John McCain: Bernie Sanders, NOT Hillary Clinton, Has ‘Record of Advocacy’ For VETS

[Segami]

Arizona Sen. John McCain—the 2008 Republican presidential nominee—told reporters today that Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, the second place Democratic candidate, has a “record of advocacy for our veterans” while front-runner Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state and senator from New York, does not.

On a conference call with reporters, Mr. McCain—chairman of the Senate Armed Forces Committee—and Florida Congressman Jeff Miller, chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, lambasted Ms. Clinton for her claim last week that the 2014 Department of Veterans Affairs scandal was not “widespread.” The two Republicans recalled numerous cost overruns and countless members of the armed forces who did not receive vital medical care, and the Arizona senator touted his joint bill with Mr. Sanders to increase transparency at the VA and to allow vets to obtain treatment at private facilities.

Asked if he thought Mr. Sanders was a greater advocate for former servicemen and women, Mr. McCain—a Vietnam War veteran and former prisoner of war—said he did not wish to “engage in expressing favoritism.” But he remembered his fraught negotiations with Mr. Sanders, who was then the chairman of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, and praised his socialist colleague’s efforts.

“I will say Bernie Sanders worked very hard when he was chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee, he, he and I had many disagreements, but we were able to come together, finally, after very spirited discussions—I think my reward will be in heaven, not here on earth for that exercise,” he said. “But the fact is we were able to come together and come and pass legislation that was nearly unanimous in both House and Senate. So he does have a record of advocacy for our veterans.”

Mr. McCain claimed Ms. Clinton had no such credentials during her tenure in the Senate between 2001 and 2009.

“To my knowledge, I know of no activity, legislative or otherwise, that Hillary Clinton was engaged in during her time as United States senator,” he said. “I don’t see how any veteran who cares about their fellow veterans could possibly have any good things, nor could support, her quest for being commander-in-chief.”

cont'

http://observer.com/2015/10/john-mccain-bernie-sanders-not-hillary-clinton-has-record-of-advocacy-for-vets/

[daleanime]

1. Well, she's interested....

in producing more Vets.

[MADem]

9. Like McCain isn't?

Ask the question: Cui bono?

Will the nation be swayed by a Palin endorsement of Sanders, next?

[daleanime]

12. McCain is running again?

Guess the question really was which republican wasn't running.

[MADem]

91. Apparently he's giving "guidance" to the Democratic Party that some find valuable.

I'd sooner take advice from a viper, but that's just me....

[Mnpaul]

208. But taking advice from Lindsey Graham is better

Teamed up with Republicans to expand health care for National Guard members and reservists. Hillary Clinton worked with Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to provide full military health benefits to National Guard members and reservists. Clinton noted that she and Graham worked for four years on that mission, even though “many people thought I would never talk to Lindsey Graham, let alone work with him… So Senator Graham and I said we’re going to make sure that if you’re a National Guard or Reserve member, you will have access to health care and you’ll be part of this great American military from the very beginning. We will take care of you and your families.” Senator Graham praised Clinton’s “longstanding commitment to ensuring that members of our National Guard and Reserve and their families have access to the health care benefits they need and deserve.”

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251737393#post205

Your "command of facts" is beginning to look like a pretzel.

[MADem]

209. Point me to the HRC DU thread that boasts about Lindsey's comments and calls them an "endorsement."

Come on--I'll wait....!!



The only one making that association is .... YOU!! And I think we've figured out that you're not a Clinton supporter!


You guys are the one who tout Bernie's ability to "work across the aisle" (as if he's better than anyone else at that--easy to do that when you don't do much in the first place...!) and start threads saying that McCain is effectively endorsing Sanders.

I think Clinton did a great job holding her nose and working with that asshole Graham--however, I am not taking advice from him, and his opinions (like McCain's) don't advise my voting preferences. However, based on this thread, it would appear that some of your cadre, to include the thread starter, find McCain's recommendations "special" and tout them as an endorsement.

Pull the string, sport! It all starts at post 1!

[Mnpaul]

210. The endorsement crap is a lame smear from Hillary supporters

I don't expect to find a thread from Sanders supporters going there.

Hillary held her nose?

the OP did not claim an endorsement by McCain. Just a statement of fact.

Are you dressing as a strawman for Halloween? You seem quite fond of it.

[MADem]

212. Unnnnh....this thread, touting McCain's words, was NOT started by "Hillary supporters."

Still waiting for the thread where anyone is "touting" Graham's words. Can't find it, can ya?

Why? Because Clinton supporters know how Congress works.

[Mnpaul]

213. I'm still waiting for the McCain endorsement

I'm not seeing it. Are you sure that the straw isn't getting in your eyes?

[MADem]

217. Post 1 makes the claim that John McCain is touting Sanders' 'record of advocacy' and was apparently

completely unaware that Clinton served on the Armed Services Committee!



If you're not seeing it, you're not looking.

[Mnpaul]

218. Post #1

talks about Hillary making more vets. The OP quotes McCain speaking on Hillary's activism but does not make that claim either.

Let me guess, you are going as a field of strawmen. What are you going to invent next?

and still no proof of an endorsement.

[MADem]

220. Anyone reading the subject line of post 1 isn't going to play your no proof/strawman game.

This thread's premise is that John McCain is an "authority" whose opinion of Sanders should matter to us.

We're Democrats, and he is the idiot who picked Palin as his running mate.

Anyone who takes McCain's opinions seriously probably isn't one of us.

[Mnpaul]

223. The subject line of post #1 reads

Well, she's interested....

you are making no sense here

[MADem]

224. Post ZERO, then--the thread starting post. I'm making complete sense.

You're trying to slough off the ugly fact that the approval of a wingnut is worthless amongst actual Democrats.

[Mnpaul]

226. Yeah, we know the facts aren't on your side

so you have to divert the topic with your imagined nonsense.

[MADem]

228. They are, though--and your tactics in this exchange demonstrate

how low you're willing to go.

I have provided links. You offer snark and rude comments. I think the imaginings and the nonsense aren't coming from me.

[Mnpaul]

231. Your tactics in this exchange

show you have no proof and nothing but empty rhetoric.

still waiting for that endorsement

I offer snark because you are unwilling to back your claims and discuss actual facts. You better look in the mirror before you accuse anyone of making rude comments.

[MADem]

232. I've provided links and cites.

You've provided snark and digs.

That endorsement is in POST ZERO. We've gone over this--repetition doesn't make you seem cool, it makes you look like a petty goader-and-baiter.

Want to play that immature game? Where's the endorsement you claimed was happening w/Lindsey?

If you're going to try and flip a script, at least have the lines memorized.

You snark because you have nothing.

And that mirror? You might want to take your own advice.

[Mnpaul]

234. I provided a list of actual bills authored

I posted actual video

The one flipping the script is you. You saw working with McCain as bad at the top of the thread and working with Graham good when Hillary did it and then bad by Bernie further downthread. You want me to provide proof of a matching endorsement from Graham when you haven't given an endorsement to match.

Where is the endorsement?

Where are the bills from Hillary?

[MADem]

235. So did I. And your video had nothing to do with the topic.

You were gish-galloping.

A video of Sanders screaming at a since-disgraced/former Congressman, taken when HRC was FLOTUS and two years after DADT was made a DOD regulation. It had nothing to do with the conversation.

The endorsement is in post zero.

I provided you a link to the 417 bills that HRC proposed. Obviously, you didn't bother to read that link--again. Go find it. Do your homework.

When you read the links, it keeps you out of trouble.

[Mnpaul]

236. You post a link to 417 bills

which ones support your case? Are you waiting for a Hillary pac to provide your talking points? Are you too lazy to point them out?

and there is still no endorsement just a statement of fact.

an endorsement looks like this: I endorse ________ for the office of ________

you can call the OP an endorsement all day but it doesn't make it one(it reminds me of Warren's non endorsement).

Your whole argument is based on a non endorsement that you claim to be one. Sorry, I can't provide examples of that twisted logic from Sanders supporters because no one is claiming that Graham is endorsing Hillary because he worked with her on bills for vets.

[MADem]

237. Gee, too many for you to read? Now you really DO want me to do your homework for you.

Support WHAT case?

You were the one crying about bills--I gave them to you. Enjoy.

The endorsement is implicit in the thread starting post. The subject line says it all.
It asks readers to recognize McCain as an "authority" as to who would be the best choice for Dems.

When Warren endorses Clinton in a best-for-last move, you're going to have some serious dissonance issues (speaking of "twisted logic&quot .

The only person suggesting a link between Clinton and Graham here is YOU. And anyone reading these subthreads can see what you said -- you started in gnawing at that in post 208, and you're still at it.

[Mnpaul]

238. You were the one touting Hillary working with Graham

it came from your post. No Sanders supporters are claiming this as an endorsement. I made the case for Bernie being the best at supporting the troops and you are unwilling to do the same for Hillary. You have still not provided a link to your imaginary endorsement.

[MADem]

239. No, I wasn't.

It was part of a link of legislative achievements. Those weren't my words and you'll notice I didn't even mention Graham at all--YOU did. You thought you had some great big GOTCHA because Clinton, like Sanders, actually had contact with a member of the opposition while working on the Hill.

You raised the stink about that-- not me. And anyone reading this can see that.

And the link to the endorsement is right upthread, at post zero. As I've told you several times already, but you're apparently challenged as to comprehension. It's not "imaginary," and you can goad and bait all day--you'll get the same answer.

Keep digging, though. It shows you for what you are.

[Mnpaul]

240. You posted it

touting Hillary's achievements. Now you are flipping again, running away from your own post. You claimed it was bad when Bernie worked with McCain but touted Hillary working with Graham as an achievement.

It's a legislative achievement when you post it in defense of Hillary but an endorsement by McCain when posted by Segami. Apparently the only difference is that you think Hillary held her nose while supporting the troops.

[MADem]

241. Right--her LEGISLATIVE achievements. Not her "Let me start a thread detailing which Republican

admires her, never mind endorses her for the Presidency" achievements.

But DO go on! Keep digging that hole!

I also didn't say it was "bad when Bernie worked with McCain." Way to show us how closely you don't read, too! In fact, I provided sources that showed you--if you bothered to read--that Sanders is one of the LEAST bipartisan members of Congress, but I'll bet you missed THAT too.


The point I was making was that it was bad for Sanders supporters to tout McCain as an authority as to Bernie's bona fides.

You apparently don't grasp that I--and most Democrats--think Lindsey is as much of an asshole as McCain. Even if they say something nice, well, a stopped clock is right twice a day.

We who are Democrats just don't take guidance from those people in the wingnut brigade.

Funny as hell that you completely mistook the point--and you're proudly doubling down, as well.

[Mnpaul]

242. and Segami is doing the same

but it is somehow different when you do it.

and there you go with that taking guidance nonsense. Is there no end to your silly rhetoric? I guess that is all you have. Outrage over imaginary events.

and I didn't need you to point out Bernie's lack of bi-partisan deals. I saw that when researching Bernie's voting record. I want a candidate that works with the other side to support the troops. I do not want a candidate to work with the other side to start foolish wars, give more tax cuts to the rich(Grover Norquist supported) and pass bad trade deals.

You seem to be on several sides depending on the candidate.

[MADem]

243. Really? You're saying I started a thread telling everybody that they should vote for Clinton

because some wingnut says she's cool? It sure sounds like you're claiming that.

Show me that thread--I don't remember starting it. Probably because, gee, that never happened.

Now you're starting to take the point. This is a slow and painful process. As soon as you DON'T find that thread that I NEVER started, all will become clear to you.

I've been entirely consistent and quite patient with you--here, one more time, in short sentences:

I don't think Democrats want or need Republicans to define them as good or worthy. Anyone asking me to 'listen' to John McCain's advice is like someone who asks a fox to watch my henhouse.

This thread asks us to take the "wisdom" of a wingnut warmonger and apply that to our thought process about a candidate running for the Democratic nomination. Since when do we take advice from John Bomb Iran McCain?

