"Bernie has been in govt 40 years and had 0 impact on Wall Street." --NOT SO FAST Hillary supporters

[pinebox]

I wake up and see that as a response http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=777674 in a reply to a post.

Let's face it, when it comes to Wall Street, Bernie wins this one hands down between him and Hillary, in fact it's really not even contest.
What has Hillary done for the average American when it comes to Wall Street? Show us something Hillary supporters, please. Show us what Hillary has introduced for legislation please. I know what she has done, taken massive donations from them and their CEOs.

Let's look at a few things Bernie has done for American's when it comes to Wall Street shall we?

Can you please show us all the bills Hillary introduced to protect the American people?

S.1206 — 114th Congress (2015-2016)
Too Big To Fail, Too Big To Exist Act
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 05/06/2015)

S.2411 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
United States Employee Ownership Bank Act
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 06/02/2014)

S.1018 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
Federal Reserve Independence Act
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 05/22/2013)

S.685 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
Too Big to Fail, Too Big to Exist Act
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 04/09/2013)

S.471 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
Fair Access to Credit Scores Act of 2013
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 03/06/2013)

S.3419 — 112th Congress (2011-2012)
United States Employee Ownership Bank Act
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 07/23/2012)

S.3219 — 112th Congress (2011-2012)
Federal Reserve Independence Act
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 05/22/2012)

S.2914 — 111th Congress (2009-2010)
United States Employee Ownership Bank Act
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 12/18/2009)

S.2746 — 111th Congress (2009-2010)
Too Big to Fail, Too Big to Exist Act
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 11/05/2009)

S.604 — 111th Congress (2009-2010)
Federal Reserve Sunshine Act of 2009
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 03/16/2009)

S.582 — 111th Congress (2009-2010)
Interest Rate Reduction Act
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 03/12/2009)

S.513 — 111th Congress (2009-2010)
Federal Reserve Transparency Act
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 03/03/2009)

S.400 — 111th Congress (2009-2010)
Financial Crisis Investigation Act of 2009
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 02/09/2009)

S.3693 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)
Stop the Greed on Wall Street Act
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 11/19/2008)

S.1982 — 110th Congress (2007-2008)
United States Employee Ownership Bank Act
Sponsor: Sen. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 08/02/2007)

H.R.2969 — 108th Congress (2003-2004)
United States Employee Ownership Bank Act
Sponsor: Rep. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 07/25/2003)

H.R.3494 — 106th Congress (1999-2000)
State and Local Automated Teller Machine Regulation Protection Act of 1999
Sponsor: Rep. Sanders, Bernard (Introduced 11/18/1999)

Meanwhile.......

[zappaman]

1. Ok. n/t

[Historic NY]

2. Which one passed into law.....???

[pinebox]

3. Where's Hillary record of being tough on Wall Street when she was a Senator?

Come on, show us something.

In his years in the the Congress (both House and Senate), Sanders sponsored 317 bills (Hillary sponsored 361, so they're rather comparable, though Sanders was there a lot longer - so much for the "blow your examples out of the water" theory,eh?).

I searched them the same way I searched Clinton's. I used search terms bank, credit, mortgage, environment, oil, coal, air, and I perused the whole list. I then included bills that were on point to the issues. For example, the Rebuild America Act of 2015 went to the banking committee, so the word "bank" came up, but that doesn't address Wall Street or the environment.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/01/1407839/-Bernie-s-legislative-record

[Historic NY]

8. Senator Clinton Calls For Immediate Action To Strengthen Financial Market Regulation

Senator Clinton Calls For Immediate Action To Strengthen Financial Market Regulation And Help Keep Families In Their Homes March 2008

Establish a federal minimum standard for mortgage originators. At the heart of the current housing and credit crisis is the widespread practice of mortgage brokers and mortgage bankers who made bad loans and passed them off their books with little responsibility to borrowers or the communities in which they operate. The Administration's call for a Commission to address this issue is too little, too late. Senator Clinton has already called for tough new federal licensing standards for mortgage brokers. Today she called for:

Legislation to subject all mortgage originators to the same type of regulations that banks are subject to, including minimum licensing, supervision and capital requirements;
A new affirmative duty on mortgage originators to determine whether a borrower has the capacity to repay;
Minimum requirements for state investments in enforcement capacity to ensure that those standards are actually enforced;
Bringing mortgage bankers more fully under the scope of the Community Reinvestment Act to strengthen their ties to the communities in which they operate.

