tea Party name. The Tea Party websites sound like some of our more excited Bernie believers. Not "socialists", but the same failure to look at objective evidence because of loyalty to a particular personality and opposed to everything else.

Anyone who's been around as long as Bernie has alliances and owes favors. He just happens to represent a small niche where he's safe. After the GOP operatives get going, any Democratic candidate will face an onslaught. Obama only survived because he was too new to have a solid record; and look at all the crap they made up about birth certificates, etc.

The Koch machine hasn't got Bernie in the cross-hairs yet.

"vulnerability".

If he's vulnerable then so was Bill Clinton for going after Sister Souljah. The person who wrote this article represents a far fringe, AND it's worth noting they are advocating not supporting the Democratic Party in general, in fact they specifically mention "Sanders's eventual endorsement of Hillary Clinton as Democratic Nominee" as a sticking point.

If Hillary's really so inevitable (again, just like last time!) then why do her supporters need to latch on to weak, amateurish pieces like this that they can't even be bothered to read?

Maybe you can tell Debbie Wasserman Schultz the next time you see her; You know one state that Democratic voters DID come out in 2014?

Oregon.

Know what else Oregon has? A State Democratic Party apparatus that supports full marijuana legalization. A Jr. Senator who is the FIRST Senator in US history, to likewise, support marijuana legalization.

Yeah, pass that along to Debbie next time you chat.

Sorry you missed it.

Has nothing to do with Debbie.

Meanwhile, I'm sure there is more marijuana in any one county of Florida than the entire state of Oregon.

WASNT a problem?

And yes, enthusiasm from party rank and file can be DIRECTLY related to the ability- or lack thereof- of party leaders to take necessary and brave stands.

I don't really care about how much pot Florida has, but if you're still putting sick people in jail for smoking it- and DWS is defending that position- it's a shame and an obscenity.

Meanwhile, Oregon has legalized for Recreational Use. Another area where our leaders and our voters are in sync and behaving rationally.

edited to add: I think you might be wrong about the "single county in Fla has more pot than all of Oregon", too. At least the prices don't seem to reflect that reality:

http://wweek.com/portland/article-18722-budget-bud.html

you do realize that between 25% and 30% of Florida were not born in the US? Hillary is correct to focus on a pathway to citizenship.

That's just one thing to think about.

Florida rarely puts people in jail for pot possession at this point. I work on a college campus and I'd say that recreational use does not seem to be an issue. It's been on the ballot to legalize, but didn't seem to GOTV.

Nobody cares or listens to DWS.

(I'd also add that "almost no one actually goes to jail for pot smoking" isn't exactly a stellar rationale for keeping things the way they are. If the laws don't work or are only sporadically or arbitrarily enforced, isn't that another argument to ditch them for good?)

DWS has become increasingly marginalized, and running against MMJ didn't help her.

I do agree that immigration reform is an important issue with all sorts of Demographic implications in this election and beyond.

I guess it lasts longer for some than others, depending on proximity, but in my case it wore off about twenty years ago. Some of this is new, most of it is familiar, none of it surprising. Bernie is a great self-promoter and if he were running for radio-host-in-chief he'd have my full support.

I would have thunk someone would have alerted on that alone!

knr

Good luck. That and some of the other recent articles on SW are bound to set off DU's ire.



Thanks for posting it. I'd like to see more engagement with significantly leftwing politics here--they're more of a challenge for liberals to regute than facist politics. Makes for a lively discussion.