This is NOT about "dissing" Bernie's legislation, or "dissing" his co-sponsorship with McCain. That's NOT the point. The point is we don't want or need McCain paternally telling us dumb old DUUHHH-we-can't-make-up-our-own-minds Democrats who's "good" and who's "not so good." He's the guy who would love a POTUS he could box into a corner so he can prosecute his warmongering agenda.

Anyone who cheers McCain for saying something they happen to like--especially if they can't find much if anything to like about him-- is being played for a sucker. He's NOT on our side.

[Mnpaul]

244. You still don't get it

We didn't need McCain's approval. That is just silly nonsense fabricated by you. It was just a statement of fact(and you don't like it). McCain was just admitting what most of us already knew, that Bernie has a superior record in advocating for the troops(and you don't like that either). There was no endorsement. More silly nonsense fabricated by you. You don't like it so you going through the thread inventing strawman arguments and dumping talking points from one of Hillary's pacs.

[MADem]

245. If you don't need McCain's approval, then why is a member of your crew starting a thread

that FOCUSES on McCain's approval, touting it--like his little 'compare and contrast' exercise matters?

If McCain tells you something is good--or bad--you should immediately check and make sure you have your wallet and your kidneys. The guy is a grifter. He's not on our side.

It's not just "a statement of fact." McCain is offering up a judgment, an opinion, a POV, not 'facts'--and you're lapping it up like a cat after cream.

[Mnpaul]

246. More manufactured outrage

it is all you have. McCain stated facts not a judgement. The record is quite clear. You have failed to present any real evidence to dispute this. Sanders has a better record than most in Congress. Probably even better than McCain himself. He skipped out on the new GI bill.

[MADem]

247. There is no "outrage" so not sure how it can be "manufactured."

I see hypocrisy and I point it out.

You want to take your cues from John McCain? You go right ahead. Stand on a soap box and tell everyone, too. Just don't hold him up as a paragon to me or most normal Democrats. His opinions do not inform our views. We don't listen to Big Daddy John as regards who's best for us.

He does not wish us well. He does not want us to retain the White House.

It's amusing--not 'outrageous'--that I would even have to verbalize this to you.

[Mnpaul]

248. You obviously don't point out hypocrisy

you have littered this thread with it.

You have nothing but strawman arguments.

No one is taking their cues from McCain - it only exist in your little fantasy world

No one is holding up McCain as a paragon - that is something Hillary did(see video downthread)

No one is suggesting you listen to McCain - it only exist in your little fantasy world

It is not an opinion, it is factual reality

No one is suggesting that he wishes us well - silly beyond belief

It's outrageous that you continue to peddle this garbage after being proven wrong by numerous posters in this thread

[Fred Sanders]

81. The Man Who Chose Palin would not be my go to guy on Democratic Party punditry!

[MADem]

90. Yeah...he's got our best interests at heart (not)! nt

[portlander23]

27. Ok, that's a bit rough

Can we say that Mrs. Clinton favors a more interventionist foreign policy? I don't believe she wants this outcome, I think she just has a difference of opinion on the application of the military than those of us on the left.

[rhett o rick]

129. American Exceptionalism needs our troops to die. It's not personal. nm

[valerief]

43. Ha! That seems to be the plan. Military spending up the wazoo.

Gotta keep those war profiteers rich.

[Scootaloo]

2. This ought to resonate with Clinton supporters

[hootinholler]

3. The swarm will be along momentarily

To point out your use of RW talking points against Schrodinger's Candidate.

[SoapBox]

4. LOLOLOLOL

Ain't that the truth!

Start the countdown.

[hootinholler]

7. That didn't take long

About a minute after your reply!

[marym625]

19. an entire OP devoted to it even!

Of course, it's not anything about truth. Even says we "embrace Palin and McCain." But when has truth ever mattered to certain people?

#FeelTheBern #Bernie2016

[hootinholler]

41. I couldn't find it

Then I remembered where to look.

[marym625]

42. Now where would we find something that isn't true,

And knocks other democrats? Hmmm.

[Art_from_Ark]

135. You can try wehatebernie.com

And if that doesn't work, try its sister site, hillaryclintonsupporters.com

[marym625]

156. Thank you. I stay away from caves. They're dark and chilly.

[Rose Siding]

18. A swarm of Democrats on Democratic Underground?

Mocking McCain?



We can only hope!

[dae]

63. Is Palin making a duckface?

[Duval]

69. No, McCain is trying to goose her! eom

[A Simple Game]

82. You got a lot of spunk Rose Siding, I'll give you that.

Not many people would take a picture of Palin and have the text "I'm With Her" including an arrow pointing towards her and then post it on DU.

[hootinholler]

85. Thanks!

My keyboard needed more coffee

[A Simple Game]

99. I lubricate mine once in a while too. n/t

[Oilwellian]

161. That is hysterical

[Segami]

162. LOL!

............DUzy!

[MADem]

93. The NERVE of those Democrats, piping up on a board called DEMOCRATIC Underground!!!

Who do they think they are? Swarming into a thread dealing with DEMOCRATIC Party issues?

They really ought to know their place!

[frylock]

36. McCain is Hillary's "3AM" buddy..

The swarm doesn't have a fucking prosthetic limb to stand on.

[AzDar]

39. I LOL'd

[Bubzer]

53. ...

Schrodinger's Candidate -

[Nitram]

68. Oh, am I late?

the swarm

[hootinholler]

86. IDK

Are you part of the swarm?

Are you a member of Hatchets For Hillary*?



*:An entirely made up hyperbolic group used solely to illustrate a point tongue in cheek.

[Nitram]

144. I don't consider myself part of a swarm.

I consider myself a liberal Democrat who will vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination. Are you a member of the Bernista Swarm? Banshees for Bernie?

[NCTraveler]

111. People mocking McCain on du?

Who would have ever guessed that. Next up, Palin. Brace yourself, we might say some mean things about her.

[workinclasszero]

5. OMG McCain...now Berniebros are holding up McCain...the man who picked Palin as a running mate

REPUBLICAN John McCain as a fount of fucking wisdom!?

Get this trash over to Redstate where they would appreciate it damn!

John McCain is on BERNIES side!? Oh you crazy "revolutionaries"

[jeff47]

8. So....is the "Republicans would never work with Sanders" talking point dead?

Or will you return to it when a different subject comes up?

[MADem]

10. They'll "work with him" until they toss him over the side in the general election!

They want the weakest candidate on the national ticket.

[jeff47]

13. You have an odd definition of "weakest"

since Sanders is doing better in head-to-head polling.

[MADem]

94. If the GOP loves someone competing for the Democratic nomination, that's "weakest."

If they HATE someone competing for the Democratic nomination, that's "strongest."

They love what they can beat. They're not in this to elect the Democratic nominee--I have to laugh that this warrants explaining to you.

I think the one with the "odd definition" isn't me.

[jeff47]

95. Again, if that is true, why is Sanders doing better in head-to-head polls? (nt)

[MADem]

104. Gee, isn't it your crew that discounts any polls you don't like?

Waah, I don't have a landline! Nobody asked me!!!

That Sanders stooge H A Goodman is shopping the "Bernie wins!" argument, one or two wingnut sites are calling it for Trump, and everyone with a decent track record gives it to Clinton...so, whatever!

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-10-26/the-most-likely-next-president-is-hillary-clinton

http://www.latinpost.com/articles/89053/20151022/hillary-clinton-2016-presidential-news-update-poll-finds-democratic-front-runner-most-likely-to-win-emerge-as-next-president.htm

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/10/28/bernie_sanders_adviser_suggests_hillary_clinton_would_make_a_good_vice_president.html

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/10/28/hillary-clinton-poll-numbers-are-beside-point/WwcBaTIT6eLPMCEF5PDaBK/story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/28/bernie-sanderss-plan-to-win-must-be-in-its-very-very-early-stages/

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=&w=1484

Don't stop believing, though....!

[jeff47]

105. And isn't it your crew that actually believes polls?

So why do polls that have head-to-heads with Republicans show Sanders doing better (by a few percent) than Clinton?

You could post more graphics, but I'll still notice you're dodging the question.

[MADem]

108. Well, you're living by the polls--you'd better be prepared to die by them.....

I read most major papers, and I haven't seen any of these polls you keep touting, so you'll forgive me if I discount your enthusiasm for them.

"Discounting" is not a synonym for "dodging," you know.

[jeff47]

148. So polls don't mean anything now?

It's hilarious that you tout them as proof in one reply, and in the next reply you say they don't mean anything.

I read most major papers, and I haven't seen any of these polls you keep touting, so you'll forgive me if I discount your enthusiasm for them.

Golly, it took forever to find the second hit on google to give you a sample. The pattern has been consistent in any polls that include head-to-heads with the Republicans.
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/sanders-outperforms-clinton-general-election-match-ups-ia-nh-n438491

[MADem]

165. Why are you touting an article from Oct 5? That's a LIFETIME ago.

I guess time frames don't mean anything now, either, do they?



Between 5 October and now, what has happened? Geeeee....let me think REAL hard!!

Why, there was a DEBATE! Yes, there was! In Nevada, on 13 October? And who kicked ass in that thing? Why, Clinton did!

And there was an 11 hour kickass grilling! You know, the one where Clinton looked presidential, and "Trey Gowdy" became the French phrase for flop sweat?

Ya THINK that those little old things might have focused awareness, and shifted public opinion? Just maybe? Coulda had an influence?

Golly!!!

You might want to find something a bit more recent than ancient history to "prove" your point.

Or don't. Rest on dried out laurels if you'd prefer!

[jeff47]

167. Reading. Try it sometime.

Oh wait...might make you think about uncomfortable things.

As I said in the post, that was just the second google hit. Demonstrating that you really aren't as well-read as you were claiming.

Ya THINK that those little old things might have focused awareness, and shifted public opinion? Just maybe?

Well, you found lots and lots of polls that didn't include any head-to-heads to show how far ahead Clinton was. How 'bout you use those same awesome skills to find a poll with head-to-heads showing Clinton does better?

Or did you try and fail, resulting in your over-the-top attempt to discredit?

[MADem]

169. Personal insult--not a response to my question--the survey was from SEP, the article from OCT 5.

What's UNCOMFORTABLE is that you will tout old news to try and make your point.

The landscape has changed, yet you're dealing in old information.

Why don't YOU read--the very article you so proudly posted? The poll you are so proudly pointing to is a MONTH old.

The NBC/WSJ/Marist polls of Iowa and New Hampshire were conducted Sept. 23-30. In Iowa, 1,061 registered voters were interviewed (margin of error +/- 3.0 percentage points), and in New Hampshire, 1,044 registered voters were tested (+/- 3.0 percentage points).

I guess veering off into personal insult is your go-to when you can't answer the question. It's not a good look, but it's what you've got to work with, I guess.

And THAT is an "uncomfortable thing," I'd say.

[marym625]

112. Jeff, they just want someone that really works on the republican side, doncha know?

Things like No Child Left Behind, the Patriot Act, the Bankruptcy bill and an illegal, first strike, horrible war in Iraq against innocent people.

How do you not understand that?

[MADem]

116. It's the Sanders supporters who brought "McCain HEARTS Sanders" into the mix, here.

That's supposed to be a selling point--isn't that the point of the thread?

We're supposed to LOVE Sanders because McCain said a few nice things about him? That McCain is somehow the one we should go to for advice on picking our nominee?

No thanks to that!




This is probably one of the most unintentionally hilarious threads I've seen in a few days.

[marym625]

120. oh don't sell yourself short! I'm sure you intended to be hilarious.

Always there with the quick wit.

No one is telling you, or anyone, who to support or using a statement about who actually gets things done to make you love anyone. I know that people here do tell others who should be anointed, sorry, I mean elected, but that's not the case here.