Immediate legislation to enable more effective near-term management of systemic risk. While Senator Clinton appreciates the Administration's willingness to endorse the idea of a market stability regulator, they are trying to solve an immediate crisis with a long-term proposal. By their own account, this proposal is not likely to be acted upon until after the Administration has left office. Today, Senator Clinton called on Congress to:

Immediately act to provide the Federal Reserve and Secretary of the Treasury with temporary authority to require reports, promulgate regulations and guidelines-including capital and margin requirements and guidelines on leverage and risk management-and take appropriate enforcement actions with respect to not only institutions accessing the Fed's credit but also those that pose a systemic risk.
Require the Treasury and Fed to issue new rules within 90 days. These rules should, at minimum, subject all institutions that are eligible to access the Fed's credit to regulations equivalent to commercial banks.
This action would address our immediate crisis while allowing adequate time for careful consideration of proposals for broader and more permanent management of systemic risk. Such proposals should be designed in consultation with global regulators to ensure that the new rules both contain global systemic risk and maintain the international competitiveness of U.S. financial services institutions and other US businesses.

More transparency and oversight of new, exotic financial products like complex derivatives that have exploded in recent years. Senator Clinton called today for:
Ensuring that financial institutions that hold, or are parties to, complex instruments like collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps are subject to minimum capital requirements. This action should be phased in over an appropriate period, and with appropriate consultation with national and international entities. Action should be based on the principle that capital requirements related to risk should be applied to all bank-like institutions that issue credit. In addition, we should consider subjecting the buyers of complex financial instruments to margin requirements similar to those that already apply to the buyers of stocks.
Strengthen independence and reduce conflicts-of-interest for rating agencies. Senator Clinton believes we should do more than simply study conflicts of interest involving rating agencies. She is calling on the SEC to take immediate action to either:

Change the existing compensation structures where rating agencies are paid by the institutions they rate; or
Require new, affirmative steps to enhance rating agency independence and accountability. Such action could include requiring rating agencies to certify that their rating practices adhere to independence standards adopted by the SEC; empowering an independent Risk Committee with no financial incentive to rating agencies to review rating decisions; or establishing independent rating agency Ombudsman approved by the SEC.

Strengthen consumer protections for credit cards and student loans. Senator Clinton has laid out detailed proposals for greater consumer protections in the areas of credit cards and student loans. Today, she urged Congress to take immediate action:

Immediately impose a national annual interest rate cap of 30 percent on all credit cards - not just the stated rate, but the effective rate.
Direct the OCC to work toward an even lower interest rate cap.
Enact a Student Borrowers' Bill of Rights that will require lenders to clearly state in easy-to-understand language: the annual interest rate and what that means over the life of the loan; monthly payment; length of the loan; and fees and interest rate increases that will occur if a student fails to make on-time payments.

Immediate action to keep families in their homes. Senator Clinton believes we cannot let a discussion about rearranging the deck chairs of financial market regulation to distract us from the fact that right now the value of families' most valuable asset is falling and thousands of families are receiving foreclosure notice.

Senator Clinton believes we should push forward on legislation designed by Representative Frank and Senator Dodd to expand the FHA's capacity to guarantee restructured mortgages. But given the depth of the crisis, Senator Clinton has made clear that we must also stand ready to have the Federal Housing Administration purchase at risk mortgages to help unlock our mortgage market and keep families in their homes.
We need a second stimulus with $30 billion for states and localities to help fight concentrated foreclosures.
We need to immediately pass legislation Senator Clinton announced last week and will introduce on Monday to clarify the legal obligations of mortgage servicers that help at-risk borrowers restructure their mortgages.


http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=96569

[pinebox]

10. Good there's one

What else ya got? Honest question, not berating you.

[Historic NY]

80. But you still didn't answer my questions which ones did Bernie pass that took on Wall St.

He can demagogue all day in the well and still accomplish nothing.

[Unknown Beatle]

81. Wow! Sanders introduced legislation that helps the average American.

It's not his fault they failed. He tried and kept/keeps on trying. But when the majority in both houses are bought by Wall St and Big Banks, what do you expect?

