Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
MrWendel
MrWendel's Journal
MrWendel's Journal
April 19, 2016
CNN political commentator Sally Kohn endorsed Bernie Sanders this past weekend, but it’s the reaction she got for one moment in particular that’s putting her at odds with some of his fans.
Anyone with an internet connection knows that a lot of Sanders fans really don’t like Clinton because of her Wall Street connections, problematic ties to a number of industries, her foreign policy record, and pretty much everything else strong progressives don’t like.
As she spoke yesterday at a Sanders rally, Kohn took a moment to make it clear she doesn’t hate Clinton, but her praise of the other Democratic candidate in the race (coupled with her saying Clinton would make an “extraordinary president”) received boos.
So she wrote a piece for The Daily Beast today clarifying that yes, she prefers Sanders, but has a problem with “shockingly vitriolic” supporters of his who don’t care for Clinton as a reasonable alternative:
She’s also a little troubled by the fact that the Clinton campaign has been “far more unconditionally welcoming of the votes of Sanders supporters than vice versa.”
(More in link)
CNN’s Sally Kohn Scolds Fellow Bernie Supporters for Booing Her Praise of Hillary
http://www.mediaite.com/online/cnns-sally-kohn-scolds-fellow-bernie-supporters-for-booing-her-praise-of-hillary/CNN political commentator Sally Kohn endorsed Bernie Sanders this past weekend, but it’s the reaction she got for one moment in particular that’s putting her at odds with some of his fans.
Anyone with an internet connection knows that a lot of Sanders fans really don’t like Clinton because of her Wall Street connections, problematic ties to a number of industries, her foreign policy record, and pretty much everything else strong progressives don’t like.
As she spoke yesterday at a Sanders rally, Kohn took a moment to make it clear she doesn’t hate Clinton, but her praise of the other Democratic candidate in the race (coupled with her saying Clinton would make an “extraordinary president”) received boos.
So she wrote a piece for The Daily Beast today clarifying that yes, she prefers Sanders, but has a problem with “shockingly vitriolic” supporters of his who don’t care for Clinton as a reasonable alternative:
Listen, I can sit around and critique Clinton’s positions on key issues as much as the next leftist. But I’m also honest enough to acknowledge where our visions overlap and praise her when appropriate.
I happen to think that Senator Sanders is 100 percent realistic about his goals for our nation, but his supporters are completely delusional if they think Secretary Clinton is evil. We can think Bernie Sanders is the better candidate without thinking Hillary Clinton is bad.
She’s also a little troubled by the fact that the Clinton campaign has been “far more unconditionally welcoming of the votes of Sanders supporters than vice versa.”
(More in link)
April 19, 2016
CNN political commentator Sally Kohn endorsed Bernie Sanders this past weekend, but it’s the reaction she got for one moment in particular that’s putting her at odds with some of his fans.
Anyone with an internet connection knows that a lot of Sanders fans really don’t like Clinton because of her Wall Street connections, problematic ties to a number of industries, her foreign policy record, and pretty much everything else strong progressives don’t like.
As she spoke yesterday at a Sanders rally, Kohn took a moment to make it clear she doesn’t hate Clinton, but her praise of the other Democratic candidate in the race (coupled with her saying Clinton would make an “extraordinary president”) received boos.
So she wrote a piece for The Daily Beast today clarifying that yes, she prefers Sanders, but has a problem with “shockingly vitriolic” supporters of his who don’t care for Clinton as a reasonable alternative:
She’s also a little troubled by the fact that the Clinton campaign has been “far more unconditionally welcoming of the votes of Sanders supporters than vice versa.”
(More in link)
CNN’s Sally Kohn Scolds Fellow Bernie Supporters for Booing Her Praise of Hillary
http://www.mediaite.com/online/cnns-sally-kohn-scolds-fellow-bernie-supporters-for-booing-her-praise-of-hillary/CNN political commentator Sally Kohn endorsed Bernie Sanders this past weekend, but it’s the reaction she got for one moment in particular that’s putting her at odds with some of his fans.
