For a campaign to post dishonest videos is shameful

[TruthTeller0505]

I'm not just talking about any rando on twitter, These are Bernie's campaign staff. They're posting a video of Biden saying Paul Ryan
was correct ... Trying to make it appear the Biden want to cut SS like Paul Ryan does. They cut the video before Biden was finished talking. I know a lot of people on twitter do this but the campaigns should stick to facts.

Link to tweet

You can find the whole quote here at about 26:00

https://www.brookings.edu/events/the-future-of-the-middle-class/



Joe Biden says he was thinking of cutting SS to the top 1% they cut the video right when he was about to say that.

[Thekaspervote]

1. Typical!! Negative campaigning. I will be SO glad when sanders goes back to VT

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. It's worse than negative; it's fraudulent.

There's no excuse for that sort of campaigning. None.

[Thekaspervote]

17. Yes!

[PatrickforO]

2. Good catch. I'm not for Biden either, but let's not put words in his mouth,

or cut words out of a video so it becomes a lie by omission.

Welcome to DU.

[betsuni]

4. K&R

[TexasTowelie]

5. Sirota is a troll and needs to go away. nt

[TruthTeller0505]

6. It was originally posted

By warren Gunnels

[TexasTowelie]

7. Doesn't matter since Warren Gunnels is Bernie's senior policy advisor.

Sirota found a surrogate so he could claim deniability, then retweeted it from his own account which has more followers. It doesn't absolve Sirota in any manner.

However, since we are sharing tweets tonight, here is another:

Link to tweet

[TruthTeller0505]

10. Warren is a Senior adviser and director on Bernie's campaign

[TexasTowelie]

12. So they acted in tandem.

Both of them are trolls and should go away.

[TruthTeller0505]

13. I support Bernie. This just shocks me to my bones.

I honestly feel like crying. I thought he was the most sincere and honest of all of them.

[TexasTowelie]

15. Not shocking to me.

Wash, spin, repeat. Any claims of sincerity or honesty have been long dismissed by me.

[UniteFightBack]

16. Listen...Bernie is still a good guy at the end of the day. You can not like tactics or votes or

what he said here and there but he is still one of the good ones.

I have to believe that he does not know this is going on.

[Lexee]

18. They implied Biden was racist earlier. This is getting plenty of attention. Not a peep from Sanders.

They have done stuff in the past and nothing from Sanders. Sanders micro manages. I would be more surprised if Sanders was unaware.

[UniteFightBack]

20. But this is something a 'bad person' would engineer. I just can't believe that Bernie is really a

bad person. Maybe I'm late to the party here but I am really really surprised by this happening now...NOW, not then...NOW by someone on his staff and that Bernie condones this.

He needs to be asked about this...somehow someway.

[stopdiggin]

22. the problem is there is a pattern

of Sanders either tolerating or failing to control people that REPRESENT him. You can't have your staff running around and doing stuff like this (repeatedly) and then claim it wasn't your intent .. or you didn't know. If this is against your own standards, then you have an obligation to REMOVE those people that are still playing this game.

And sadly .. after seeing this stuff come up again and again .. people are no longer convinced that it all comes about just by happenstance. As much as we would all like to believe that Bernie really IS a good guy ....

[betsuni]

25. "He can't control his supporters. The playbook is very clear. Sanders supporters attack

attack attack, anyone that challenges Senator Sanders. They do it to me. This morning I was added to a list called 'human garbage' and I'm not even running for president. ... It's going to be telling to see if people are really interested in other policies or ideas or are they simply part of the Sanders' cult."

Tezlyn Figaro (2019)

He knows. He says he's "a little bit busy" to keep track, but of course he knows. The playbook is very clear.

[dansolo]

35. Bernie knows exactly what is going on

There is a reason that none of his senior campaign staff are Democrats. Most, if not all of them, voted for Jill Stein over Hillary Clinton.

[pazzyanne]

30. The discussion here outlines the reason I support other candidates.

I like Bernie's policies for the most part, but the way he does business bothers me.