Hillary, on the other hand, talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk. As SoS she was for the TPP and calling it the "gold standard in trade agreements".

She will say anything and do anything to get elected president. If all of a sudden people were for the TPP, she would make sure she was for it again. It's politically expedient.

[eridani]

84. Nobody will accomplish anything until we get congress back from the Republicans

When Clinton was in the senate, she did nothing whatsoever. If you introduce bills, even if they are blocked by Republicans, you are showing your constituents which way you want to go.

[1StrongBlackMan]

95. Nope ... Decided not to engage. n/t

[daleanime]

18. That's good....

so she introduced a bill for that?

[merrily]

20. 2016 Candidate, much more liberal than 2008 candidate C, "calls for." What did Senator Clinton DO?

Brand new Presidential candidate rhetoric, not even the same as the old Presidential candidate rhetoric:

[Armstead]

32. Was anything accomplished beyond "calling for"?

[azurnoir]

33. there's an old saying about shuttin' the barn door that applies here

[frylock]

38. Nice words.

Was there any follow-through to completion?

[modestybl]

39. She wagged her finger and told them to knock it off...

... and boy did they listen... NOT...

Wall Street isn't concerned about about HRC disingenuous tack to "the Left" ... they don't pour money into campaigns out of the goodness of their hearts, they are expecting a return for their investment...

We should have nationalized the banks at that point, handed them over to bankers with sound banking experience (legions of community banks and thrifts are a deep bench of asoun banking principals) and allowed homeowners the same zero percent deal through the Fed window that the perpetrators got.

We should break up the banks.

[LiberalArkie]

58. What is he Senate Bill number for that?

[Rilgin]

86. march 2008 link to a campaign press release

This was not legislation. This was a press release of a campaign position. It is not action. It was a position she was trying to take in a campaign. What did she do as a senator or sos that was anti bank

[Bubzer]

117. Ya beat me to it... good catch :)

[Bubzer]

116. You've cited a passage from a press release. None of that is legislation.

[roguevalley]

29. Unlike Bernie, she did a very strong action and ended it

all herself: She want to NASDAQ and wagged her finger, saying STOP IT! Then they did.

Oh wait ...

I would like to see the legislation that she attempted or did pass into law as a senator regarding wall street criminality, then I would like a detailed explanation of all the stuff she did to help stop the creation and passing of the TPP.

Oh wait. she was a major architect of that too.

Also, her old man killed glass-steagell and she is against it.

BWAHAHAHAHA! YOU WHINE ABOUT BERNIE!?

Reality isn't some hillary supporters strong suit it would seem.

[NorthCarolina]

106. Perhaps on at least one occasion Wall Street offered to drop a cool $million on her campaign until

she got tough with them and demanded double that (graft doesn't come cheap these days)....and they complied. It's possible.

[99th_Monkey]

4. Which Candidate has been leading the fight ? .. is the real question.

As opposed to which candidate has been -- and still is -- "on the take" from Wall $t. donor$.

[Blue_Adept]

5. You need to change a few more S's to $'s to really get your point across

[99th_Monkey]

6. Speaking of "S" s

perhaps you need a few more Sarcastic Snarks to muddy-up the
waters, and distract from the subject matter.

[BlueCaliDem]

40. The "subject matter" being: attacking the Democratic front-runner any which way you can?

Why waste your time demonizing Hillary Clinton instead of making your case why Bernie Sanders would be a better and more effective president? Don't you know that we all know her background and history? Don't you understand that, despite that, we still support Hillary Clinton by double digits over Bernie Sanders? Or it doesn't matter to you that the majority choose her over Sanders because you happen to disagree? I mean, in a democracy, it's still the rule that the majority wins.

[99th_Monkey]

67. Hillary has NOT yet won this Primary election, not by a long shot.

As Bernie demonstrated last night, this election is still very much in play, with
months to go before any voting even starts. So get used to it.

Many voters remain unaware of how many huge billionaire donors she has in her
corner, despite her "get tough" on the 1% rhetoric. I was glad Rachael FINALLY
got around to pointing that out last night at the candidate forum.

Yes, obviously many -- perhaps most -- Hillary supporters already know that, and
inexplicably don't give a shit and support her anyway. However, as this video
illustrates, MANY voters remain completely ignorant about it, and are
actually shocked to find out the truth.

