"What Would Bernie Do?" -- Questions for Hillary--from William Greider

[KoKo]

Published on
Friday, October 24, 2014
by
The Nation

Whether or not Senator Bernie Sanders decides to run for president in 2016, we can count on him to serve as creative provocateur. The political gremlins hired to manage candidates and campaigns set out to limit the content of public debate so as not to inconvenience their clients with awkward questions. The media cooperate in this process by taking their cues from the pols and polls. Unsanctioned ideas that people care about are safely ignored.

Bernie Sanders, you might say, is Senator Inconvenience. He caucuses with Senate Democrats and generally votes with them, but he has built his career on raising issues and reform ideas that party regulars avoid. Vermont voters seem to like his style, since they keep electing him. He operates in Congress with considerable shrewdness, carefully picking fights that can resonate with a broad base of popular needs and desires and even draw bipartisan endorsements.

The current inertia of the Democratic party is part fear, part resignation. The marching order for 2014 is “don’t rock the boat.” Hillary Clinton’s agents say they already have it locked up for 2016, so don’t make problems for her. Democrats decided to lay off heavy stuff (like big ideas) in the interest of short-term survival. They are counting on those goofy-scary right-wing Republicans to preserve the Senate majority for Democrats.

Senator Sanders provocatively proposes a different question to consider. Who are the Democrats, anyway? What does the party actually stand for? The senator doesn’t put it that bluntly, but he slyly invites Democrats to ponder their own answers. If the elections results next month are razor-thin close and additional independent senators are elected, should Sanders continue to caucus with the Democrats or perhaps explore some other arrangement? The question gives Sanders a platform for describing what he wants in a political party. Here is his answer:

Rest of article is good read about QUESTIONS TO ASK HILLARY:

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/10/24/what-would-bernie-do

[antigop]

1. questions for Hillary, indeed. Thanks. nt

[djean111]

2. I would sign up for "Bernie's Party" in a heartbeat.

[bigwillq]

38. Me too (nt)

[NYC_SKP]

3. I need to see the inevitable one respond so some questions right now.

Last edited Sun Oct 26, 2014, 04:36 PM - Edit history (1)

EDIT: "annointed one" seemed to be offensive to someone so I've replaced it with "inevitable one".

~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'd like to see her try to answer this questions right fucking now, but she's being "coy".

Not AFTER she fools the people into selecting her as the Democratic Candidate, after which time she'll run as a moderate Republican.

I'd like to see how she avoids the questions.

[wyldwolf]

4. Isn't it interesting how 'progressives' are adopting right wing attacks?

Rightwingers have spent 6 years calling President Obama the anointed one. I wonder why 'progressives' adopted that line for Clinton. Ponderous.

[NYC_SKP]

13. Not really.

Progressive calling a DINO what they are is truth.

BTW, Obama was the underdog in 2008.

[wyldwolf]

15. Really. Republicans HAVE called Obama 'the anointed on,' and now 'progressives' call Clinton that

Seemingly for the same reason. You're taking a line right out of Hannity's book.

[NYC_SKP]

17. Yes, I know that. They did this after the election.

Hillary was annointed in 2007 to, if you take that to mean pre-ordained by the PTB, in this case the DLC and party establishment.

Obama is called that in a pathetic misuse of the word; he had to fight to get the nod and it pisses them off so they have tried every trick they can to disqualify them.

"Inevitable" might be more appropriate to the present situation, but whatever the case it's pretty clear as we lead up to 2016 that, again, many in the party leadership seem to want to discourage any opposition to HRH Clinton.

A number of us feel strongly that Hillary should step back and allow some new blood, some progressive blood, to take a run at the office.

[wyldwolf]

19. to this day, Republicans call Obama the anointed one. And it isn't for the reasons you say

But that's OK. If you want to continue using RW attacks, that's your right.

A number of us feel strongly that Hillary should step back and allow some new blood, some progressive blood, to take a run at the office.

Yeah, that's obvious though un-democratic. What you're in saying is you can't win any other way than for someone to voluntarily let you win.

[rhett o rick]

21. Your attempt to disparage the progressive of the Party is very weak and one week before the

election. What's your agenda? I think it's interesting that HRC supporters object when the obvious is pointed out. HRC is the Wall Street candidate. She has powerful Goldman-Sachs, believed by some to actually dictate economic policies, behind her all the way. How can the populace movement have a chance against the Ruling Oligarch's favorite?

I am strongly against HRC for President. She has proven that she lacks the integrity to be President.

[wyldwolf]

22. I don't believe I saw an answer in your response. Let me check again...

... no, I am SURE you didn't address the "progressive" parroting of the right wing.

[rhett o rick]

24. Why are you actively disparaging progressives one week before the election? nm

[wyldwolf]

25. Yeah, another reply, another avoidance of the question.

[rhett o rick]

26. Why do you disparage progressives on a "politically liberal" message board? What is your

ideology? I bet it's a lot closer to the Right Wing than mine. I don't support fracking. HRC does. Do you?

[wyldwolf]

27. Why are you using rightwing attacks against Democrats?

[rhett o rick]

28. Can you show where I have? I can show you disparaging progressives.

" Isn't it interesting how 'progressives' are adopting right wing attacks?" It's not true and apparently intended to split the Party.

[wyldwolf]

29. you answered a direct and specific question posed to someone else. You apparently agree.

Why are you using rightwing attacks against Democrats?

[RiverLover]

41. To Wyldwolf: You're kind of being like a gnat here.

I feel like swatting something...jeesh. People with brains don't like Hillary. Saying that she is a wall street candidate isn't a right wing attack. Its the truth. And there's a deep, deep desire to have a frigging true Progressive as President, not just another pretender.