[UniteFightBack]

8. I really can't believe Bernie's people are doing this and he is OK with it? Are they really

attacking Biden like this??? Trying to also say he is racist??

This far left faction are a serious problem. These people are so far left then done ended up on the right...smack dab in the middle of the deplorables....so I guess that would make them deplorable as well.

[comradebillyboy]

39. Why can't you believe Bernie's people are doing this? It's their pattern.

It's their usual behavior. I presume Bernie is on board with his employees behavior.

[ritapria]

9. From the Prestgious Financial Newslatter , The Motley Fool

May 17, 2019 …".Joe Biden has Called for Social Security Cuts 3 Times " How , you ask ? ...1) As a Presidential Candidate in 2007 , he proposed raising the maximum retirement age....2) Orchestrating a 112 billion dollar SS Payroll tax holiday : "Biden was a key figure behind 112 billion in Social Security cuts " ... Part of the deal that made 90% of the Bush tax cuts permanent …(Thanks Joe) ...3) Means testing for Benefits ………. This is not an article criticizing Joe in any way shape or form ….. It is rather praiseworthy of him ..... .… From The Hill April 26, 2019 :" Biden says he's the Working Class Candidate , But he has worked to Cut Medicare and Social Security ".. From the article : .." In Bob Woodward's book "The Price of Politics" , the author "portrays Biden during Obama's first term AS EAGER TO SACRAFICE SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE FOR THE SAKE OF BIPARTISAN COMPROMISE and achieving what would be in the eyes of Washington a POLITICAL VICTORY " ……. Is Bob Woodward part of the Bernie/Sirota Axis , too ?... Is he a far leftist out to get Joe ? ……….. Forget trashing the Hill ….Go after Bob Woodward , if you will ……….

[TruthTeller0505]

11. Those are fair to be debated

This is a chopped clip to form a narrative that is not true.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

36. He goes on to say "social security can say but still needs to be adjusted"

It’s pretty clear what he is saying.

[TexasTowelie]

14. Let's examine each of those points:

Last edited Thu Jan 2, 2020, 05:41 AM - Edit history (1)

1.

While not focusing strictly on cutting benefits, Biden's noted approach, according to NBC News, was to work on a bipartisan solution that would include discussing options such as raising the full retirement age and increasing the earnings cap associated with the payroll tax.

I have no problem with Biden addressing the actuarial soundness of the Social Security administration. The proposals that he was offering would guarantee that SSA for be around nearly 40 years longer than if nothing was done.

2. The SS payroll tax holiday was a temporary measure to address the recession that was occurring at the time and the tax holiday would have put more money into the hands of consumers to stimulate the economy.

3. Means testing for Social Security. Seems reasonable to me. Yes, some will argue that it will pit liberals against conservatives that will say that Social Security is a welfare program, but those people have been making that claim for decades without the program being means tested. The argument isn't much different than whether means testing should be applied under the free tuition programs being offered by various candidates. I don't see why anybody would yield that point to conservatives, except for those that are sympathetic to the wealthy.

[pnwmom]

21. The reason means testing would destroy Social Security is it would turn it into a type of welfare,

rather than an earned benefit that everyone pays into and everyone receives in retirement.

It isn't true that people have been calling Social Security a welfare program for decades. Even most R politicians don't say that.

[stopdiggin]

24. most means testing proposals would operate on a graduated scale type system

that would "kick in" at some very reasonable level. In short, the impact would be very negligible on those impacted at all.

[pnwmom]

27. Doesn't matter. When it becomes subject to ANY means testing it becomes a form of welfare,

not an earned benefit that we've all paid into.

I am not naive enough to think the means testing wouldn't get stricter and stricter over time till it was treated the same way as people who are on SNAP.

And I don't know why any Democrat here or in a campaign would push means testing when the simple solution advocated by Hillary is to lift the cap and/or extend it to non-salary income. (Bernie thought we could simply lift the cap but I like HRC's idea of also extending it to investment income.)