So, even though it understandably pisses off Hillary supporters to shed light on
how hard Hillary's billionaire buddies are pushing her candidacy, I am not about
to STFU about it. Sorry, but not sorry.

Voters have a right to know what they are getting, when they cast their ballot.

[BlueCaliDem]

72. Never said such a thing. I clearly stated she's the Democratic FRONT-RUNNER. How did you miss that?

As Bernie demonstrated last night, this election is still very much in play, with months to go before any voting even starts. So get used to it.

At this point, the majority of Democratic voters have already made up their minds, so maybe YOU need to get used to that, and stop vilifying her and start posting informative posts making your case why Bernie Sanders will be a more effective president than Hillary Clinton, because no matter how many posts I read here and elsewhere, I don't see it. I just see lots of Hillary-vilifying from Sanders supporters.

And remember, Hillary Clinton is THE MOST vetted and scrutinized politician in recent history. Yet poll after poll after poll after poll shows that she continues to widen her margin and is beating Sanders by double digits in those polls (had to add for clarity which was, obviously, necessary). When the media begins their vetting of Sanders (which will most likely happen in January next year), we'll see where he then stands because there are LOTS out there you, even, might not know about but what would cast him in a not-so-positive light with minorities.

Yes, obviously many -- perhaps most -- Hillary supporters already know that, and inexplicably don't give a shit and support her anyway.

Maybe our hangups aren't the same as yours? I know for a fact that the vast majority of Blacks and Hispanics/Latinos don't care about Wall Street. They care about voting for the candidate who can use government to get more funding for education, for jobs, for raising their incomes, for immigration reform - for being able to get these things through Congress. Their issues aren't all about Wall Street, if at all, and that's why they choose Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders by double digits. Maybe, just maybe, they don't think he's talking to them and addressing their needs even if he's addressing yours.

As an aside, Senator Obama got the lion's share of Wall Street donations back in 2008. Everybody knows that. Did it affect how voters viewed him? Of course not. He won with nearly 53% of the popular vote in the G.E. Did it affect his policies once he was president? No. After all, he brought in Elizabeth Warren and approved the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau plus pushed for Dodd-Frank, immediately signed it into law, and is issuing veto-threats for any bill that tries to roll it back.

Wall Street didn't get a lot of bang for their mega-bucks with him, and I'm certain they won't with a President Hillary Clinton, either, despite some DUers trying their darnedest to preach otherwise.

[99th_Monkey]

76. I know you didn't come out and SAY the Primary is over

but that's been the tenor of Team Hillary's "inevitability" memes from day one, and it goes
on, citing poll numbers, etc. which is fine, very understandable, from one point of view.

The more racial minorities listen carefully to Bernie, the more they are seeing how they
are not exempt from the dilitarious effects of corporatist establishment politics as usual.
It's just a matter of time, so we'll see how that works out on election day(s).

Many, including Sanders, feel Obama didn't go far enough reigning in Wall St., Barney
Frank is a case in point, who now has a cushy bank job. Many observers are predicting
another Wall St. 'crash' like any day now, due to the half-way measures of Dodd/Frank.

Bernie's fully prepared to take it the rest of the way, and re-instate Glass/Steagal, unlike
Hillary, if he can get elected in time, which is a big reason he's in this race at all ... that
and climate change.

[PosterChild]

82. +100 !! (NT)

[Old Codger]

104. Actually

At this point, the majority of Democratic voters have already made up their minds (you hope)

I personally think the polls are misleading but time will tell

[Old Codger]

103. will you

Still cheer for her when sh e is not the "front runner"? Be prepared...

[BlueCaliDem]

107. If by "cheering" you mean, supporting her, donating to her, canvassing for her, and getting voters

to the polls for her - and if by "her" you mean, Hillary Clinton - then yes. I've already made up my mind.

She's the most experienced, most vetted, most skilled, has the most support from State and Federal Democratic pols (so far) and is, by farm the most capable of the three Democratic presidential candidates. Also, President Obama trusts her judgment, and I'm a supporter of his.

Thus, turnabout being fair-play, will you still "cheer" Bernie Sanders when he loses the primary?

[Bubzer]

119. hillary clinton is known to take corporate and bank money and do speaking engagments with them.