Anyone with an internet connection knows that a lot of Sanders fans really don’t like Clinton because of her Wall Street connections, problematic ties to a number of industries, her foreign policy record, and pretty much everything else strong progressives don’t like.
As she spoke yesterday at a Sanders rally, Kohn took a moment to make it clear she doesn’t hate Clinton, but her praise of the other Democratic candidate in the race (coupled with her saying Clinton would make an “extraordinary president”) received boos.
So she wrote a piece for The Daily Beast today clarifying that yes, she prefers Sanders, but has a problem with “shockingly vitriolic” supporters of his who don’t care for Clinton as a reasonable alternative:
Listen, I can sit around and critique Clinton’s positions on key issues as much as the next leftist. But I’m also honest enough to acknowledge where our visions overlap and praise her when appropriate.
I happen to think that Senator Sanders is 100 percent realistic about his goals for our nation, but his supporters are completely delusional if they think Secretary Clinton is evil. We can think Bernie Sanders is the better candidate without thinking Hillary Clinton is bad.
She’s also a little troubled by the fact that the Clinton campaign has been “far more unconditionally welcoming of the votes of Sanders supporters than vice versa.”
(More in link)
April 18, 2016
By CatM
"You bet your ass I'm qualified." (Not a real quote.)
Connecticut’s Hartford Courant endorses Clinton based on her realistic approach to issues and qualifications:
The Philadelphia Inquirer also endorsed Clinton, citing her experience and realism. However, the endorsement was hardly ringing; it emphasized the editorial board’s dissatisfaction with Sanders’ idealism more than great appreciation for Clinton:
(More in link)
Clinton Snags More Solid Endorsements Ahead of Primaries
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/4/17/1516660/-Clinton-Snags-More-Important-Newspaper-Endorsements-in-Run-up-to-PrimariesBy CatM
"You bet your ass I'm qualified." (Not a real quote.)
Connecticut’s Hartford Courant endorses Clinton based on her realistic approach to issues and qualifications:
Hillary Clinton Most Qualified and Effective
...We believe she can do the one thing that President Obama has not done and that Mr. Sanders may not do, with his ambivalent record on guns (including voting against the Brady bill) — use her political skills to get greater gun controls. Dec. 14, 2012, has tragically made that Connecticut's salient issue...
Mr. Sanders is appealing in his promises: Who doesn't want tuition-free universities, single-payer health care and bigger Social Security checks? But the costs are far greater than he's acknowledging. Also, the tax increases required would make Congress keel over. Finally, the quality of his Medicare-for-all system wouldn't match today's. He is idealistic. But he is also unrealistic….
Mrs. Clinton has turned dreams into laws. She has fought for the underclass, championing the causes of women and children around the world. Her grasp of foreign policy is deep — including, through sorry experience, the limits of U.S. power.
Given her resume, few people today are more qualified for the Oval Office than she is.
The Philadelphia Inquirer also endorsed Clinton, citing her experience and realism. However, the endorsement was hardly ringing; it emphasized the editorial board’s dissatisfaction with Sanders’ idealism more than great appreciation for Clinton:
In a Word, Clinton
[P]articularly in contrast with the former secretary of state, [Sanders] has largely downplayed foreign affairs, one of the president's greatest responsibilities. He expresses too much vain hope that other countries will do what they ought to, while Clinton told the Inquirer Editorial Board that "we have to continue to lead the world." She helped do so herself by contributing to the nuclear deal with Iran, a bright spot in President Obama's foreign policy.
Even on his core issues, Sanders can be surprisingly short on the prose behind the poetry. His $75 billion-a-year plan to make public universities tuition-free hasn't attracted a single Senate cosponsor from either party. Asked about the complication that free college doesn't correlate with higher education levels globally, he reiterated the desirability of postsecondary schooling and added, "To me, this is not a complicated issue." Clinton's plan for income-based loan repayment would spend much less public money on students who don't need it: again, less electrifying but more realistic.
