Posted on 12/06/2015 6:29:59 AM PST by Libloather
A petulant Lang cavils at the bernistas “President Cruz thanks you.”
Not when she has a 200+ electoral vote lead before the polls even open.
People backing Sanders are doing it based on principle and character... Sanders speaks the truth as he knows it. Hillary lies when the truth would be easier.
It's not a question of teaching Hillary to be a better candidate. It's a question of attempting to teach Hillary to be a better human being. And that's not gonna happen in this lifetime.
It looks like the drunks over at the Saloon are totally blitzed again. Their queen is a loser.
I don’t know. Fidel is 89 and Che is dead.
Great post!
Salon is simply articulating for its particular audience the agreement that was already made at the highest of levels among the liberal establishment: Sanders is ONLY permitted to do things that enhance his chances of the nomination if they help Hillary in the general election.
Rally a bunch of hippies for redistribution, and get a database of 5 million email addresses and mobile numbers which Hillary can buy / borrow / steal? Allowed.
Call out Hillary on Benghazi or her e-mail server, or fail to play along with Black Lives Matter word for word? Prohibited.
‘another Clinton’...
Bill Clinton has a photographic memory, does not chuckle and screech like a witch, and has not had multiple strokes.
Hillary is not just another Clinton. She is much worse than Bill ever thought of being.
People backing Sanders are doing it based on principle and character... Sanders speaks the truth as he knows it. Hillary lies when the truth would be easier.
________________________________________________________
I think you are spot on w/ your analysis of the Bernie supporters. Someone else called Bernie the Dem’s Ron Paul. I wouldn’t disagree w/ that either ... except to say ... I don’t think Bernie has the organizational *skills* that Ron Paul’s supporters had. As in ... I don’t think Bernie’s supporters know how to game the process.
Bernie is an odd duck ... but I do believe he believes what he says. I just fundamentally disagree w/ 99.9% of what he espouses.
Just pull out all of the arguments that Democrats used against Hillary in 2008 when we were all told that Barack Hussein Obama was the MUCH MUCH better candidate.
What a servile, slavish, boot licking article!
Just the way they like it!
LOL - my feelings exactly. If Bernie was elected he would do things I wouldn't agree with, but I wouldn't be afraid he'd use the power of government against individual conservatives. Bernie has a strong ethical streak... He's not a thug. Hillary on the other hand is a monster...
No Clintons, no Bushes!!!!!
CA, NY, IL, MA, HI, MD, CT, RI, DC, And VT for sure.
Probably WA, NM, NJ, ME, DE, and MI.
IA, WI, PA, and OR lean but far from certainly going for she-who-shall-not-be-named
Clintoon is a malignant liar...everyone knows that.
The Clintons left the WH “dead broke” - and after she spent a dozen years holding offices of “profit or trust” under the United States, suddenly they control more money than Mitt Romney.Meanwhile Bill (with whom Hillary was a partner by marriage) was scoffing up millions of dollars from foreign governments for giving speeches. And the Clinton Foundation, in which Hillary was a principal, was accepting donations from foreign governments.
- Article 1 Section 9:
- No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state
Under the Constitution it doesn’t matter whether that money was spent for the purposes advertised, or whether there was an illegal quid pro quo. Without an explicit OK from Congress, that is illegal. There may not be a statute defining a penalty for it, but it is illegal, under the supreme law of the land.
The spirit of Campaign Finance Reform - the spirit that says that even freedom of the press is not as important as keeping illegitimate monetary influence out of politics - surely implies that fabulous wealth acquired by unconstitutional means, no matter how laundered, disqualifies anyone from consideration, certainly for preferential consideration, by voters. Every state should prevent anyone as corrupt as Hillary from having Electors on the ballot. Failing that, every state should certainly prevent Hillary’s name from being on Row A or Row B of the ballot. Even that might dissuade the Democratic Party from nominating her.
Since the Constitution gives each state the authority to “appoint” its electors (popular election being merely the universally traditional way electors are selected), there is no grounds for any claim that states cannot take the action I commend to them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.