It's not demonization to call that out. And doing a side by side comparison does shows why Bernie would be a better president.
Speaking of majority winning... could you point to where clinton's massive crowds of rally attendees are? And while you're at it, you could illustrate how hillary's rally supporters outnumber those at Bernie Sanders rallys.

[nilram]

7. Because bad laws matter more than good bills?

[merrily]

19. Like the Commodities Futures Financial Service Act and the law repealing Glass Steagall? Sure do.

Last edited Sat Nov 7, 2015, 02:27 PM - Edit history (1)

[merrily]

21. Which bill of Hillary's regulating Wall Street passed into law? Which did she even propose?

How is it Sander's fault if Congress kisses up to Wall Street?

[MADem]

34. Really--Dennis Kucinich used to introduce a lot of "stuff" too....if it ain't law, it's recycled

paper.

[BlueCaliDem]

68. Bingo.

But I guess for some, just introducing a bill - even without any co-sponsors and zero to nada chance of getting any support - is more important than actually doing the hard work of getting a bill put together and co-sponsored and what will have a chance of passing both chambers.

[eridani]

85. Since the only bills Republicans will let us introduce are those which fuck over the 99%--

--let's just keep introducing them so that we can "accomplish" something.

[KoKo]

75. Not really. n/t

[wendylaroux]

48. I love this gif the best

it is head and shoulders above the rest.

[imthevicar]

73. Sponcering and Passing BAD LAW

Does not Count!

[Motown_Johnny]

90. Which is exactly why he should be the one with the power to pass Executive Actions!!!

DUH!!!

[Agschmid]

9. You and your meme's...

[pinebox]

11. More like me and my reality

I know, no argument from you, right?
Got it.

[Agschmid]

12. Why argue?

We aren't going to change each other's opinion.

[pinebox]

13. Then why reply?

[Agschmid]

15. Sure I'll just sit quietly in the corner...

Don't mind me.

[pinebox]

26. lol

[Logical]

115. In your case, maybe a good idea. nt

[Agschmid]

120. You guys are all about inclusion huh?

[BlueCaliDem]

42. Because Agschmid is allowed to opine and reply.

Have something against that?

[pinebox]

43. Sure

I do but it's more or less why are you so serious and unable to understand our friendly little bantering. /facepalm

[BlueCaliDem]

47. So you *do* have something against people opining and replying.

Oh, I understood that "banter" perfectly well. And you know it.

[pinebox]

56. I know "nunya"

about you, not a damn thing.
No problem in people replying, problem with people not understanding sarcasm on the internet however.

Now are you going to discuss the topic at hand or go wandering around the Saraha in the middle of March on some off topic rant?

[BlueCaliDem]

64. "Nunya" doesn't mean "nada" or "nothing". Look it up before use.

Urban dictionaries can be illuminating when using internet slang.

I know "nunya" about you, not a damn thing.

I have NO idea what you're referring to here.

Now are you going to discuss the topic at hand or go wandering around the Saraha in the middle of March on some off topic rant?

Uh...I'm not the one ranting in this subthread.

But to answer your question, no, I have no interest in "discussing the topic at hand" since it's just more vilifying of our Democratic front-runner and her supporters. It's more your thing.

[erronis]

66. I'm late to the game called "DU". But shouldn't friendly snarks take place in private messages?

I think I gather that pinebox and nunya are friend/conversants/whatever. If they are just engaged in a little friendly banter that should affect the rest of us lurkers, shouldn't it be in private conversations?

Or, as I guess, they are still trying to influence other people's views while trying to make this look like nobody's business other than their own.

There's so much detritus on this site that it makes it hard to figger out what is worth looking at. Perhaps that is the purpose of these exchanges. Close down the information flow for everyone else.

[Paulie]

14. Yep!

^W^A^L^L^S^T^R^E^E^T'^S
^F^A^V^O^R^I^T^E

[pinebox]

16. Yup! Agreed!

[Lizzie Poppet]

41. The results are in!

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Nov 7, 2015, 01:21 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Hey alerter: feel free to dispute the list instead of cowering behind inane alerts that waste my time.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: *sigh* This is just silly. Hide.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Disgusting and reprehensible.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: But...
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

[pinebox]

46. LOL Iknew that would be alerted on

and I also know it would be allowed to stand XD
Thank you.