[S]elf-inflicted controversies dampen the enthusiasm that should attach to a candidate who is not only thoroughly qualified for the presidency but also historically unprecedented by the long line of men who have occupied it. To paraphrase a Republican, Sanders may have "the best words" in this contest, but HILLARY CLINTON is better prepared to lead her country.
(More in link)
April 18, 2016
by Tommy Christopher
Foreign policy and specifics continued to plague independent Vermont Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders during his interview on Sunday morning’s State of the Union. Host Dana Bash asked Sanders to comment on a controversial bill that would allow Saudi Arabia to face liability for the 9/11 attacks in American courts, which has in turn elicited threats of a massive sell-off of American assets by the Saudi government. The bill is currently in the Senate, where Sanders works, but like so many of the questions he was asked in that recent NY Daily News editorial board meeting, Sanders didn’t have enough information to respond:
Elsewhere in the interview, Sanders was given another crack at attacking Hillary Clinton over campaign contributions when Bash asked him to name a decision Hillary had made that was influenced by money, and Sanders fed Bash the exact line that CNN reporter Jeff Zeleny gave him Thursday night, although Sanders coyly refused to chalk it up definitively to campaign cash.
Sanders was also asked about his position on liability for gun manufacturers, and explained that his new position is not really his new position, it’s just that he contradicted himself when he was asked about it before?
This is the immunity shield law that Bernie voted for, and here is the repeal bill that he signed on to as a co-sponsor on January 28, after Hillary Clinton made this a campaign issue.
(Videos in link)
Bernie Sanders Whiffs Badly on Another Big Foreign Policy Issue
http://www.mediaite.com/online/bernie-sanders-whiffs-badly-on-another-big-foreign-policy-issue/by Tommy Christopher
Foreign policy and specifics continued to plague independent Vermont Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders during his interview on Sunday morning’s State of the Union. Host Dana Bash asked Sanders to comment on a controversial bill that would allow Saudi Arabia to face liability for the 9/11 attacks in American courts, which has in turn elicited threats of a massive sell-off of American assets by the Saudi government. The bill is currently in the Senate, where Sanders works, but like so many of the questions he was asked in that recent NY Daily News editorial board meeting, Sanders didn’t have enough information to respond:
Bash: How do you intend to vote, as a senator?
Sanders: Well, I need more information before I can give you that decision….You’re asking me to give you a decision about a situation and a piece of legislation that I am not familiar with at this point, and I gotta have more information on that. You gotta get some information before you can render a sensible decision.
Elsewhere in the interview, Sanders was given another crack at attacking Hillary Clinton over campaign contributions when Bash asked him to name a decision Hillary had made that was influenced by money, and Sanders fed Bash the exact line that CNN reporter Jeff Zeleny gave him Thursday night, although Sanders coyly refused to chalk it up definitively to campaign cash.
Sanders was also asked about his position on liability for gun manufacturers, and explained that his new position is not really his new position, it’s just that he contradicted himself when he was asked about it before?
This is the immunity shield law that Bernie voted for, and here is the repeal bill that he signed on to as a co-sponsor on January 28, after Hillary Clinton made this a campaign issue.
(Videos in link)
April 18, 2016
by Tommy Christopher
Foreign policy and specifics continued to plague independent Vermont Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders during his interview on Sunday morning’s State of the Union. Host Dana Bash asked Sanders to comment on a controversial bill that would allow Saudi Arabia to face liability for the 9/11 attacks in American courts, which has in turn elicited threats of a massive sell-off of American assets by the Saudi government. The bill is currently in the Senate, where Sanders works, but like so many of the questions he was asked in that recent NY Daily News editorial board meeting, Sanders didn’t have enough information to respond:
Elsewhere in the interview, Sanders was given another crack at attacking Hillary Clinton over campaign contributions when Bash asked him to name a decision Hillary had made that was influenced by money, and Sanders fed Bash the exact line that CNN reporter Jeff Zeleny gave him Thursday night, although Sanders coyly refused to chalk it up definitively to campaign cash.
