The budding smear campaign against Bernie Sanders

[bigtree]

20. congressman whatshisname was out of line. He thought he was being clever

...he wasn't.

What I'm concerned about is the way these over-the-top criticisms serve to preclude legitimate questions about the focus and priority of campaigns. If a campaign just brushes off questions related to the smear, for instance, by harkening back to similar-but-unfair criticisms, what we'll end up with is a barrier to legitimate debate over some very important issues.

I like that Sen. Sanders has begun to include elements of his views on immigration, for example, into his standard speeches - even though he was clearly slighted by the congressman on that issue.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that any political figure is going to eventually fall short of our expectations and will need challenging on some issue, initiative or action. Just as it's important there be a forceful and defining response to misrepresentations of candidate's positions, there's also a need to allow room for legitimate debate. While over-the-top criticisms, like the congressman's, serve to stifle that legitimate debate, pointing out that slander can't be the standard defense to related questions.

I've see a bit of that here at DU. It should be possible to question the senator on his stances, as well as the priority he gives these issues which concern folks in his campaign speeches and discussions, without being tainted with previous smears. That's mainly my own concern; that candidates afford these issues which interest and affect me prominence in their campaign rhetoric. That's what I think propels these issues into the national debate and helps elevate them to a position to be enacted or acted on by our legislature.

Sen. Sanders seems to get it, and I certainly appreciate that.