What's hillaryous is people who scream "Bernie would never be able to work with Republicans and it would just be gridlock" are the same people complaining about the fact he can work with Republicans. But, hypocrisy is lost on some people.

I do realize that most Hillary supporters see helping Veterans as something to laugh at, as is proven here. And I do know that No Child Left Behind, the Patriot Act, the Bankruptcy bill and the war in Iraq were only bad when talking about republicans and Hillary supporters see no problem with her working for republicans in those votes. I am supporting someone that works to improve the lives of our Veterans, our children and the working class.

#FeelTheBern #Bernie2016

[MADem]

121. What I am READING here is hilarious.

And it gets funnier, this thread, the longer it gets!

Where did I say that someone was "telling" me who to support?

Why even go there? The premise of this thread IS this:

We're supposed to LOVE Sanders because McCain said a few nice things about him? That McCain is somehow the one we should go to for advice on picking our nominee?

The thread is a complete fail because this thesis is laughable--not dire, not bossy--it's flopsweat, it's desperation-- it's a joke. If you think any sentient, genuine Democrat is going to take advice from McCain on who's the best Democratic candidate, you're dreaming.

The very idea is ... hilarious.


Maybe you shouldn't defend against assaults not made! That way, you won't come off as piqued and defensive, and resorting to the tired old "hillaryous" kinds of digs and gish galloping that people who are playing catch-up use. You might want to let up on the gas, otherwise, you'll be feeling the Bernout before you know it.

To distill this to the one essential point ... I wouldn't keep touting McCAIN as a reason to vote for Sanders.

Not a winner, that tack.

[marym625]

122. with all your hyperbole and lectures on what Sanders and Sanders'

supporters should and shouldn't do, tells me you're worried. After all, it was you that told me I shouldn't comment on a candidate I don't support.

Your assessment of the OP is beyond the pale.

Reread your previous response to me. That's where it came from.

I will tout how Senator Sanders was able to work with all in the House and Senate, Democrats and Republicans alike, to make life better for Veterans and the poor, constantly. Because it matters. Obviously, you know this or you wouldn't be trying so hard to change the subject, which is: Sanders does more for Veterans.

Now I'm bored with you. Have a pleasant day.

[MADem]

123. Ah ha....and there it is!! No longer about the topic, now you're railing about ME.

YOUR hyperbole and lectures...

YOU'RE worried.... it was YOU.....

YOUR assessment.....

It's not about ME. And I'm not lecturing anyone--I'm looking at a thread that is proclaiming John Frigging McCain as the ORACLE for the Democratic Party--and I'm laughing my ass off. As any Democrat with a brain would.

It's about trying to use McCain as a Sanders endorser, and thinking that anyone reading this flopsweat mess would do anything but laugh. Or cry--depending on what candidate they supported.

This is not a winning strategy, but please--do carry on.

Of course you're "bored." If "bored" is a simile for all out of insults and snark.

[marym625]

126. there you go again, changing the subject, twisting the OP,

Lecturing, commenting on things not said. And all done in the guise of democratic unity.

Where is that rapier wit?

You can ignore facts, twist words, try to deflect from reality from now until the cows come home. Won't change the facts:

Senator Sanders works with the Democrats and Republicans to improve the lives of Veterans and he succeeds.

Senator Sanders works with Democrats and Republicans to improve the lives of the poor by insuring accessible healthcare and succeeds.

The only Democratic candidate that can make that claim.

No, no smilie. It's a simple statement. I'm pretty sure you know what it means.

[MADem]

127. Ha ha ha!! The subject is McCain, and how he's "endorsing" Sanders...

I've been consistent--you're the one racing all over the page, here!



And still, more complaining about MEEEEEE!!! Now you're accusing me (falsely, I might note) of ...changing the subject, twisting the OP, Lecturing, commenting on things not said.....

The subject is McCain telling DEMOCRATS who the "best" candidate for our nomination is, and the people here ready to support his endorsement. Tell us all, again, why we should listen to John Fricken McCain?

[marym625]

128. I thought you hated the little laughing guy?

You do love to chastise people for using it. Surprised to see you use it. Good for you for being able to laugh at yourself.

Oh, don't despair, it's all about you and always about you.

The OP, however, is about how Bernie Sanders can work with Republicans and Democrats to get things done. Things that help Veterans. And other candidates, specifically Hillary Clinton, cannot.

Hurts, huh? Obviously since you can't accept that is the truth. Hence your constant replies trying to make that a bad thing.

[MADem]

131. I think he's like salt--best used SPARINGLY!

It's never about me--until you run out of argument and turn on me--as you did in this thread. Anyone can see how you keep changing the subject to me. It's a lousy tactic in the first place, and it's best dispensed with once it becomes obvious.

The OP is about McCain touting Sanders--and how some Sanders supporters want to make that a "good" thing--like we Democrats need advice from McCain on who is "best" for us and for America.

Frankly, when a Republican says nice things about Democrats, Democrats would do well to watch their wallets AND their reputations.

Still don't comprehend why you think it's some kind of miracle that Sanders did his job--but I guess when the bar is low, the bar is low.

[marym625]

152. I watched part of the republican debate last night.

It was very interesting, how they can just spew lies, twist words and ignore the subject. Don't you think?

Sorry dear, you went after Sanders supporters and me and made it personal, not the other way around. But I'll excuse you for not recognizing it. When you do something constantly, I guess it doesn't register.

Deflecting from the actual issue and turning things away from real discussion is a pattern with some people here.

Perhaps I have been wrong and you're not trying to twist things. Perhaps you don't understand the OP. Let me help you. John McCain, a Republican and Chairman of the Senate Armed Forces Committee, a Veteran and was a POW during the Vietnam war, stated,

But the fact is we were able to come together and come and pass legislation that was nearly unanimous in both House and Senate. So he does have a record of advocacy for our veterans.”

Nowhere does the OP say we Democrats should listen to him. Nowhere does the OP say McCain says you should love Bernie Sanders. Nowhere does the OP say we need republicans to tell is what's good for America. {We have Hillary supporters for that.)

Don't you get tired of twisting things? Don't you get tired of being hypocritical? You rec OPs with Republicans criticizing Sanders, Republicans that lost to him and lies to boot, and OPs with rwnj sources to criticize Sanders, but a Republican saying something good about Sanders is bad!

Then we have this lovely statement:

Still don't comprehend why you think it's some kind of miracle that Sanders did his job--but I guess when the bar is low, the bar is low.

That's pretty low, even for you.

Senator Sanders does a great job. Unlike Hillary Clinton, he works with Democrats and Republicans to pass legislation that helps the country.

As minimal a thing it may be, your comment about the laughing emoticon is very telling. And frankly, very sad. It's enough to let me know that when you respond to me, any reply from me is an exercise in futility.

[MADem]

164. Are you calling me "dear" to be smarmy and denigrating, or am I really that "dear" to you?

Inquiring minds want to know!

Odd how you can call me "dear" on the one hand, and "low" on the other!

But there you go again--you can't argue the points, so you again, make it all about MEEEEEEEE.....!

I just get so much ATTENTION from you--all of it so very PERSONAL!

You notice I don't call YOU names when I disagree with you--I'm not "dearing" you or calling you "low"... but I will continue to point out how you never stick to the topic, and immediately start lashing out at me, every time you run out of argument.

Now, because I don't agree with you, I am "twisting things" and "being hypocritical."

smh!

If you refuse to take the point I made--that John McCain does NOT want Bernie Sanders in the White House--then just don't take the point. Believe, if you would like, that McCain has taken leave of his principles and is on the Bernie Bandwagon. But try, for once, to do it without calling me names.

It only makes you look bad when you do that kind of thing. And gosh, to quote you, that is kind of "sad."

One for the road:

[daleanime]

14. Republicans want....

Hillary?

[MADem]

100. They want Sanders....so they can beat him like a rented mule.

They don't want Hillary--because she'll wipe the floor with them.

It's really not rocket science--they want to win, so they want an easy candidate to thrash and trash. One with no backing in the traditional Democratic enclaves, one--or is it two--super delegate supporters, one with thready infrastructure, no money to sustain a general election campaign, and who is opposed/unwilling to take money from the resources needed to bring a media fight to the fore.

Vote Sanders--Because McCain Likes Him!


Yeah, that's a winning slogan!

[eridani]

139. I suppose that's why Sanders turns up at the top of Republican polls in NH

Actual numbers aren't important, but it is significant that when at least some Republicans are asked who they want for president, they name Sanders.

[MADem]

166. It would help to have a look at those polls, to see what they are actually saying.

NH has a trifurcated electorate, with robust representations of Democratic, Republican AND independent voters. They like to "have an effect" on the national conversation, and many of them vote strategically.

Keep in mind that it doesn't really matter who wins either IA or NH so long as the margins aren't all that large. Sanders could lose both and still be competitive, and he could win both and be done for if he can't perform well on Super Tuesday.

IA and NH are opening salvos that "thin the field." Since the Democratic field is down to two--yes, O'Malley is still in there, but he's running for a cabinet job, and Lessig is just using the POTUS contest as a platform to whine--we really aren't in the "thinning" business.

People forget that Bill Clinton lost NH (though coming in 2nd was a huge gain for the performance that most expected from him), but won big after that.

[Autumn]

58. John McCain... the man Hillary assured us was more qualified to be President than Obama

Talk about a fount of fucking wisdom. 3 AM phone calls and all that crazy shit.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

119. +1 n/t

[eridani]

140. McCain whas the guy Hillary picked as better qualifies to pick up the red phone at 3am--

--than Obama

[still_one]

6. This is from the ASS who choose Palin as his VP. Glad to see DU finds it helpful to inquire about

how rethugs think of our candidates.

Here are some of Hillary's voting and and where she stands on the issues:

•Commit to helping people abroad before committing troops. (Apr 2008)
•FactCheck: Accomplished but exaggerated foreign experience. (Mar 2008)
•Meet with Cuban leaders only after evidence of change. (Feb 2008)
•Diplomacy with Iran & Cuba, but no presidential meetings. (Feb 2008)
•Bill made deal with Kazakhs to bring in HIV drugs. (Feb 2008)
•Establish leadership & moral authority via multilateralism. (Dec 2007)
•Deeply involved with Bill Clinton’s foreign policy team. (Dec 2007)
•Operate from a position of strength, but not confrontation. (Dec 2007)
•2001 speech to AIPAC pledges money for Israeli military. (Nov 2007)
•Supported strong funding for international development. (Oct 2007)
•Cuba deserves peaceful transition to freedom & democracy. (Sep 2007)
•Should not telegraph our adversaries about preconditions. (Aug 2007)
•US support & no-fly zone, but UN troops on ground in Darfur. (Jul 2007)
•Arabic and Muslim countries take women leaders seriously. (Jul 2007)
•Diplomacy yes; propaganda no; when meeting enemy leaders. (Jul 2007)
•Allegedly pro-PLO in 1960; but pro-Israel by 1981. (Jul 2007)
•NATO-enforced no-fly zone to end Darfur genocide. (Jun 2007)
•Supported Palestine in 1998, before Bill officially did. (May 2007)
•Obligation to support Israel with more than foreign aid. (Oct 2005)
•Support UN reform because US benefits. (Oct 2005)
•1995: Spoke as voice of United States on Latin America trip. (Jun 2004)
•Supports USAID projects in developing world. (Nov 2003)
•Focus on women's rights in international policy. (Nov 2003)
•Alienated Jewish voters by kissing Mrs. Arafat. (Oct 2001)
•Engage in world affairs, including human rights. (Oct 2000)
•Human rights are central to our objectives abroad. (Oct 2000)
•Keep Cuban embargo; pay UN bills. (Oct 2000)
•Smartest strategic choice is peace. (Nov 1999)
•Puerto Rico: Stop using live ammo at Vieques. (Oct 1999)
•Foreign aid spending is only 1%; lead by remaining engaged. (Feb 1997)
•Supports micro-loans to third-world women. (Sep 1995)
China

•Boycott Olympic ceremony to pressure China on Tibet & Sudan. (Apr 2008)
•Establish coherent diplomatic approach toward China. (Dec 2007)
•China respects us if we call them on human rights breaches. (Dec 2007)
•FactCheck: Chinese did black out Hillary, but DID invite her. (Dec 2007)
•Our fiscal responsibility undercuts Chinese power over us. (Aug 2007)
•China: criticized authoritarianism with women & children. (Dec 1999)
Voting Record

•Would use very vigorous and bipartisan diplomacy. (Feb 2008)
•Dems believe in fighting terror with cooperation. (Jun 2006)
•Voted YES on cooperating with India as a nuclear power. (Oct 2008)
•Voted YES on enlarging NATO to include Eastern Europe. (May 2002)
•Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence. (Aug 2000)
•Increase aid to avert humanitarian crisis in Congo. (Dec 2005)
•Implement Darfur Peace Agreement with UN peacekeeping force. (Feb 2008)
•Acknowledge the Armenian Genocide of the early 1900s. (Mar 2007)
•Urge Venezuela to re-open dissident radio & TV stations. (May 2007)
•Call for Burma's junta to release political prisoners. (Jun 2007)
•Develop a strategy to protect civilians in Darfur. (Feb 2007)
•Let Ukraine & Georgia enter NATO. (Jan 2008)
•Condemn violence by Chinese government in Tibet. (Apr 2008)
•Sanction Mugabe until Zimbabwe transitions to democracy. (Apr 2008)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton.htm

Maybe DU can start a group representing what republicans think the Democratic party should do. McCain should be focusing on the wonderful choices the republicans have in their candidates.