Sanders was also asked about his position on liability for gun manufacturers, and explained that his new position is not really his new position, it’s just that he contradicted himself when he was asked about it before?
This is the immunity shield law that Bernie voted for, and here is the repeal bill that he signed on to as a co-sponsor on January 28, after Hillary Clinton made this a campaign issue.
(Videos in link)
Bernie Sanders Whiffs Badly on Another Big Foreign Policy Issue
http://www.mediaite.com/online/bernie-sanders-whiffs-badly-on-another-big-foreign-policy-issue/by Tommy Christopher
Foreign policy and specifics continued to plague independent Vermont Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders during his interview on Sunday morning’s State of the Union. Host Dana Bash asked Sanders to comment on a controversial bill that would allow Saudi Arabia to face liability for the 9/11 attacks in American courts, which has in turn elicited threats of a massive sell-off of American assets by the Saudi government. The bill is currently in the Senate, where Sanders works, but like so many of the questions he was asked in that recent NY Daily News editorial board meeting, Sanders didn’t have enough information to respond:
Bash: How do you intend to vote, as a senator?
Sanders: Well, I need more information before I can give you that decision….You’re asking me to give you a decision about a situation and a piece of legislation that I am not familiar with at this point, and I gotta have more information on that. You gotta get some information before you can render a sensible decision.
Elsewhere in the interview, Sanders was given another crack at attacking Hillary Clinton over campaign contributions when Bash asked him to name a decision Hillary had made that was influenced by money, and Sanders fed Bash the exact line that CNN reporter Jeff Zeleny gave him Thursday night, although Sanders coyly refused to chalk it up definitively to campaign cash.
Sanders was also asked about his position on liability for gun manufacturers, and explained that his new position is not really his new position, it’s just that he contradicted himself when he was asked about it before?
This is the immunity shield law that Bernie voted for, and here is the repeal bill that he signed on to as a co-sponsor on January 28, after Hillary Clinton made this a campaign issue.
(Videos in link)
April 15, 2016
by Tommy Christopher
One of the standout moments at Thursday night’s Democratic presidential debate was when independent Vermont Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders was unable to name a single decision that Hillary Clinton has made that was influenced by campaign contributions. The exchange cut against the Sanders campaign’s central argument against Hillary, that she can’t be trusted to take on corporate interests because she takes large campaign contributions.
In a most unusual move, right after Thursday night’s debate, CNN reporter Jeff Zeleny literally fed Bernie Sanders an attack line to use against Hillary in case the subject ever comes up again:
(More with video in link)
Watch CNN Reporter Feed Bernie Sanders Attack Lines Against Hillary
http://www.mediaite.com/online/watch-cnn-reporter-feed-bernie-sanders-attack-lines-against-hillary/by Tommy Christopher
One of the standout moments at Thursday night’s Democratic presidential debate was when independent Vermont Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders was unable to name a single decision that Hillary Clinton has made that was influenced by campaign contributions. The exchange cut against the Sanders campaign’s central argument against Hillary, that she can’t be trusted to take on corporate interests because she takes large campaign contributions.
In a most unusual move, right after Thursday night’s debate, CNN reporter Jeff Zeleny literally fed Bernie Sanders an attack line to use against Hillary in case the subject ever comes up again:
(More with video in link)
April 15, 2016
by Lindsey Ellefson
Last night, while talking about Hillary Clinton and the place of money in politics at a Bernie Sanders rally, Dr. Paul Song used the phrase “democratic whores.” While he was talking about the exchange of money for favors in a broad sense, using such a term when discussing a female politician in particular is, of course, a terrible idea.
The Sanders camp disavowed the comments, but since they happened in front of a crowd of 27,000 during the social media age, the damage had been done.
https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/720590717706506240
Even though the incident barely made a blip on the cable news radar, online activists noticed fast. Right now, #DemocraticWhores is trending on Twitter with 74,400 tweets nation-wide.