[peacebird]

63. Stole your meme and tweeted it! Love it!

Thank you!

[pinebox]

71. XD Welcome!

[dsc]

99. Presuming you are a white, straight male

which of the following rights are you willing to give up since you find there is no difference between supporting the voting rights act and not doing so, being pro choice and not being pro choice, favoring civil rights for gays and transgender and not doing so, favoring pay equity for women and not favoring pay equity for women and a host of others. So are you willing to take a cut in pay or have your voting rights taken away, or be fired for your sexual orientation, or be forced to raise a child you don't want? Again, in your words there is no difference between the candidates.

[pinebox]

102. Which of the following do you like

in the coming election seeing as you support Hillary?

Students continuing to drown in student loan debt, people continuing to be uninsured and dying because of it, endless and needless wars, not supporting a living wage, continuing to pay for the low wages of Wal Mart and others through taxes, Gitmo continuing to hold prisoners.

Hillary has a ton on common with Bush, in fact so much so that their donors are the SAME.
There is one clear choice this coming election and it's not Hillary and it's not Bush. It's Bernie.
Funny you bring up gay rights considering Hillary's stance on the issue for so many years though.

[dsc]

110. I notice you didn't answer the question

fancy that. The fact is Sanders opposed marriage equality in 2006 when he was running for Senate. Thus his and Hillary's position on gay rights was the same except for DOMA. So again, just which of the rights I listed are you willing to give up since you say they are EXACTLY THE SAME.

[merrily]

17. Clintons-in positions of greater power much longer and made Wall Street considerably richer.

Lshing out at your opponent deceptively at his strength and your weakness--Classic Rove Swiftboating

[Live and Learn]

23. Hillary represents Wall Street, she said so herself. She owns it. nt

[BlueCaliDem]

45. Exclusively? Or did she represent New York of which Wall Street is a part of?

Context matters, L&L.

[pinebox]

51. So if we're going with that train of thought with your logic

then I guess you support Bernie with his stance on guns too, right? XD

[BlueCaliDem]

61. Not on the Brady bill. Not on his vote to give gun manufacturers immunity against lawsuits

that NO OTHER American business enjoys. And not his vote against prohibiting firearms and ammunition on Amtrak when, since 1968, more Americans have died from guns than on all our battlefields in American history. Do you support him in that?

[Kentonio]

91. No other business enjoys?

So if you run over someone in a Ford car, they can go sue Ford for selling it in the first place?

Or to put it another way..

""The essence of the claim is gun manufacturers and sellers have a duty to anticipate, and control for, the criminal misuse of their products," John Goldberg of Harvard Law School wrote in an email."

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/14/9533389/bernie-sanders-gun-lawsuits-democratic-debate

[BlueCaliDem]

98. As the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence reports, the PLCAA is "unprecendented and unjustified".

In their article they mention the lawsuit brought by families of victims of the D.C. Snipers that gave birth to that law; a lawsuit your Vox source fails to mention:

In 2004, a group of families destroyed by the D.C. sniper shootings brought a lawsuit against the gun company and dealer that armed the gunmen, Bull’s Eye Shooter Supply. Bull’s Eye’s sales practices were so grossly negligent they had “lost” 238 guns during the previous three-year period, including the Bushmaster rifle used in the shootings. The families won a settlement of $2.5 million when the trial court determined the gun industry could be held liable.

The gun lobby got the message and decided to clamp down on litigation that was exposing their industry’s bad practices. Just one year later, Congress passed the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” (PLCAA), slamming the courthouse doors on victims and survivors of gun violence like the ones described. The law gave gun manufacturers, distributors and dealers broad immunity from civil litigation—legal protections that were unprecedented and unjustified.
http://csgv.org/action/tell-senator-sanders-reconsider-vote-gun-industry-immunity/

I repeat, that lawsuit is the reason WHY gun manufacturers lobbied hard for the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) that Senator Sanders and "Third Way" Democrats voted for.

An honorable note: Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton voted AGAINST the PLCAA.

Even Senator Sanders sees the error of that vote and has a change of heart. On Meet the Press on 10/11/2015 he confesses,
"So can we take another look at that liability issue? Yes."