[jeff47]

26. Hmm....your list doesn't include anything about vets.

Kinda odd for a post that appears to be attempting to refute McCain's statement about vets.

[retrowire]

44. PFFT!!! HAHAHA

I noticed that too!

[still_one]

59. Here is a few of the veterans issues and how she voted

https://votesmart.org/public-statement/139636/senate-unanimously-approves-clinton-collins-measure-to-protect-men-and-women-in-uniform-from-predatory-lending-and-insurance-practices#.VjEVxYSvLww

https://votesmart.org/bill/3733/9013/55463/additional-funding-for-veterans-amendment#.VjEWQYSvLwx

https://votesmart.org/bill/3101/8451/55463/veterans-affairs-and-hud-appropriations-act-of-2002#.VjEWa4SvLww

https://votesmart.org/bill/3698/9025/55463/health-care-for-veterans-amendment#.VjEWi4SvLww


Clinton voted yes on S. Amdt. 2019 in 2007, which called for providing care and management of "wounded warriors" [source: U.S. Senate].

She voted against killing an unsuccessful 2006 amendment (S. Amdt. 4781) that called for $2 million in additional funding for Army imaging equipment for use in diagnosing brain injuries [source: U.S. Senate].

Clinton voted against S. Amdt. 3704 in 2006, an unsuccessful attempt to provide an additional $20 million in funding to Veterans Affairs medical facilities [source: U.S. Senate].

In 2006, Clinton voted in favor of a failed amendment (S. Amdt. 3141) that called for assuring a steady stream of future funding for veterans' health care by repealing the Bush tax cuts [source: U.S. Senate].

Clinton voted in favor of waiving S. Amdt. 3409 in 2004, which provided for increased funding for veterans' health care adjusted each fiscal year for inflation and increases in veteran population [source: U.S. Senate].

Clinton voted against the successful S. Amdt. 1823 in 2003, which provided emergency funds, in part, for veterans' health care [source: U.S. Senate].

She voted in favor of a failed 2003 amendment (S. Amdt. 385) that would have provided an additional $1 billion in funding to the Veterans Affairs Administration in 2004 [source: U.S. Senate].

[frylock]

37. Hillary as pretty tight with McCain when discussion of 3AM phone calls came up.

[karynnj]

71. This MIGHT be the strangest list I ever saw on anyone's positions

The weirdest thing is that it is podted in her support.

McCain's comment is something that it is in response to her team's criticism of the Sanders/McCain bill. Why is there any question that McCain would NOT respond? No matter how bad he is on other things, McCain has a long history of writing veterans legislation - many with Kerry in the 1990s and the most recent one with Sanders.

[still_one]

117. Glad you enjoyed it, and you are correct about McCain not only

Support of veteran legislations, but also supporting the wars for them to fight so they can receive all those Med benefits

Regardless, to say I was incoherent in my post is an understatement

McCain also opposed torture of captured prisoners, much to the disappontment of the bush administration

Have a good one

[NCTraveler]

11. Just think about how much better off you would be today if your vote was the one....

that put McCain in the Oval Office. Sorry it didn't work out. Seriously? Fucking McCain? We need a protected group for you to spread your right wing bullshit or I should be allowed to call it what it is without fear of a hide.

[jeff47]

17. Yes, it was totally necessary to vote for Clinton in 2008. Otherwise we'd have lost the GE.

Oh wait...

[NCTraveler]

20. Things NCTraveler has never said for $200, Alex. nt.

[jeff47]

21. I'll take "What year was McCain the Republican nominee?" for $500.

See...there was this other "unlikely" candidate in the 2008 primary, who we were assured would lose to McCain. And we should abandon our search for unicorn ponies and vote for Clinton in 2008.

Since it did not quite unfold that way, it's a little odd for you to make that same argument.

[workinclasszero]

15. Bernie Sanders embraces John McCain and Palin

Well I guess the dog and pony show is over, eh Bernie fans?

All democrats can see where you are comin from now!

[restorefreedom]

25. embraces?

wow i didn't know bernie had the ability to control the thoughts and words of others.

he is even more powerful than i dreamed....

[HerbChestnut]

32. He is a Jedi.

These are not the quotes you're looking for.

[restorefreedom]

35. i hope someone photoshops that

i wish i knew how.

[jeff47]

61. There's a cartoon

with Sanders saying to Clinton, "If you strike me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine".

My google-fu is not finding it though. I think it was in the New Yorker.

[restorefreedom]

66. thats gold

i did find this....

[frylock]

76. After a 3AM phone call no less.

[davidpdx]

190. Who can forget that ad

Talk about reeking of inevitability.

[frylock]

192. Clinton supporters are trying like hell to forget.

[eridani]

141. Hillary embraced McCain over Obama in 2008 in the matter of 3am phone calls n/t

[davidpdx]

191. You mean her "commander-in-chief threshold" comment

Another memorable one:

[mmonk]

16. Yes. But we already know that.

[kelliekat44]

22. When was Hillary not an advocate for veterans? McCain hate Hillary and will lie to no end. nt

[RandySF]

23. Yep. Let's take the Republican's word.

[jeff47]

29. Should be very easy to refute if he's lying.

Here ya go, start looking:
https://www.congress.gov/member/hillary-clinton/C001041?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22Clinton%22%5D%7D&resultIndex=1

[NorthCarolina]

38. You can't talk facts in a political campaign, only incredibly fabricated conjectures are allowed. nm

[sabrina 1]

24. Watch what they do not what they say. That is why I support Bernie Sanders. I know what he did

throughout his career so when he talks now, his words MATCH his actions.

Hillary talks, about women and children eg. But when you look at her record, what you see is some of the harmful legislation to get signed into law to women and children was fully supported, in fact she boasts about how she used her position as First Lady, to get it passed, by her.

War, you can't say you support women and children and support every neocon war that comes up for discussion.

[tecelote]

30. +1

"War, you can't say you support women and children and support every neocon war that comes up for discussion"

[marym625]

49. Four of the worst and most harmful pieces of legislation in recent history

She actually voted for, working with Republicans. No Child Left Behind, the Patriot Act, the Bankruptcy bill, and the Iraq War. All extremely harmful to women and children.

If we need someone that can work with Republicans and Democrats to pass legislation that can actually help, we need Bernie Sanders

[sabrina 1]

54. She is very weak on the issues. That is why they are doing everything they can to avoid

discussion on the issues. Thanks for that list of votes. She also played a pivotal role in getting votes for the awful Welfare Reform Act.

How many times can she say 'that was a mistake I have already apologized for it'?? So now they are resorting to desperate smears.

I think we need to focus on those smears like never before. They are all paid for by the Dark Money made possible by Citizens United. This issue of Money in Politics and what and who it buys, needs to hammered by Bernie's campaign, as often as possible.

And each time she attempts a smear such as her latest 'I'm a poor woman' attack, it should brought out into the light, her long record of voting for legislation that has so harmed so many women and chidren.

The smears shoulld USED to Bernie's advantage. It's not hard to do. And watch what happens WHEN we use her own participation in an attempted smear using her status as a woman? Her supporters become so angry it tells you that this is the way to handle it

We are supposed to do what Dems have done consistently in the past, see Kerry eg and the Swift Boaters, 'rise about them and move on'. No thank YOU.

[marym625]

62. Right on, Sabrina!

Really don't get it. Never have, never will. Just beyond everything we're supposed to be about.

#FeelTheBern #Bernie2016

[sabrina 1]

65. Yeah, we're all older and wiser now. We see through the sham that our democracy has become.

I guess they thought they had us with the 'Red Team' 'Blue Team' game. For a while, they did. But now they see we are not as stupid as they apparently thought. That is WHY they are so angry! They are afraid. Because we are not playing their sports themed game anymore.

Makes things a bit more of a struggle for them when they simply can't people back on board with the old divisive game they played, successfully for so long.

They should have noticed the message sent in the last two Mid Terms, and it was a message. Instead they lashed out at the voters, only further confirming why things have to change.

I suppose it is frustrating when you think you have things all neatly taken care of, control of the media, the message, the voters using the same old fear tactics, and suddenly it all blows up on you. Lots of money spent on all this.

Too bad, they are not the first to find out you can only push the people so far.

[frylock]

78. Discussion of issues is mysoginistic.

[merrily]

57. Thanks, marym. Bernie gets legislation that he writes passed into law. Hillary does NOT have a

good record of doing that, despite all her bluster in two Presidential primaries about how she knows how to get things done and her opponent does not.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=694015 (Bernie gets things done.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128030707 (Republicans like working with Bernie).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128027637 (Sanders McCain became a case study at Brookings Institute in negotiating across the aisle.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1280&pid=63762 (Job titles do not equal accomplishments.)

[marym625]

64. Thank you, merrily!

Great stuff!

It's mind boggling that so many actually have changed their stances on so many things just to support Clinton. Makes no sense

[merrily]

70. Glad you found it useful. It's not about principles or positions.

It's mind boggling that so many actually have changed their stances on so many things just to support Clinton. Makes no sense

It's not about principles or positions. It's about who is the party's choice.

[HerbChestnut]

28. Say what you want about McCain's overall politics, but...

...the guy deserves nothing but respect for his military service and dedication to veterans. Thank you, Mr. McCain, for speaking the truth.

[Nitram]

75. Hmmm.

McCain "deserves nothing but respect for his military service and dedication to veterans"? Howe about his willingness to send them into needless and illegal wars to die?

[frylock]

83. The ironing is delicious.

[HerbChestnut]

84. Like Vietnam?

Again, we may not agree with him on every issue, but he deserves our respect.

[Nitram]

143. Sorry, Herb, McCain doesn't have my respect.

He used to. He lost me around the time he thought singing "bomb Iran" was funny.

[RandySF]

31. Seems like yesterday

When McCain used to praise Hillary in 2008.

[rbrnmw]

33. I guess this endorsement totally cancels out

Sherrod Brown's endorsement of HRC

[mmonk]

34. For a disabled veteran, probably so.

[Mnpaul]

124. The disabled vet

knows who got them a COLA increase and it wasn't Hillary.

[MADem]

194. No one is getting a COLA increase this year. So it wasn't McCain, either.

And Clinton wasn't serving in the Senate the other times that there's been no COLA increase. Can't see how you can possibly "blame" her for something that happened while she wasn't there. That's a bit of moxie, I'd say.