(More with tweets in link)
Following ‘Whores’ Incident at Sanders Rally, Clinton Supporters Trend #DemocraticWhores
http://www.mediaite.com/online/following-whores-incident-at-sanders-rally-clinton-supporters-trend-democraticwhores/by Lindsey Ellefson
Last night, while talking about Hillary Clinton and the place of money in politics at a Bernie Sanders rally, Dr. Paul Song used the phrase “democratic whores.” While he was talking about the exchange of money for favors in a broad sense, using such a term when discussing a female politician in particular is, of course, a terrible idea.
The Sanders camp disavowed the comments, but since they happened in front of a crowd of 27,000 during the social media age, the damage had been done.
https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/720590717706506240
Even though the incident barely made a blip on the cable news radar, online activists noticed fast. Right now, #DemocraticWhores is trending on Twitter with 74,400 tweets nation-wide.
(More with tweets in link)
April 14, 2016
Spandan Chakrabarti
Dear Dr. Song:
I am a little perplexed.
Yesterday at a Bernie Sanders campaign rally in New York City, you riled up a giant crowd by describing unspecified Democratic members of Congress and Hillary Clinton as "Democratic whores" beholden to the pharmaceutical industry that is the chief roadblocks in the path of achieving a single payer health care system.
After an inconvenient social media reaction, you first claimed that you did not mean to include Hillary Clinton among such "whores" though any reasonable construction of your own words would indicate that you did - after all, her husband did rescue your sister-in-law from a North Korean prison at the asking of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton - but that you had certainly meant it about Democratic members of Congress, whom you had been referring to in that way for years. Then you even walked that back and said you were sorry for using the term 'whore' against Democratic members of Congress.
Here's where my perplexity comes in. Dr. Song, as you well know, a single payer system merely makes the government the only payer in the system, but it doesn't necessarily address the payees, like pharma, directly. That is the difference between a single payer health care system and a socialized one. I am not saying that you should know this because you have "spent [your] adult life fighting for health care for all", but because you are yourself a rather major beneficiary of the pharmaceutical industry. You have been in the upper echelons of that industry for some time, and you're even a minority shareholder of a privately held pharmaceutical company in New York.
I'm sure your well-deserved windfalls from your pharmaceutical career helped pay for your lavish wedding which was featured in InStyle magazine, and this magnificent home in Santa Monica, California. So you could understand if some people thought that for you to be calling other people whores to the industry that made you rich is, well, a little rich.
(More in link)
Confessions of a Democratic Whore: An Open Letter to Dr. Paul Song
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/main/2016/4/14/confessions-of-a-democratic-whore-an-open-letter-to-paul-y-songSpandan Chakrabarti
Dear Dr. Song:
I am a little perplexed.
Yesterday at a Bernie Sanders campaign rally in New York City, you riled up a giant crowd by describing unspecified Democratic members of Congress and Hillary Clinton as "Democratic whores" beholden to the pharmaceutical industry that is the chief roadblocks in the path of achieving a single payer health care system.
After an inconvenient social media reaction, you first claimed that you did not mean to include Hillary Clinton among such "whores" though any reasonable construction of your own words would indicate that you did - after all, her husband did rescue your sister-in-law from a North Korean prison at the asking of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton - but that you had certainly meant it about Democratic members of Congress, whom you had been referring to in that way for years. Then you even walked that back and said you were sorry for using the term 'whore' against Democratic members of Congress.
Here's where my perplexity comes in. Dr. Song, as you well know, a single payer system merely makes the government the only payer in the system, but it doesn't necessarily address the payees, like pharma, directly. That is the difference between a single payer health care system and a socialized one. I am not saying that you should know this because you have "spent [your] adult life fighting for health care for all", but because you are yourself a rather major beneficiary of the pharmaceutical industry. You have been in the upper echelons of that industry for some time, and you're even a minority shareholder of a privately held pharmaceutical company in New York.
I'm sure your well-deserved windfalls from your pharmaceutical career helped pay for your lavish wedding which was featured in InStyle magazine, and this magnificent home in Santa Monica, California. So you could understand if some people thought that for you to be calling other people whores to the industry that made you rich is, well, a little rich.
