2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumVanity Fair: Sanders was granted an audience with the Pope.
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/04/bernie-sanders-meets-pope
So much for the ambush theory.
I would say these details should put the matter to bed.
reddread
(6,896 posts)they have barely begun to keep lying about that.
no end in sight.
it is not about the truth
Schema Thing
(10,283 posts)FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)CentralCoaster
(1,163 posts).
...and when it turned out that the Pope and Bernie were both in the Vatican AND in the same building....
....Bernie stalked the Pope and then popped out and surprised him!
.99center
(1,237 posts)Bernie stalked the Pope and then popped out of a bathroom and surprised him!
I'm sure were missing the full story, anyone have any other news from the Clinton camp on this vicious attack on the pope perpetrated by Bernie?
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)They don't seem to be capable of ignoring much. I'd bet they try to spin even this.
uponit7771
(93,532 posts)R B Garr
(17,984 posts)really ridiculous. Sanders put him in an awkward position, and the Pope had to explain himself to the Press. Not cool.
Barack_America
(28,876 posts)Did you not read the one paragraph I quoted?
COLGATE4
(14,886 posts)it must be true. Why would I believe Jeffrey Sachs, seeing as he is the one who probably engineered the non-invitation 'invitation' for Bernie in the first place???
Armstead
(47,803 posts)I'm sure he'd lie about it
COLGATE4
(14,886 posts)when he finagled Bernie an 'invite' to the conference. Then he kept on going. I prefer to take the Pope at his word rather than Sach's 'interpretation' of what transpired.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)The world has not ended. And it didn't advance or detract from Sanders efforts.
Get
the
fuck
over
it
COLGATE4
(14,886 posts)your false outrage there.
R B Garr
(17,984 posts)CentralCoaster
(1,163 posts)
R B Garr
(17,984 posts)Who made them deliberately misquote the Pope......Satan???
CentralCoaster
(1,163 posts)I would like to know what bits of context are missing.
I'm confident that what comes before "needs to see a psychiatrist" would do more harm to Sanders-haters than to Bernie.
Missing bits, one needs the missing part to draw conclusions about what was said.
R B Garr
(17,984 posts)translators are misquoting him. I'm sure they will be very interested to learn that only Sanders supporters have discovered this terrible lapse of competence. I'm sure the missing bits you're looking for say, "I love Bernie; I hate Hillary". Yeah.
CentralCoaster
(1,163 posts)But for me, as a research engineer I don't like to draw conclusions from incomplete sets of data.
If you want to spin this in a different direction, that's cool.
Me, I'm past due for my walk on the beach so need to let this conversation go for now.
R B Garr
(17,984 posts)I listened to the Pope in his own words, and you insinuated either the Pope or his translators were lying if they didn't match your own biased theories about what was actually said. WTF.
I can see his body language and his obvious distress and embarrassment at having to explain himself and read his own translator's words and come to the conclusion that Bernie put him in an awkward situation.
So, LMAO, at YOU spinning this in the direction of questioning the POPE HIMSELF. And I have to laugh at your cutesy little psychological comment ("calm down"
that Bernie supporters always attack people with when the spin doesn't go your way. All of a sudden, the armchair psychologists spring to life to "evaluate" anyone not supporting Bernie. Thank you.....
Walks on the beach on Monday morning?! Must be nice......
basselope
(2,565 posts)Sanders never claimed an endorsement. He claimed he met him.
The Pope agrees.
The Clinton campaigned claimed the meeting would NEVER happen and then tried to claim it was an "ambush".
The Pope never said what they CLAIMED he said.
Thanks for the video proof that the Clinton camp lied.. AGAIN.
CentralCoaster
(1,163 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Bernie met the Pope? Good for him. I hope he took the opportunity to call out the church on its homophobia, sexism and protection of pedophiles.
reddread
(6,896 posts)he called the world out for allowing inequity and greed to rule.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)But let's not forget in our fanboyishness that the Church still perpetuates homophobia and sexism. And the Pope, as the leader of the Church, is part of that.
reddread
(6,896 posts)I know what you want to do to him.
Let us start with that.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Where I posted I have no issue with Sen. Sanders visiting the Vatican.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)I don't see why it is a big deal he went, either for Hillary supporters, or Bernie supporters.
Joob
(1,065 posts)AS a FAVOR, she did it AS a FAVOR.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)supporters who will not let this "Bernie Lied" crap stop. It doesn't matter what proof is in front of them. They only care about one thing. Trashing Bernie.
djean111
(14,255 posts)And, I tell ya, if the Vatican thing had not happened, we would have been showered with pictures of Hillary and Clooney - as if Clooney were as important as the Pope.
reddread
(6,896 posts)she is building her illusions on quicksand.
merrily
(45,251 posts)stonecutter357
(13,045 posts)wendylaroux
(2,925 posts)ecstatic
(35,075 posts)strategy?
R B Garr
(17,984 posts)Unbelievable.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)who insist on calling the Pope and Sachs a liar.
How is that a good strategy?
salinsky
(1,065 posts)... I would be more impressed if he declined due to the plethora of issues on which the church is regressive, corrupt, and criminal.
A conference on income inequality at the Vatican?
That's pretty rich!
If the church were to divest itself of even half it's assets and properties held around the globe and donated the proceeds to the poor, poverty would be cured for a generation.
And, the Vatican Bank? ...
... holy shit, there may not be a more evil institution on the planet.
snagglepuss
(12,704 posts)Punkingal
(9,522 posts)It is incredibly important to prove she carries hot sauce, as if anyone cares.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)You're kidding right? How would that work to Hillary's advantage?
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)The Pope's words (and nothing more) that so many are twisting to say meant he never spoke with Sanders have been explained...just as I said...they were taken out of context and it was obvious to me from watching the clip, that he did not mean what so many are claiming. Now it is written in Vanity Fair and I am vindicated (as is Bernie).
Francis, meanwhile, wanted to ensure that his encounter with Sanders would not be construed as a partisan gesture of support. He had a characteristically candid remark for the press inquiring about whether the Pope might back a Sanders candidacy:
I shook his hand and nothing more, he said. If someone thinks that greeting someone means getting involved in politics, I recommend that he find a psychiatrist!
His words (and nothing more) were in response to this endorsement issue, not his "greeting" with Sanders. Everything I've been saying about what he said to the reporter and why has been corroborated here. Thank you!