I always remember fairly nice increases when her husband was in the White House, and while she was in the Senate.

It’s Official: No COLA in 2016

As we noted in an article published on October 12th, there will not be a cost of living adjustment (COLA) for federal retirees and Social Security beneficiaries in 2016.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics data has been released with the Consumer Price Index figures used to calculate an annual COLA and confirms there will be no benefit increase in 2016 for millions of Social Security recipients, disabled veterans and federal retirees. This is the third time in 40 years that benefits will remain flat. These three occasions have occurred since 2010.

http://blogs.fedsmith.com/2015/10/15/its-official-no-cola-in-2016/

[Mnpaul]

202. I was referring to S. 893

S. 893 (113th): Veterans’ Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2013 sponsored by Bernie Sanders

also sponsored in the 113th

S. 1583 (113th): Mental Health Support for Veteran Families and Caregivers Act of 2013

S. 1582 (113th): Improved Compensation for Hearing Loss Act of 2013

S. 1584 (113th): A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to provide replacement automobiles for certain disabled veterans and members of the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

S. 1586 (113th): Enhanced Dental Care for Veterans Act of 2013

S. 1585 (113th): A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to update the Service-Disabled Veterans Insurance program to base premium rates on the Commissioners 2001 Standard Ordinary Mortality Table instead of the Commissioners 1941 Standard Ordinary Table of Mortality.

S. 1578 (113th): A bill to authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to cover the costs associated with the care of veterans at medical foster homes.

S. 1564 (113th): Protecting Those Who Protected Us Act of 2013

S. 922 (113th): Veterans Equipped for Success Act of 2013

S. 927 (113th): Veterans’ Outreach Act of 2013

S. 894 (113th): A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to extend expiring authority for work-study allowances for individuals who are pursuing programs of rehabilitation, education, or training under laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, to expand such authority to certain outreach services provided through congressional offices, and for other purposes

S. 825 (113th): Homeless Veterans Prevention Act of 2013

S. 852 (113th): Veterans’ Health Promotion Act of 2013

S. 2782 (113th): A bill to amend title 36, United States Code, to improve the Federal charter for the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, and for other purposes

S. 2422 (113th): Ensuring Veterans Access to Care Act of 2014

S. 2413 (113th): Restoring Veterans Trust Act of 2014

S. 1982 (113th): Comprehensive Veterans Health and Benefits and Military Retirement Pay Restoration Act of 2014

Bernie has a long record of fighting for the vets. What does Hillary have?

[MADem]

203. What does Clinton have to do with that piece of legislation? Answer: NOTHING.

Why? She wasn't in Congress then.

I think you just stepped in it.

Show us where Clinton voted against COLA for disabled vets, EVER --since that's what you're implying, here.

You do know (and I suspect you do not) that she had a seat on the ARMED FORCES COMMITTEE? One of the most powerful committees in the entire Senate, with a great deal of influence and reach? You seriously think that "Bernie" is the only one in this race who gives a shit about vets and works across that aisle?

FACTS:

MILITARY / VETERANS / FIRST RESPONDERS

• As a U.S. Senator, Clinton was a champion for our service members and veterans. Hillary Clinton was the first New Yorker to serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee and made veterans a main focus. She introduced the Heroes at Home Act in 2006 and 2007 to help family members care for those with Traumatic Brain Injury. She also worked to increase the military survivor benefit from $12,000 to $100,000, and cosponsored the Support for Injured Servicemembers Act to extend benefits provided under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Hillary also worked across the aisle to keep the Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station open during a time when the Pentagon was shuttering bases, which saved 800 jobs in upstate New York.

• Hillary Clinton, as a U.S. Senator, worked with Republicans to expand health care for National Guard members and reservists. According to McClatchy, then-Senator Clinton worked with Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to “provide full military health benefits to reservists and National Guard members.” A statement from Graham’s senate office said, “Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) today announced that the Department of Defense Authorization bill conference report finalized today includes an amendment that will improve TRICARE benefits for National Guard members and Reservists, allowing all members of the Selected Reserve and their families to enroll in TRICARE with an across the board cost-sharing of 28 percent. Today’s victory builds on the Senators’ longstanding commitment to ensuring that members of our National Guard and Reserve and their families have access to the health care benefits they need and deserve.”

• Hillary stepped up for New York in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, fighting hard to secure funds for medical assessment, referrals and outreach for 9/11 rescue and recovery workers, and volunteers.

[Mnpaul]

204. Two bills from Hillary

dozens from Sanders. Thanks for making my point.

[MADem]

205. You obviously don't have command of your facts. It's way more than "two bills" and if you did

your homework, you'd know that.

When it comes to meaningful, make-a-difference legislation for veterans, particularly disabled veterans, active duty military personnel, and their families, Clinton beats Sanders hands down--and she has far less total time legislating on the Hill than he has. The GI Bill alone had more impact than any other bill out there.

You didn't think that snippet was an all-inclusive list, did you? I believe you actually did--how embarrassing! Bet you didn't click on the link--you should have, it would have saved you from making that glaringly awful and just plain-wrong comment:

Mnpaul
204. Two bills from Hillary
dozens from Sanders. Thanks for making my point.

The POINT, it would seem, is that you don't know what you're talking about on this matter, and even when HANDED the material, you ignored it and doubled down on a wrong idea.

Always click the link. You can actually LEARN something when you do.






http://correctrecord.org/hillary-clinton-a-record-of-service-to-veterans/

Teamed up with Republicans to expand health care for National Guard members and reservists. Hillary Clinton worked with Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to provide full military health benefits to National Guard members and reservists. Clinton noted that she and Graham worked for four years on that mission, even though “many people thought I would never talk to Lindsey Graham, let alone work with him… So Senator Graham and I said we’re going to make sure that if you’re a National Guard or Reserve member, you will have access to health care and you’ll be part of this great American military from the very beginning. We will take care of you and your families.” Senator Graham praised Clinton’s “longstanding commitment to ensuring that members of our National Guard and Reserve and their families have access to the health care benefits they need and deserve.”

Authored a new G.I. Bill of Rights to help veterans adjust and re-enter the workforce after deployment. Hillary Clinton introduced the 21st Century G.I. Bill of Rights to help veterans achieve their American dream through educational opportunities, a new veteran-specific micro-loan program, and an expanded home loan program. Clinton said she took “tremendous personal pride in the fact that the VFW has endorsed” the legislative package. Describing the new G.I. Bill of Rights, Clinton said it “provides educational opportunities – from college, to trade and technical training, to certification and licensing programs. It expands opportunities for veterans to buy, build, repair and improve their homes. It creates a Veterans Micro-loaning Program to provide loans up to $100,000 at very low interest rates and without collateral, so that veterans can start their own small businesses.”

Fought to expand retirement pay and disability compensation for veterans disabled during their service. Hillary Clinton cosponsored the Retired Pay Restoration Act of 2001, 2003, 2005, and 2007. This legislation sought to expand retirement pay and disability compensation for all of America’s veterans disabled in the service of their country.

Expanded the Family and Medical Leave Act to families of wounded service members. The defense authorization bill enacted in 2008 included legislation introduced by Senator Chris Dodd and Senator Clinton to allow families of wounded service members to take up to six months unpaid leave to care for their wounded family member. Clinton cosponsored similar legislation in 2003 and 2005.

You might enjoy this link, too: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=96363

And that's just a small chunk of her military portfolio. She surpasses Sanders on the legislative front, no question with far less time on the Hill, too. Of course, she did have a much better committee assignment than he did--but that probably had much to do with her wilingness to do the hard work to shepherd legislation through the process, something Sanders was--and IS-- not known for doing. He doesn't schmooze, cajole, horse-trade, or do any of the stuff that legislators intent on getting bills passed do.

[Mnpaul]

207. Unlike you

I can actually post the actual bills sponsored(and I have posted a sample from the 113th congress). I believe the whole list is 40-50 bills. I have done my homework and there is no comparison. That is why McCain said what he said.

You won't see this from Hillary

[MADem]

215. And can you also document that Sanders is one of the LEAST bipartisan Congressmen on the Hill?

Because I can!

Writing Bipartisan Bills

2nd lowest among Senate Cmte. Chairs/RkMembs

Sanders tends to gather cosponsors only on one side of the aisle. 9% of Sanders’s 69 bills and resolutions had both a Democratic cosponsor and a Republican cosponsor in the 113th Congress.

compared to...
Senate Cmte. Chairs/RkMembs 2nd lowest out of 35 8
Sen. Bernard “Bernie” Sanders [I-VT] 57% of bills View All
Serving 10+ Years 3rd lowest out of 49 8
Sen. Bernard “Bernie” Sanders [I-VT] 61% of bills View All
All Senators 6th lowest out of 90 5
Sen. Bernard “Bernie” Sanders [I-VT] 65% of bills View All
Only Members of Congress who sponsored more than 10 bills and resolutions are included in this statistic.

Nice reach back into the distant past to show Sanders talking to Ex-Convict Duke Cunningham (who was a war hero like John McCain, you know--he was a Vietnam Ace). That video was made before Mister Top Gun went to jail, and when HRC was FLOTUS.

And your tape was made two years after DADT was implemented via a DOD regulation (not an Act of Congress). The header on the video implies that Sanders had something to do with DADT. He didn't.

Not sure what your point is, there....yeah, Bernie Sanders can shout on the floor of the House. He can shout on the floor of the Senate, too. Yeah, Duke Cunningham was an offensive gay-hating asshole who got caught in a web of greed and corruption and went to jail. So?

And if you really wanted to see HRC's 400+ bills, all you had to do was go here:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?sponsor=300022

If you want to compare how many bills Clinton got enacted to how many Sanders did, you can do it at that site....you might not like what you see, though. Clinton did far more in her short time in Congress than Sanders has done in a quarter century.

[Mnpaul]

216. I didn't think you would post the bills

so now it is time to change the subject and flip flop on working with Republicans.

You now want to attack Bernie for not working with Republicans? I getting dizzy from all the spin. Is it good or bad to work with the "enemy". Or is good when Hillary does it and bad when Bernie does it?

[MADem]

219. You were the one who demanded them, not me.

I'm not attacking Sanders for not working with Republicans.

What I am saying is this:

1. An "endorsement" --be it a "touting" or "praising" or "Yay Bernie" from McCain, is NOTHING to boast about. Particularly from a "warmonger," while trying to paint Clinton with that very brush. It smacks of that hypocrisy thing.

2. Trying to pretend that Clinton did nothing for vets when she served on ARMED SERVICES -- the best damn military committee on the Hill-- is a non-starter.

3. Playing a "Sanders reaches across the aisle" card, when he doesn't--and so what, many people don't--is dumb as hell. Particularly when it's so easily proven that he doesn't.

4. Trying to twist a mention that Clinton had that idiot dingdong Graham as a partner in crafting some bills into the equivalent of the RAH RAHing in post one is a nonstarter, too. I don't see any Clinton supporters starting posts like the first one in this thread, pointing to Lindsey's comments about her and touting that as a reason why she deserved to be elected.

5. I've yet to see any superdelegate endorsements for Sanders in the Senate--and single digits (or is it just digit?) in the House. There IS a reason for that--it's because he does not work/play well with others--not even those on the same side of the aisle where he'd need/want endorsements. It's not that he's mean or rude, he just doesn't help out. He doesn't do any "wrangling" or back-scratching or even the simple things, like recording a robocall for a re-election campaign, or helping a whip get a few votes lined up. He does his own thing, and he does not work to help the Democratic Party advance legislation in the Senate--that's why no one endorses him.

There's no flip-flopping (a GOP term used against John Kerry in 2004, FWIW) going on here. I've been consistent in saying that using McCain to pump up Sanders is a dumb move. He doesn't need that kind of help.

[Mnpaul]

221. Working with the other side to help vets

is nothing to boast about?