(More in link)
April 12, 2016
By Susan Madrak
“Tom Hayden? Tom Hayden?” I said to myself when I saw The Nation today. If you asked me who were the least likely activists to support Hillary, Tom Hayden would have been on the list — especially since he was already supporting Bernie. But here’s what he writes today: “We still need the organizing of a united front of equals to prevail against the Republicans. It will take a thorough process of conflict resolution to get there, not a unilateral power wielding by the usual operatives. It’s up to all of us.”
Tom Hayden was one of the highest-profile student radicals of the sixties, and an author of the Port Huron Statement, calling for the complete reformation of the Democratic party. (On a more mundane level, he was married to Jane Fonda at the height of her activist years.) He also ran successfully for the state legislature in California, and is on the board of Progressive Democrats of America. He is an anti-fracking activist.
And as of today, Hayden is a Hillary supporter. It was her nuanced position on fracking that finally made him switch — that, and the tactics of California fracking opponents. Hayden explains:
As Hayden points out, Bernie’s fracking ban doesn’t include a strategic plan for implementing his policy.
(More in link)
CONVERSION: With a Powerful Essay, Famous Social Activist Tom Hayden Switches From Bernie To Hillary
http://bluenationreview.com/famous-social-activist-tom-hayden-switches-from-bernie-to-hillary/By Susan Madrak
“Tom Hayden? Tom Hayden?” I said to myself when I saw The Nation today. If you asked me who were the least likely activists to support Hillary, Tom Hayden would have been on the list — especially since he was already supporting Bernie. But here’s what he writes today: “We still need the organizing of a united front of equals to prevail against the Republicans. It will take a thorough process of conflict resolution to get there, not a unilateral power wielding by the usual operatives. It’s up to all of us.”
Tom Hayden was one of the highest-profile student radicals of the sixties, and an author of the Port Huron Statement, calling for the complete reformation of the Democratic party. (On a more mundane level, he was married to Jane Fonda at the height of her activist years.) He also ran successfully for the state legislature in California, and is on the board of Progressive Democrats of America. He is an anti-fracking activist.
And as of today, Hayden is a Hillary supporter. It was her nuanced position on fracking that finally made him switch — that, and the tactics of California fracking opponents. Hayden explains:
Hillary wants limits on fracking: a ban where individual states have blocked it, like in New York; safeguards against children’s and family exposures; a ban where releases of methane or contamination of ground water are proven; and full disclosure of the chemicals used in the process. Bernie’s position is that he’s simply against all fracking. But Hillary’s position goes beyond what virtually any state has done.
As Hayden points out, Bernie’s fracking ban doesn’t include a strategic plan for implementing his policy.
There is no recognition of the overwhelming wall of opposition from the Republican Congress, which can only be broken on state-by-state organizing. The climate clock is ticking towards doomsday. Where are we moving next, beyond waiting for the overthrow of Citizens United?
(More in link)
April 11, 2016
By dsvelca
Following Senator Sanders' much discussed interview with the NY Daily News, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with the same editorial board. Link below:
www.nydailynews.com/…
I tried to incorporate some quotes from the article but it’s much too long. Every question, as usual, was answered in her usual wonkish, dripping in details matter. If you’re a supporter — you should be satisfied, if you aren’t, this is not likely to change your mind.
Happy reading!
Hillary Clinton meets with the NY Daily News
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/4/11/1513870/-Hillary-Clinton-meets-with-NY-Daily-NewsBy dsvelca
Following Senator Sanders' much discussed interview with the NY Daily News, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with the same editorial board. Link below:
www.nydailynews.com/…
I tried to incorporate some quotes from the article but it’s much too long. Every question, as usual, was answered in her usual wonkish, dripping in details matter. If you’re a supporter — you should be satisfied, if you aren’t, this is not likely to change your mind.
Happy reading!
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Jul 22, 2015, 02:19 PMNumber of posts: 1,881