Quit twisting yourself in pretzels in order to justify an unjustifiable vote for an unprecedented and unjustiable bill that protects the NRA's money masters. Even Senator Sanders can't do it with any credibility anymore - and he's supposed to be a die-hard Liberal, for chrissakes.

[beam me up scottie]

92. Why do you oppose allowing guns in checked baggage on trains?

That position seems unreasonable since they're allowed in checked baggage on airplanes.

Why are trains different?

[Live and Learn]

54. Hmmm, I thought she represented the PEOPLE of New York but I will take

her word for it!

[BlueCaliDem]

100. There are no New Yorkers working and living in Wall Street then?

You can take MY word for it, there are.

[Faux pas]

24. K N R and

[Ed Suspicious]

25. Nice job! As a bonus, you got some Hillpeople to talk policy!

[demwing]

27. Lie, but even if true, it's infinitely better than electing Hillary

and pretending that you can put out a fire with a can of gasoline.

[JaneyVee]

30. Weren't we discussing effectiveness?

[pinebox]

31. Care to show us what your candidate has done?

Have at it by all means.
Where are the bills Hillary introduced about Wall Street that would benefit the American people when she was a senator from NY?

[JaneyVee]

35. Has Bernie even released a Wall St policy plan yet?

[pinebox]

36. Again, show us what Hillary has done when she was a senator

for the average American where Wall Street is concerned.
You can talk the talk but you've got to walk the walk.

[JaneyVee]

50. Hillary had to deal with Bush. Bernie had Obama + super majority.

[pinebox]

53. Now let's look at when they served at the same time.

Bernie served as a senator when Hillary was a senator.
Compare the records. You can see where this going.

[BlueCaliDem]

65. You'd be amazed how many Sanders supporters don't understand that glaring difference.

[Rilgin]

87. what are you thinking

Sanders and Hillary Clinton were Senators at the same time while Bush was president. You just make things up that sound good to you but have no real substance.

Let me spell it out for you. If Hillary had to deal with Bush so did Bernie. In addition Hillary was at least Bills advisor while banks were deregulated in the 1990s.

[BlueCaliDem]

49. Don't expect him to answer that.

Only Hillary Clinton should be criticized. Sanders, in that poster's opinion (and many other Sanders supporters' opinions) is above reproach.

I guess we didn't get the memo.

[pinebox]

62. Why should I? I asked her multiple times to answer my question

What she's doing is spin and only used as a distraction and deflect from my original question.
I gave her multiple chances at answering my question and I've asked you now too a couple times.

No defense, eh?

Got it.

DING! DONE! Argument won!

[840high]

55. You were asked a polite

question. Got nothing?

[Bernie-2016]

77. Answer her question first.

You don't answer a question with a question, pal.

[zappaman]

124. Welcome to DU, pal!

[Omaha Steve]

37. Don't forget Bernie Sanders's Highly Sensible Plan to Turn Post Offices Into Banks

They're much less crazy than payday-lending services, and the rest of the world agrees.


http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/10/bernie-sanders-lets-turn-post-offices-into-banks/411589/


In an interview with Fusion’s Felix Salmon the day after last week’s Democratic debate and published Tuesday, Senator Bernie Sanders discussed the marquee features of democratic socialism he’s been tirelessly calling for during his presidential campaign: higher taxes for the wealthiest Americans, an increased minimum wage, and breaking up the biggest Wall Street banks.

Salmon also raised a possibility that has not been as prominent in Sanders’s stump speeches, but animates him nonetheless: turning the U.S.’s post offices into banks. Sanders:

If you are a low-income person, it is, depending upon where you live, very difficult to find normal banking. Banks don’t want you. And what people are forced to do is go to payday lenders who charge outrageously high interest rates. You go to check-cashing places, which rip you off. And, yes, I think that the postal service, in fact, can play an important role in providing modest types of banking service to folks who need it.

It’s something Sanders alluded to in a 2014 Wall Street Journal op-ed, and it’s not even the craziest idea proposed to save the USPS—a report last year explored the implications of turning post offices into hubs for 3-D printing.

FULL story at link.


Lucy Nicholson / Reuters

[jtuck004]

44. Trying to do the work without being just one more excuse-making deposit box pretending to

an allegiance IS doing something.

Go Bernie.