Hillary voted for the vets but I'm pretty sure Bernie voted yes on the same bills. But he didn't stop there, he continued to fight for them and continued to address their issues. I can post the bills he sponsored to prove it. I can post videos that show it. You clearly aren't doing your homework because I'm not seeing the bills.

I guess I will have put that on my waiting list as well(along with proof of endorsement). Maybe when you get done playing with your strawmen you can provide that.

[MADem]

222. Not when you're taking guidance on who is "best" at it from a right wing nut job. nt

[Mnpaul]

225. We are not taking guidance from McCain

Most of the Sanders supporters already know that Sanders has a superior record working for the vets. If Hillary had such a record, I have no doubt that you would be touting it. You can't argue on facts so you are attacking the messenger.

[MADem]

229. Yes, you are--otherwise you wouldn't keep engaging me on this matter.

You're in the horribly uncomfortable position of having to tout a wingnut, solely because you dislike an actual Democrat. That's why you are resorting to snark and insults.

I'm not attacking the messenger-I provide links and facts. You're the one doing the attacking, dissing, snarking and name calling. Anyone can read this thread and see your words. They don't acquit you well.

[Mnpaul]

230. No I'm not

You have not provided any facts just cut and paste talking points prepared by someone else. I have proven Bernie's longstanding record with actual bills authored and actual video. I'm am still waiting for that endorsement, I'm still waiting for that list of bills from Hillary. You are the one with the empty rhetoric, numerous positions and strawman arguments.

[MADem]

233. Post 232. nt

[camelfan]

40. What McCain is saying is undoubtedly true, but...

I have to wonder if he's saying it in an attempt to get the GOP to run against Sanders instead of Clinton. My guess is the GOP thinks they have a much better chance at winning if the opponent is Bernie.

[Ed Suspicious]

47. Or maybe it was a moment of clarity from a subject that burns in his belly.

I dont like him but he passed bipartisan legislation that worked for vets. For that O give him credit. Said mcusuallyinsane.

[marym625]

45. The bullshit being said about this post is laughable

Bernie did a great job working with republicans to ensure Veterans are cared for. Just like he did when making sure the poor, who can't afford healthcare have access to good clinics with the $11 billion amendment to the ACA. Both things supported overwhelmingly by both parties.

This is a great thing. We're talking about our Veterans.

The same people that are throwing shit at this, just threw around the "Bernie could never work with the Republicans" meme.

Jesus Christ on a cheese sandwich some people are strange.

[workinclasszero]

51. "Bernie did a great job working with republicans"

So Bernie is pals with republicans eh?

Tell me more. How about the republican witch hunting committee, does Bernie pal around with Trey Gowdy?

[marym625]

60. yes, he passed legislation that helped the country.

Unlike Hillary who worked with Republicans to pass No Child Left Behind, the Patriot Act, the war in Iraq and the Bankruptcy bill.

She does hang around George, both HW and W.

[BeanMusical]

87. Don't forget her buddy Kissinger, the war criminal wanted in several countries.

"Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy."

― Henry Kissinger

[hootinholler]

103. They look like

They're about to get a room.

[BeanMusical]

109. Lol, yes they do!

[Segami]

110. Not surprising...not at all!

"....Kissinger is a friend, and I relied on his counsel when I served as secretary of state. He checked in with me regularly, sharing astute observations about foreign leaders and sending me written reports on his travels. Though we have often seen the world and some of our challenges quite differently, and advocated different responses now and in the past, what comes through clearly in this new book is a conviction that we, and President Obama, share: a belief in the indispensability of continued American leadership in service of a just and liberal order...."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-reviews-henry-kissingers-world-order/2014/09/04/b280c654-31ea-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html

[BeanMusical]

118. +1000

[arcane1]

79. Working together makes them pals? And now the Gowdy strawman?

It must really hurt to constantly defend the indefensible

[frylock]

89. Gee, the complaint around here from Team Clinton has been that Bernie can't work with Congress..

now when it's shown that he CAN work with Republicans, it's to be considered a bad thing. Nice "evolution" there.

[liberal N proud]

46. Considering McCain's choice for VP, I think I will pass on listening to any of his advice

Using McCain to promote a Democratic candidate is just desperate.

[Ed Suspicious]

50. The mechanic has a shitty husband and always wrongly predicts the weather. No way I'd let that hack

change my oil.

[liberal N proud]

52. What if that mechanic was the cause of a loud squeal in your car?

Would you still use them?

[Uncle Joe]

48. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Segami.

[blackspade]

55. There is some 'help' that Sanders doesn't need....

[leftofcool]

56. Johnny 5 planes endorses Bernie?

LOL!

[frylock]

96. Could be the kiss of death like it was for Hillary in 2008.

Although, to be fair, Hillary did endorse McCain in 2008 as well.

[Nitram]

67. The kiss of death.

John McCain's endorsement.

[BlueMTexpat]

73. My first reaction!

[frylock]

97. Just ask Hillary!

[karynnj]

72. Exactly what the Clinton team SHOULD have expected when they attacked Sanders on this bill

McCain's comment is something that it is in response to her team's criticism of the Sanders/McCain bill. Why is there any question that McCain would NOT respond? No matter how bad he is on other things, McCain has a long history of writing veterans legislation - many with Kerry in the 1990s and the most recent one with Sanders.

Funny that this gives more visibility of Sanders being able to work across the aisle. In addition, Clinton really does not have veterans issues as one of the things she spent most time focused on in the Senate or as Secretary of State.

It is also ironic that as she often spoke of her good relationship with McCain, that she let her team hit Bernie (and McCain in the same shot) as not concerned enough about veterans. This hits very close to the core of who McCain sees himself as.

[workinclasszero]

74. How desperate is Bernie now

Clinging to McCain and Palin?

?1381884812

[frylock]

98. This seems more like McCain clinging to Bernie..

try reading the OP again, then watch this.

[Phlem]

77. Wow. Seems the same people calling for conservatives votes last

midterms are the exact same people all up in arms about this. Yes, I remember the big deal about pulling in conservatives votes by democrats so we could "WIN!"

Now that one Republican favors a candidate over another and promotes them, it's sooooo wrong!

What the fuck

Back to my 1st question, is polling good or bad!?

[frylock]

101. These people contradict themselves every time they open their mouths..

Bernie sucks. He can't work with Congressional Republicans.
Bernie sucks. He can work with Congressional Republicans.

They don't know what the fuck they stand for.

[Phlem]

107. Spot on with that.

Trying to explain any sense of logic is an exercise in futility.

[Duval]

80. Not going to give a knee jerk reaction.

This needs some investigating. Why would McCain come out against Hillary unless it's to benefit the Republicans? Oh, wait......

[Robbins]

88. what some forget

back In 2008 Clinton hinted mccain would be better CIC than Obama during primary fight.

While what Mccain said was true he said it to help Clinton.republicans had started to attack Bernie so why suddenly say something nice? to help one the GOP wants to run against-Clinton

[d_legendary1]

92. Incredible how a Republican gives props to Sanders for all he's done for Vets

Even more incredible is how some die hard HRC supporters are turning this into a big fat lie about Sanders being an undercover Republican or some such...hard to keep up with these theories of theirs.

[Kalidurga]

102. It seems just like yesterday when they were all worried about Bernie being a sexist...

and the day before that he lost the debate. And before that he was just not good enough.

[MADem]

113. No one is doing that 'big fat lie' thing at all. You shouldn't misstate the POV.

Sanders had damned well BETTER do something for VETS--he's ranking member of the frigging COMMITTEE. That's part of his portfolio. He got that ranking member slot by caucusing with the Democrats, not because everyone thought "Oh gee, he's a nice guy, let HIM have it." That was his "prize" for voting with the Democrats on procedural issues.



Does no one here have any appreciation how the legislature and caucusing works?

And when John McCain touts a Democrat for the Presidential nomination, it's because he has his eye peeled for the Democrat the GOP can beat. No one with common sense could possibly believe that McCain is touting Sanders because he actually wants to see him as POTUS or, even for a second, thinks he can beat any Republican--he's touting him because he thinks he's the weaker candidate on a general election card.

smh.

[d_legendary1]

125. What do you mean he'd better?

Look up the following amendments he wrote that got turned into law:

S.Amdt.3130 to H.R.3222

S.Amdt.1658 to S.1390

S.Amdt.3183 to S.3254

S.Amdt.3058 to S.3254

H.R.3230 - Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014

Hell, even Jim Webb praised Sanders on his record on Veterans affairs. He didn't get where he is by being pals with Congressmen, Caucus people or whatever connections you think Sanders is using to get ahead. Every so often McCain will snap out of his senility and some shit that makes sense (US drones should be used by the military, not the CIA for example). Him stating the obvious doesn't mean that he's picking on GOP prey or whatever theory you're trying to push.

Matter of fact I'd like to give you thanks for proving my point! Wasn't so hard, now was it?

[MADem]

132. Check his COMMITTEE memberships.

Good grief, this isn't like a toddler finishing his oatmeal for the first time--it's the guy's JOB to steward Veteran's legislation.

He sits on the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs for goodness sake.



It's like suggesting that we should all bow down when the restaurant waiter serves us food. It's what he gets paid to do.

Do we leap up and down and run to pat Elizabeth Warren on the back when she expresses an interest in banking issues? She's on the BANKING Committee--it's her j-o-b.

smh! You're pulling out "McCain" like he's an oracle, saying something that is "remarkable" about Bernie. Sanders is doing his job. Nothing more, nothing less.

[d_legendary1]

137. Okay...so what exactly are you arguing?

Why are you complaining about Sanders doing his job? Who gives a damn HOW he got the job the fact is that he's doing his part (unlike certain Republicans)! And McCain patting him on the back for his efforts means what exactly to you? He says good job and somehow you claim weakness on Bernie's behalf. You mad about how effective he is when dealing with Republicans? I see no rationale for going after him for this.

And I voted for Obama twice. Does that make me an Obamabot?

[MADem]

138. Go back to the very first post that starts this foolish journey.

The post is using JOHN McCAIN as a "touter" for Sanders.

Like we're all going to drop everything and do the E.F. Hutton on what JOHN McCAIN has to say about anything. "Oh, gee, I was on the fence, but now that I know McCAIN loves him some Bernie, why, I'm ONBOARD now--a hundred percent!!!" It is the sort of argument a Republican would make, arguing from their own frame of reference and not realizing that the frame is not shared by their audience.

Frankly, anytime McCain likes ANYTHING, the smart Democratic response is to look askance. Rolling out John McCain to sell Bernie Sanders to Democrats is like rolling out vegetarians to tout for the Outback Steakhouse.

Pull the doggone string. Read this sad little thread.

[d_legendary1]

158. Take it up with that person then!

I don't see the need in replying to my post calling Sanders GOP fodder, calling me a McCain worshipper, and then talking about someone else's post. I didn't say any of these things.

My point was that there are people here (that happen to support HRC coincidentally) who are willing to associate Sanders with Republicans and/or that the Republicans are coming after Sanders cuz he's weak. We all know that McCain is not the brightest bulb in the GOP, but even a dim bulb show flashes of light every so often. I bet if he said HRC was right on shadow banking her followers would be using his remarks as an advantage. And honestly, I wouldn't disagree with them since he has a history of saying stuff that makes sense (at times). Hell, he showed class when Trump questioned his service. You may feel differently and I respect that.

If you don't like the thread then simply trash and move on. Quit making stuff up about what I said about McCain.

[MADem]

163. When you carry their water, you share in the responsibility.

No one is calling Sanders "GOP fodder." No one is saying YOU are a "McCain worshipper." That's an absurd premise from the get-go.

But using McCain to try to "bolster" Sanders is absurd. As I said, it's like using a vegetarian to tout the advantages of the Outback Steak House. They just don't go together. They don't agree on a single social program. They never will, either. Just because a Navy retiree and former POW likes a guy's legislation re: vets doesn't mean he'll like his legislation on a single other subject. That vegetarian I mentioned might like the parking lot at the Outback, but she doesn't care for a single thing on the menu.