[stopdiggin]

33. there are currently a great many recipients

that contributed little or virtually nothing to the fund as individuals. I appreciate the distinction you try to make .. but I think the "label" you try to avoid, is already being employed. And I disagree that "means testing" will somehow fundamentally change the perception of the program (with the exception perhaps of those that are already enemies of the system).

[jberryhill]

46. +1

People behave as if this tired old talking point were some kind of fact.

It is not a fact, and it is not based on a single fact.

It is, simply, a talking point.

[TexasTowelie]

28. I'm able to back up my statement. Republicans have called Social Security a welfare for decades.

When Medicare was first being considered Senate Republican Robert Dole (then in the House) voted against it. Also in opposition to Medicare, in a famous 1964 speech, Ronald Reagan explained that his opposition to Social Security and Medicare is why he switched from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party. He called Social Security “welfare” and said of the possible regret in not stopping the passage of Medicare: “One of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it once was like in America when men were free.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/teresaghilarducci/2018/11/02/republican-public-opposition-to-social-security-and-medicare/#67cfe80a4e71

There are some other pieces of information that indicate Republican opposition to Social Security going back to 1935, while other paragraphs are more recent.

However, instead of means testing Social Security the GOP prefers to eliminate the entire program. I will concede that it will be easier for the GOP to accomplish that goal if they could claim it was welfare though, but there are enough actuarial and budgetary factors that they don't have to stick their necks out which makes them appear cruel.

I think that a lot of whether a means tested Social Security system would be viable is going to depend on where the dividing line is set for eligibility. If 80%-90% of retirees remain eligible for Social Security, then there will remain enough support for the program and the wealthy won't be in a position to gather enough votes to eliminate the program. However, if only 50%-60% of retirees are eligible, then it does take on aspects of a welfare program and those that are ineligible could muster the resources to eliminate the program.

Can I live with soaking the rich a bit more to finance Social Security? Yes, and I can understand why Biden feels that way also. If we want to discuss correcting economic inequality, the adjustment for means testing for Social Security seems like a starting point. The program already exists so new bureaucracy would need to be created. I also support raising the income amount subject to taxes to a higher level--again no new bureaucracy is necessary.

While Biden's proposals included a mix of progressive ideas along with some conservative aspects, it offered enough middle ground that both sides of Congress could have reached an agreement. Instead, Congress sat on the problem for over a decade and the situation has grown worse.

The actuarial soundness of Social Security when Biden made the remarks in 2007 was 30 years (2037). The actuarial soundness for Social Security now is 15 years (2035). If Biden's proposals were adopted then Social Security would be sound past 2070. It will require much larger tax increases to keep the program alive to the 2070s since we can't go back and recover that lost revenue and the interest it would have earned. What exacerbates the situation is that the government has incurred major deficits, particularly with the Trump tax cuts; therefore, it is going to be more difficult for the government to cover deficits in SS funds than it would have been otherwise. The young are more likely to view Social Security as a transfer of wealth from their pockets to the pockets of the elderly with little hope of benefiting from Social Security themselves which may put more pressure on eliminating the program altogether.

[stopdiggin]

23. and to characterize ANY of these measures as efforts to kill Social Security

is just flat out intellectual dishonesty.
(We have a party out there that DOES want to scrape the program, thanks. -- And Joe is not a member!!)

[TexasTowelie]

29. You are correct.

If anything, Biden was trying to come to some type of compromise to extend Social Security. When Biden made those remarks about Social Security the program was actuarially sound through 2037. Now, the program is sound only through 2035. What Biden proposed could have kept Social Security in good shape through the 2070s, but now the program is deeper in crisis and there is also nothing that federal government can do to prop up the system because of the huge general budget deficits.

If we try to raise taxes too much, then it will prompt younger voters to oppose Social Security since they will view it as a transfer of wealth from them to the elderly. They will also view it as a Ponzi scheme. I can't blame them.