[wyldwolf]

42. Give it your best swat. "People with brains don't like Hillary." WOW!

You just insulted about 69% of the Democratic electorate!

[NYC_SKP]

43. They don't realize how easily Warren would pull in the Independents and moderate Republicans.

Her message speaks to the entire disenfranchised middle class.

She'll pull people who will NEVER vote for a Clinton, especially a Hillary Clinton.

When it boils down to who can pull in the most from outside the mainstream of her party, it's going to be a Warren or even a Sanders.

A good ground game and just speaking the truth, we can win this without the name recognition and the DLC.

[rhett o rick]

45. I like your attitude. First I want to say how pathetic it is when people try to say that

because Sen Warren was a Republican, she is as bad as HRC. Secondly, how sad that the progressives have to fight conservatives within their own party.

"A good ground game and just speaking the truth, we can win this without the name recognition and the DLC." Yes, we must. We can not survive 8 more years of conservative Democratic rule.

[arcane1]

30. The 2016 election is two years away and many say her candidacy is already inevitable.

Sounds like anointing to me

[wyldwolf]

32. Who says that?

One person on DU? Some writer somewhere? So when you use the term "anointed one" you're directing it at... just who exactly?

[arcane1]

33. The OP, for starters n/t

[wyldwolf]

34. KoKo, the OP, says Hillary is "inevitable?"

[arcane1]

35. I don't speak for KoKo. Read what I said: The Original Post, paragraph 3:

"The current inertia of the Democratic party is part fear, part resignation. The marching order for 2014 is “don’t rock the boat.” Hillary Clinton’s agents say they already have it locked up for 2016, so don’t make problems for her. Democrats decided to lay off heavy stuff (like big ideas) in the interest of short-term survival. They are counting on those goofy-scary right-wing Republicans to preserve the Senate majority for Democrats."

Now please go play your little coy game with someone else. I don't like having to post the same thing twice.

[wyldwolf]

36. You said the OP claims Hillary is inevitable. You just added paragraph 3, which I've read

The author is making the same claim you are without bothering to mention just who is making the claim.

[arcane1]

37. Yes, paragraph 3 is in the OP that I referenced. Now please move along.

[wyldwolf]

39. "Now please move along." LOL. Nah. I think I'll just hang out here.

[adirondacker]

5. Excellent OP! Thanks for posting KoKo. Isn't it interesting the 3rd way act like their Republican

friends.

[MisterP]

16. well, they've only openly declared, over and over to anyone who'll listen, that the want to run the

party like the GOP is run and want to adopt all GOP policies except the gay-bashing (unless it'll win them elections)

they really think that '72 was lost not just by liburls but by primaries replacing the smoke-filled back room nomination process: they're Jeane Kirkpatrick Democrats

[LawDeeDah]

6. Careful, this could be hidden by a jury...

Speak no ill of Hillary.

I happned to mention Tuzla yesterday, and how wild that made up story was - it just amuses me to no end that thing and what sort of mind(s) would come up with that idea.

There is proof all over, a video of Hillary making that story up several times, and of her weak apology for it - attributing it to 'misspeaking' whatever that is. How can you misspeak a whole imaginary story, I don't know.

Anyway, apparently bring up Sniper story is now a RW talking point here on DU, and my post got hidden when I mentioned that I don't think Obama and Hillary are 'the same' like so many here say - because he would never come up with a Tuzla like that and get one of his daughters to support his lie like that.

[rhett o rick]

7. Those that have no arguments seek to push their agenda via locks and hides.

Any disagreement with the President might be considered a RW talking point.

[antigop]

8. fascism 101: stifle dissent. nt

[Enthusiast]

10. +1

[Cleita]

11. +2

[Enthusiast]

9. +1

[Cleita]

12. +2

[L0oniX]

44. ^^^THIS^^^

[AtomicKitten]

14. I saw that hide

and it was bs. Censoring facts with feigned outrage is ridiculous but apparently effective here at DU. I can think of no other politician who would have the audacity to spew such horseshit with impunity.

[NYC_SKP]

18. It's going to be interesting come Primary Wars time. I wonder what the admins have in mind.

If we let anyone with 5 bucks for a star continue to serve on juries then this might become a real echo chamber.

[djean111]

40. Waiting to see if criticizing the TPP or Keystone will be considered violations of the TOS. nt

Looks like that is one of the memes (along with the 67% APPROVAL RATING!!!!!!) - any criticism of Hillary makes one a right-winger.
Oh, and don't use the word "anointed". Although the attempted thread hijack is hilarious. Need new material, methinks.

[cascadiance]

20. How long before the pro-third way distractionists invade this thread...

To continue to remind us that we shouldn't be wasting our time talking about things that "64%" of the Democrats don't support because they support Hillary, etc.

It is so frustrating to try and discuss substantive issues and how people like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and even others we should look at as candidates would deal with them, in the midst of the huge clutter threads like this gather at some point.

I loved how my senator in the midst of his reelection campaign was the first senator on record to have stood up for trying to get rid of the lost war of marijuana prohibition. Merkley is awesome. Not sure he's ready to run for president just yet himself, but I think he would be an awesome running mate, if he's not given more power to do things like fixing the filibuster rules this coming term if we can keep the senate and perhaps even get in line to be Senate Majority leader down the road.

[wyldwolf]

23. How long before you realize this is a discussion board and not your Facebook timeline?

[AzDar]

31. Bernie!!!