This isn't about dim bulbs or flashes of brilliance, either. It's about finding a single point of congruence and trying to make something out of it that's just NOT there. "Oh look--McCain agrees with Bernie on treating veterans with a modicum of decency.....that means Bernie will sell McCain on universal health care NEXT WEEK...just you watch!!! See? SEE? Bernie CAN work with Republicans--they share his views!! Yay!" I'll bet you can find Republicans who agree with Sanders on dairy subsidies, too--that doesn't mean that Sanders has grand powers of pursuasion, it simply means that the Republican has rural constituents, too.

There's not much "there" there on this matter. The OP is framed as though McCain is "endorsing" Sanders, but when you dig down that's not what is happening. Further, the point that is lost on way too many is that framing McCain's comments as an endorsement is unhelpful to Sanders. Who wants a President that meets John McCain's standards? He's the guy who sang "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" after all.

[d_legendary1]

168. I ain't carrying nobody's water! Its you who keeps splashing it on me.

"...when John McCain touts a Democrat for the Presidential nomination, it's because he has his eye peeled for the Democrat the GOP can beat...he's touting him because he thinks he's the weaker candidate on a general election card. "

"

You're pulling out "McCain" like he's an oracle, saying something that is "remarkable" about Bernie."

No one is calling Sanders "GOP fodder." No one is saying YOU are a "McCain worshipper." That's an absurd premise from the get-go.

If you're gonna make stuff up at least own up to it. Taking shots and backing off is what bush leaguers do.

But using McCain to try to "bolster" Sanders is absurd.

No, but it does bust up that myth that a liberal can't work with a Republican which is the point I and a few others have been saying.

They don't agree on a single social program.

Nice how you go from veterans to overall social programs. Fine. I'll play.

H.Amdt.569 to H.R.6 = Make competitive grants available to colleges and universities that cooperated to reduce costs through joint purchases of goods and services.

H.Amdt.562 to H.R.5120 = Protects Pensions

H.Amdt.721 to H.R.5006 = Increased Funding for Heating for the Poor

All these amendments passed BTW. Anything else you keep on spouting?

"...that doesn't mean that Sanders has grand powers of pursuasion, it simply means that the Republican has rural constituents, too."

What do rural constituents have to do with any of this? Are Republicans calling up McCain to tell him to be friends with Sanders?

"Further, the point that is lost on way too many is that framing McCain's comments as an endorsement is unhelpful to Sanders."

Why? Cuz he's an R? Had he said this about Clinton the usual suspects would be saying the same thing some Sanders supporters are: Dems can work with Republicans. Why don't see the need to attack Sanders on this.

Feel free to reply! I'm always on deck even though I may not be prompt.

[MADem]

170. Now you are just gish galloping.

Show me where McCain is touting Sanders' participation in that legislation you mentioned. I don't think you can.


This thread is about McCain's putative "endorsement" of Sanders. That's how it's spun, anyway, but digging down deep, he said one nice thing about the guy. He doesn't want Sanders to be POTUS. So why should anyone give a shit about what he has to say? He's NOT an oracle for Democrats to heed.

Do stick to the topic, or try, anyway.

[d_legendary1]

172. If that means that you're moving the goal post then guilty as charged

My point was never about the OP itself. It was about people from the HRC camp (or so they claim) swirling manure to downplay the fact that Sanders got a pat on a back from a Republican. I've stated facts that Sanders can and has worked with Republicans to get shit done. I'm sorry if it bothers you...actually wait. No. GOOD! I'm glad its pissing you off! As a matter of fact its time for you to do some work. What has HRC done for veterans other than send them off to war? Or create more of them? Maybe its time you stop defending someone who hasn't done much for veterans instead of mouthing off on someone who has.

It makes you look just as bad as those so-called nasty Republicans who are out to get Democrats.

[MADem]

173. The point I think you are missing is that a pat on the back from a Republican isn't a good thing.

But you keep on pretending it's all about people being "mean to Bernie."

It's like a senior Democrat telling a Republican, "Oh, that Ben Carson is great! What leadership skills!" It's damning. Sanders doesn't need "praise" from McCain, the nitwit who picked Sarah Palin to be his VP. McCain's judgment (Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran) sucks--touting him as an oracle of who has talent, just because he said something nice about Sanders, isn't helpful. To SANDERS.

In actual fact, it doesn't "bother me" at all. Enjoy the view from the heights of your McCain petard. From my perspective, it strengthens my favored candidate, but I was trying to be kind from a 'DNC unity' perspective. Most Democrats don't take voting advice from Republicans, you see.

As a veteran and a military retiree, I'm not concerned about Clinton's POV towards my community. I got the first decent pay raises of my career under her husband, and despite the whining of the far right about how he dared to let gay people serve and increased opportunities for women service members, I thought the military got stronger under him. Family service programs were strengthened, he put teeth in fraud, waste and abuse oversight, his Pentagon actually fully staffed EO offices, he cracked down on bigotry and sexual harassment, he upped pay, and in general, he made the services a better place to serve.

[d_legendary1]

185. Wow, you never stop making stuff up don't you?

"But you keep on pretending it's all about people being "mean to Bernie."

I don't give a hoot what you think about Sanders. That's your opinion. What I do give a damn about is you spreading lies that he's a weak candidate cuz a Republican gave him props.

It's like a senior Democrat telling a Republican, "Oh, that Ben Carson is great! What leadership skills!" It's damning.

DWS does it all the time in Florida and it gets them elected. Coincidence?

"...from McCain, the nitwit who picked Sarah Palin to be his VP. McCain's judgment (Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran)..."

I've already answered this about McCain. We're going in circles now.

"Most Democrats don't take voting advice from Republicans, you see."

No, but Republicans do. And it'll help him out should he be the nominee.

As a veteran and a military retiree, I'm not concerned about Clinton's POV towards my community.

So why the hell are you coming after Sanders? He helps out Veterans and you spit in his face. Hopefully you're not gonna turn this into a "Well I served and he didn't" type of argument. Jim Webb already burst that bubble during the primary.

[MADem]

186. And you never stop having challenges understanding my point. Ever. You just did it again.

So why the hell are you coming after Sanders?

Answer--I am NOT.



I am questioning the sagacity of his over-eager supporters, trying to turn a "comment" by John McCain (the Democrats' natural enemy) into an "endorsement" by McCain for Senator Sanders.

He doesn't NEED these kinds of associations. They aren't helpful. And it's not "spitting in his face" (really--you go to that level of hyperbole?) to say so.

But hey, you keep on with your bad self!

[enid602]

106. Bernie

Finally. Sanders finally gets another endorsement . . . of sorts. Nice to knoe not everyone in the Senate is corrupt.

[ucrdem]

114. The Lane Bryant lady has sung, crashed and burned. nt

[MohRokTah]

115. Wow, citing John McCain as an endorsement for Sanders.

The desperation...

it Berns!

[rhett o rick]

130. Desperation is using that emoticon to attempt to ridicule. Sad. nm

[MADem]

133. I think the attempt succeeded. It's pretty low to pull out McCain as "proof" of anything.

Of course Sanders works on veterans issues--he's on the committee. He doesn't HAVE to be on that committee, he expressed an interest in it and Harry Reid gave him a seat on it. That's nice, but at the end of the day, that's a job he ASKED to take on.

All Senators and Representatives sit on assorted committees. John McCain doesn't need to pat people from our side of the aisle on the head and call them Good Little Senators for doing what they asked to do in the first place -- their work can stand on its own. In fact, "praise" from McCain is the last thing anyone wants or needs if they're running for the Democratic nomination.

Do you seriously think McCain wants to see Sanders as POTUS? If you do, that's what's "sad"--that enthusiasm for a candidate would blind a person to the obvious game that McCain is playing. McCain is not going to endorse the strongest Democrat--he wants the weakest one to run against the GOP standard bearer.

[Kentonio]

174. So..

You don't think the best advocate for veterans might just be the one who actually asked to be on the veterans committee and committed huge amounts of time and energy to their cause?

[MADem]

175. So....you completely missed the point I was making.

This isn't about Sanders' qualifications at all.

It's relying on a WINGNUT who wants to defeat us for "recommendations" as to who is good, and who is not.

I'm quite sure Sanders could find, if he even wanted, plenty of people who hew to the left side of the aisle to tout his many successes on the Veteran's committee. He doesn't need any vet 'splaining' (the new cool word here) from the likes of John "Bomb Iran" McCain to 'teach' all of us Dumb Democrats how to take care of wounded warriors, and who does a good job in this regard.

I've seen no evidence that Sanders solicited this "endorsement." In fact, the context of the comments remains entirely unclear. If they were teased out to "prove" something about BS, they're not having the desired effect.

If John McCain likes it, Democrats often don't. I am quite sure Sanders could find a better person -- if he were even looking for that -- to sing his praises.

[Kentonio]

180. John McCain is a completely qualified man to speak about Veterans affairs

He never disguised his appreciation of how Sanders worked to find a deal that would work for both sides of the house. This isn't a sudden thing he's come out with just because of the election.

McCain is wrong on many things, but compared to most of that group he's fairly moderate on a lot of issues, and given his history extremely emotionally invested in veterans affairs.

[MADem]

182. He married an heiress while transitioning to retirement status.

He has never--not once--had to avail himself of the services of a VA facility. He transitioned from active duty care in a top shelf military hospital, to expensive, private, top-of-the-line care courtesy of his wife's billions. He doesn't even take his retirement pay--he signed that over in its entirety to his first wife.

Just because you work in a bar doesn't mean you know how to bottle whiskey. He can certainly have empathy, and the exact same level of knowledge that Sanders might have through study of the issue, but that doesn't mean he has any special experience, never mind authority. His qualifications are no better than anyone else's. Just because you have a career in uniform does NOT mean you "understand" the VA.

The VA is a very different kettle of fish. Anyone who has used it--or helped anyone navigate that nightmarish bureaucracy-- can tell you.

But still, you persist in missing my point. Would you want Arnold Schwartzenegger's 'praise' as to your level of fitness? After all, he was once Mister Universe. Bill Cosby to tout your acting talents?

Some people bring baggage to their "endorsements." And I don't think this is an endorsement--it's a cherry-picked statement.

Sanders -- if he even wanted an endorser (and I'm doubtful he even asked for this) -- could find a better one.

[Kentonio]

183. A man who spent 5 and a half years in a Vietnamese prison camp

Suffering terrible wounds that affected him ever since, underwent horrific torture and yet refused repatriation because he didn't want to leave his fellow captives behind. Perhaps you might consider putting aside politics for a moment and giving the man some damn respect. Questioning whether he has any authority to speak on veterans issues is about as honest as the people who swift-boated Kerry.

We're supposed to be better than that.

[MADem]

184. What does that dramatic paragraph have to do with his knowledge of a healthcare facility?

It's not disrespectful to tell it like it is. I know this guy--his last tour was at OLA, where he availed himself of the good offices of the staffs at Bethesda and Walter Reed, and got plenty of (needed) referrals--but none to "VA" facilities, because he was on active duty. He divorced Carol and married Cindy, and he never had to wait in a crappy hospital waiting room ever again. This is fact. It has nothing to do with what he endured during captivity, or where or how long he endured it.

Unless you're suggesting that the VietCong had a branch VA hospital next door to the Hanoi Hilton?

If you ask people who got shitty care courtesy of the VA, or whose family members died waiting for care, they'd wonder if that fictional facility wasn't transported to America for them to use!

What in hell does "We're supposed to be better than that" even mean? That I should pretend that McCain has special knowledge, over and above the knowledge that anyone serving on the VA Committee has, of VA hospitals and practices....just "because?"

I've got news for you--putting on a Naval officer's uniform does not magically impart knowledge of all aspects of Naval service, to include post-service medical benefits for veterans not in a retired status. McCain never got care from the VA--as a military retiree, he fell under TRICARE, but as the husband of a rich woman, he falls under "the very best care that money can buy."