And you are correct that there is a party out there that does want to eliminate the whole program. Pardon my grammar, but that party ain't the one Joe Biden belongs to.

[LongtimeAZDem]

56. +1

[Thekaspervote]

19. Blah blah blah

[Cha]

31. ...

[MasonDreams]

26. Totally wrong fucked up by the Bernie campaign.

The Truth is of Paramount Importance. Especially with the Ocean of lies coming from fox and the rumpf.
Bernie should fix this or fire that guy or both.

[LongtimeAZDem]

57. Bernie hired Sirota knowing full well the nature of his posts; this is who Bernie is

Darius Khalil Gordon, Simone Zimmerman, Matt Orfalea, Linda Sarsour.

Nina Turner, Briahna Joy Grey.

Cenk Uygur.

David Sirota.

At what point will you say, "enough is enough"?

[Cha]

32. Because of course they are.. they're

******* Desperate.

Not listening to ****** sirota telling us who to listen, either.

Link to tweet

[writes3000]

42. That's absolutely outrageous! I had no idea! He was absolutely helping Trump!

Do people widely know this?

[Cha]

49. Pretty much.

[JoeOtterbein]

37. So, why are you supporting Bernie then?

Seems a bit odd to bash the guy you support.

[JoeOtterbein]

43. I don't like bashing Bernie.

Especially from someone who would vote for him today.

[BannonsLiver]

45. Exactly!

Bernie should never be questioned. Ever.

[Cha]

50. ..

.. my god.. where's the loyalty, man!?

[Eliot Rosewater]

60. Bashing is relentless attacks as in what happened with Hillary and now Joe.

Providing factual information is not bashing.

[LanternWaste]

48. Sacred Cows are sacred for reason.

[George II]

51. Are you happy that Sanders' campaign speech writer is circulating fake videos?

[Cha]

54. Too bad.. the OP's name is Truth Teller.

[yardwork]

58. Elegant example of circular logic fallacy.

[mcar]

38. The staffers Sanders has hired

tell us a lot about him and his campaign. It's not a good look.

[Gothmog]

44. From Neera Tamden

Link to tweet

[George II]

47. David Sirota. It's beginning to look like Philadelphia all over again.

[LongtimeAZDem]

53. To quote a real Democrat:

[Lexee]

55. Remember when Sanders ran as a candidate of integrity? We do not hear that at all, this time

around.

There is a reason for that now that the nation has gotten to know Sanders.

[R B Garr]

59. Thanks for exposing these outright lies, TruthTeller.

Shameful is a kind word for it.

[Gothmog]

61. A deceptively edited video of Joe Biden signals what's coming

Link to tweet

A video that was edited in a monumentally dishonest fashion to make Joe Biden sound racist just circulated all over Twitter. Distressingly, some reporters and people with large Twitter followings tweeted out the video, before others drew their attention to the full context, causing them to backtrack
.
It is simply incredible that anyone in the business of informing people would circulate a video like this before verifying the full context. Have we really learned nothing in the past few years? One hopes this episode will be taken as a cautionary tale of what’s coming.

The video in question, which your humble blogger will not link to, shows only 19 seconds of a 13-minute monologue that Biden delivered in New Hampshire. Biden had been asked by an audience member to speak about his work and his agenda on sexual assault and domestic violence....

One of the original purveyors of this disinformation (again, we won’t link) is still pretending this was an honest depiction, and is accusing those who supplied the corrective context of being the “real” purveyors of disinformation. Take this as a glimpse of what’s coming.....

All this is a sign of what the Democratic nominee could face. It’s no wonder that some Democrats are worried we might even see “deepfake” media manipulations. Imagine such ultra-sophisticated video distortions of Biden’s rambles, retweeted by Trump, and perhaps even by reporters.

Trump views disinformation not as a scourge to be combated in the name of protecting our democracy, but as an ally. In this particular case, Trump has not retweeted the video of Biden — yet. But let’s try to learn from this.