And it's not "swift boating" (Jesus--the mixed metaphors!) or lack of "damn respect" to say so.

[Kentonio]

187. The disrespect comes from this idea that because he didn't use a VA facility

That he can't be considered a vocal supporter or advocate for veterans issues. That's completely out of order, as are your attempts to dismiss the guy as a 'wingnut'. Despite how repulsive the GOP frequently are, the idea that no Republican can ever have a moral position is incredibly divisive and destructive.

[MADem]

188. Unnnh--that's not "disrespect." Good grief, the 'disrespect' is entirely IN YOUR MIND.

What I said--and you didn't read--is that he knows NO MORE about the facilities than Sanders--or anyone else who has served on the committee who has never been treated in one of those places--knows.

All his knowledge comes from a) Study, b) Vet/worker interviews, and c) CODELS. Not from "personal patient experience." Why? Because he was never treated at a VA hospital.

Just because you wore a uniform does not mean you ever interacted with a VA facility as a patient.

I am telling you this as someone who wore a uniform.

And if you're trying to insist that John McCain is NOT a wingnut, you've perhaps taken a wrong turn. Here ya go--maybe pictures will work where words don't:

[Kentonio]

189. He knows a damn sight more about the injuries and traumas

..that returning soldiers can face, than you or anyone on that committee. Not being treated at a VA facility (which would have been pretty damn selfish, using their resources when he didnt need to) does not mean he doesnt understand the care and support required. He does, better than most.

As for the bomb Iran thing, he was clearly trying to be funny, which has gotten him in trouble many times. Thats not to say he doesnt hold that position of course, but putting it in a goofy inappropriate way is just very John McCain. Hell its not like Biden doesnt suffer from the same affliction.

[MADem]

193. So you're saying Senator Sanders is incapable of learning about traumas and injuries, that the only

way he can get any 'gravitas' in a committee assignment that he holds is to go back in time, join the military, and get wounded himself--AND stand in line at the VA, awaiting care? Or rely on a recommendation from a wingnut who has never met a war he didn't like?

See how that works?

If you think that "Bomb Iran" thing was funny, you clearly have zero empathy for...I dunno...IRANIANS? I have to smh at someone going to this extent to "defend" McCain--while comparing him to BIDEN, no less!

I will be the first to acknowledge his service and sacrifice, but I know where he gets his care--and it ain't the VA. He had just over a half decade of the WORST care the globe has to offer, courtesy of The Enemy, after his plane crashed into that paddy, and then he got on a Freedom Bird and from then on, he got the Caddillac service--the very best care the DOD and later, his billionaire wife, could buy. He never had to wait in line at the VA. NEVER. Not once. Neither has Sanders. That's not to say they don't have the ability to learn about these things through investigation, evidence, reports, CODEL visits, and interviews.

[Kentonio]

195. Oh you want to play in the mud?

Did I say I thought the bomb Iran thing was funny? Did I? That doesn't alter the fact that it was quite obviously an off color distasteful joke by someone who should have known better. That doesn't mean he's a psychopath who has 'never met a war he didn't like'. His kids were in the military and he opposed intervention in Lebanon along with various other critisisms of US intervention. His position though has always been that if you enter a war you do everything you can to win it, which is what you'd expect from any sensible politician. You didn't 'acknowledge his service and sacrifice', you called him a wingnut and now in effect a warmonger.

As for Sanders and everyone else, yes of course they can learn, the point was that when a guy who has experienced as much of the horror of war as McCain has talks about vets affairs, that has a weight that it would take an awful lot of 'learning' to match. One of the good things about Sanders is that he has spent a lot of years learning and commiting time and energy to fight for what he thinks is right.

[MADem]

197. You are the only one approaching this conversation as a "game."

At least you're now admitting it. You called it a joke--the goal of most jokes is to amuse. I doubt many Persians are amused by that kind of thing.

The rest of your sentences are just sentences. This one is a particular beaut

You didn't 'acknowledge his service and sacrifice', you called him a wingnut and now in effect a warmonger.

Pro tip--Having a commendable service record, and being a wingnut and warmonger, are not oppositional constructs. One CAN be both. McCain IS. I guess you think Randy 'Duke' Cunningham wasn't a wingnut warmonger either, hmmm? Since he was a Vietnam 'Ace' and all?

And, speaking of warmonger, here's a map of all the countries John McCain has wanted to attack. Still trying to tell me he's a swords-into-plowshares kinda guy?

I don't THINK so!



http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/09/john-mccain-world-attack-map-syria


If we're going to play that whole "experience takes an awful lot of 'learning' to match" errrrr....'game,' then the Democratic POTUS candidates might as well go home, and we should beg Jim Webb to get back in the race, otherwise Lindsey Graham is the most qualified guy to serve as Commander in Chief. After all, at least he's been in the rear with the gear in the Reserves, as he tells us, incessantly .... ....

[Kentonio]

198. As your 'game' appears to be dishonesty and misrepresentation

I think we're done here. Go contruct some strawmen for someone else.

[MADem]

199. Yeah, the 'dishonesty' of facts and links. Whereas your lame opinion of a warmonger Republican

is so much more 'superior' an argument.

We were done here a while ago--you just wanted to "play"--or did you forget that bit of snark?



You might want to look up the definition of 'strawman' too, on your way out the door.

[Kentonio]

200. Please go away now

Your hyper partisan dung throwing is extremely boring. As for strawmen, you erected at least 3 before I stopped caring enough to count.

[MADem]

201. No. If you want to find the door, go right ahead.

You made that "We're done here" promise before, but didn't keep it.

I see you have nothing to add, save a childish comment about "dung throwing." You have been doing a lot of that up to now, no wonder it's on your mind!

[MohRokTah]

149. I don't use the icon to ridicule

I use it when stupid shit literally makes me laugh.

[rhett o rick]

150. Ridicule "Words or actions intended to evoke contemptuous laughter at or feelings toward a person"

Key words are " contemptuous laughter". I see ridicule as the last resort for those w/o legitimate responses.

[MohRokTah]

151. I am laughing at the silly shit posted.

If you take that as ridicule, then you are ridiculing yourself by posting the shit that makes me laugh.

[kelliekat44]

136. Especially when it's an out and out lie. nt

[eridani]

142. Clinton endorsed him in 2008 over Obama in the matter or 3am phone calls n/t

[Major Hogwash]

159. Hillary said McCain was more qualified than Obama to deal with foreign policy emergencies.

Some of the peeps at the DU have a short memory.

[Segami]

160. They sure do....

.....in her OWN words.

[jfern]

134. Another thing that McCain is right and Hillary wrong on is we should reinstate Glass Steagall

[sufrommich]

145. Gosh,I wonder why McCain is promoting Sanders?

[frylock]

179. For his outstanding collaborative effort in ensuring that Vets get the healthcare they earned.

[Vinca]

146. I'm glad at least one Republican recognizes Bernie's work.

It seems a whole lot of military people and veterans are Republicans and they refuse to believe their own party doesn't give a rat's patootie about them. Bernie has done so much. He's responsible for a satellite VA clinic opening about 3 miles from my house.

[lonestarnot]

147. blah blah blah go Ann Kirkpatrick!

[SidDithers]

155. The right hates Hillary. The fringe left hates Hillary...

and, apparently, they both love McCain.

Sid

[merrily]

178. "Fringe left" LOL! "Hates" LOL!

[niyad]

157. that bastard, a veteran himself, votes against the vets every time, and has the nerve to talk

about others "supporting the vets"??? does he think that we are all stupid, and forgetful?

[NCTraveler]

171. Kick nt.

[HassleCat]

176. Cranky old guy

I don't know why he had to hate on Hillary. He could have just praised Bernie and let it go at that. I guess he's still peeved he lost to Obama.

[merrily]

177. Poor Hillary. Some people tell the truth about her record.

Two frontrunners for the Democratic Presidential nomination. Comparing their records is natural and necessary.

[tularetom]

181. But I heard Sanders couldn't work with anybody in the senate

Next we'll hear that Sanders hates Obama and that's why McCain praises him.

[MADem]

196. Well, McCain is not going to switch parties and serve as a super delegate, now, is he?

I don't think Sanders hates Obama. I think they like each other. I think Sanders and Clinton like one another, too--otherwise why would she have donated to his 2006 Senate campaign?

The 'problem' is the OP trying to take a nice comment McCain made about a very specific interaction, and blow it up into an "endorsement." The reason this is a problem is because it doesn't do Sanders any favors--the left doesn't need to be told by the right who is good, and who isn't.


It's one thing to use this as an argument that Sanders can work across the aisle, but when it's elevated to the level of an "endorsement" then things go a bit wobbly. The left side of the aisle doesn't want to elect legislators that are "approved of" by the right.

[tularetom]

206. Of course it isn't an endorsement and it would be meaningless if it was

But we keep hearing that Sanders can't work with anyone in the senate and here he is sponsoring a bipartisan bill with a well known and very outspoken republican.

[MADem]

211. It is a FACT that Sanders ranks SECOND LOWEST in terms of bipartisanship in his "ranking member"

peer group. He jumps to THIRD lowest among legislators serving ten or more years. And of all Senators, he is SIXTH lowest. So there's no bragging there.

He is NOT very good at that bipartisan stuff.

Writing Bipartisan Bills

2nd lowest among Senate Cmte. Chairs/RkMembs

Sanders tends to gather cosponsors only on one side of the aisle. 9% of Sanders’s 69 bills and resolutions had both a Democratic cosponsor and a Republican cosponsor in the 113th Congress.

compared to...
Senate Cmte. Chairs/RkMembs 2nd lowest out of 35 8
Sen. Bernard “Bernie” Sanders [I-VT] 57% of bills View All
Serving 10+ Years 3rd lowest out of 49 8
Sen. Bernard “Bernie” Sanders [I-VT] 61% of bills View All
All Senators 6th lowest out of 90 5
Sen. Bernard “Bernie” Sanders [I-VT] 65% of bills View All
Only Members of Congress who sponsored more than 10 bills and resolutions are included in this statistic.

I mean--really--BFD. This entire thread pretends that McCain, because he said one nice thing about Sanders, is suddenly championing him--I wouldn't expect them to hit the campaign trail together. And why would McCain 'tout' someone running against his party's choice? It defies logic. It's more like McCain is touting the weaker candidate to get a dig in against the stronger one (who has a lengthy record of support of military personnel, detailed elsewhere in this thread).

Even in these contentious times, it's COMMON for there to be bipartisan co-sponsorship on bills that benefit military personnel. It's a win-win. There's absolutely no call to suggest anything more than each co-sponsor, no matter who they might be, is burnishing their OWN resume with these measures. They'd dance with the devil himself to get a good piece of legislation passed.

I have not heard that "Sanders can't work with anyone in the Senate." That's not the vibe I've gotten at all. I've heard that Sanders will not help the Democratic caucus do ANY housekeeping; he won't assist the whips, he won't use any powers of persuasion, he won't help out with admin matters, he won't campaign for people or even do a robocall, and he pretty much worries about his OWN shit and to hell with the Democrats. He cut the deal to get a few committee seats in exchange for voting with the Democratic caucus on PROCEDURAL matters, and that's as far as he has taken it.

It's the whole reason WHY he can't get any endorsements, save, what--one or two from back in the day in the House? And Clinton is racking up HUNDREDS? People are nice to people who are NICE TO THEM. One hand washes the other, both wash the face. He just isn't interested in helping. Maybe this experience will teach him a little something about teamwork--because he doesn't have that spirit.

[mythology]

214. While I don't know if I'd use John McCain as proof of something

Sanders does have a record of support for veterans including spearheading the new law last year.

Some veterans groups like IAVA have said he didn't do enough, but that's more an indictment of the system in that it's so hard to get anything done.

[doc03]

227. I have heard John McCain speaking very highly of Hillary

many times in the past. I guess the Rethugs would rather run against Sanders in the general.