[upaloopa]

52. Hillary will be the 45th President of the

United States and together she and Bernie will put Wall Street legislation in place
All this bull shit here pales in comparison.

[840high]

57. No. No.

[pinebox]

60. Uh and the Pope had sex with Conan.....

or something like that?

Can you maybe stick to the topic and show us all of Hillary's wonderful accomplishments to help the American people with Wall Street?
Thank you.

[SoapBox]

59. Hey! Cut it out!

That is her plan.

She is intimate and close to Wall Street and Billionaire Banksters. Period.

She is Third Way. Period.

And that is that.

[George II]

69. Your "Top 10 Donor List" is false.

[LiberalArkie]

70. But we know that Bill Clinton had a tremendous effect on Wall Street. Glass-Stegall?

[treestar]

74. Bernie must eliminate Wall Street!

How many oligarchs has he brought down? I'm disappointed that Wall Street is still standing.

[1StrongBlackMan]

96. I was going to post the comment ...

that apparently, no one has noticed/wishes to acknowledge that EVERYTHING that Bernie's campaign is based upon, either came about, or got worse during his congressional tenure.

[treestar]

121. That's because Bernie was in the Senate

but when he is POTUS he will have the BULLY PULPIT and bully Congress to pass a bill Eliminating Wall Street. The oligarchs will then go to jail where they belong.

I don't know why Bernie didn't run in 1992, 1996, etc. up to and including 2008, so he could do this, and why he let it all get worse. Maybe he wanted to wait until it was bad enough that he could ride in on his white horse. Bad Bernie. Letting the banksters get away with all this for so many years.

[pinebox]

105. Show us the legislation

Hillary has introduced please when she was working for the US people, serving as a Senator.
Surely there's a ton of stuff she introduced to fight Wall Street, right?

[treestar]

122. This thread is about Bernie

Why would Hillary do that? How many posts have I seen describing her as a friend to Wall Street - so why would she, the ultimate corporatist, introduce any such bills? She has been described as one of the Oligarchs.

[pinebox]

123. The thread is about both Hillary and Bernie.

She is a corporate candidate. You support her so I am thinking that you can at least show us something that shows her as working for the people to protect their interests against Wall Street from when she served.

[jfern]

78. Here's two of his accomplishments that affect Wall Street.

Corporate Crime Accountability (February 1995): A Sanders amendment to the Victims Justice Act of 1995 required “offenders who are convicted of fraud and other white-collar crimes to give notice to victims and other persons in cases where there are multiple victims eligible to receive restitution.”

Sanders was able to get the first-ever audit of funds given out by the Federal Reserve, which made transparent over $2 trillion of funds handed out by the secretive organization. This was a cause that Republican congressman Ron Paul (TX) had been pursuing for decades, but Sanders was able to get the votes to do it by forging a compromise that required an audit for the bailout period alone.

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-gets-it-done-sanders-record-pushing-through-major-reforms-will-surprise-you

[cascadiance]

79. Let's not also forget his proposed tax on Wall Street transactions to go after speculators there!

... that he proposes to use the revenue to fund college education for college students. Hillary doesn't seem to want this sort of tax to hit her friends on Wall Street to pay for her more limited college education proposal that would only help those going to community college! We used to have this sort of tax up until the 60's to fund the SEC before it got ended then, so it won't hurt real trading rather than the rapid computer trading now that is used to fuel and take advantage of moves of pricing on Wall Street that speculators try to take advantage of.

[99Forever]

83. Hillary is gonna tell 'em to "Cut it out!" with a REAL mean look on her face this time.

She might even wag a finger at them.


Scary shit, right there. That'll fix it.

[Motown_Johnny]

89. One hand wagging a finger, the other stretched out for donations.

I wonder which one will have more impact.

[AzDar]

118. ^ This.

[tecelote]

88. K&R

We know who the corporate overlords and media want.

Isn't that one real good reason to NOT vote for their candidate?

[cantbeserious]

93. Not So Fast HRC And Supporters - This Reflects The Power Of Wall Street And Why We Need Bernie

Has HRC ever grilled anyone like this?

[DrBulldog]

97. Remember, Hillary hired professional trolls to spread this stuff.

And some who have quit out of disgust have made the facts of it public.

[Thinkingabout]

101. Sanders lives in a rural state, like guns, Clinton lived in a state where Wall Street, so by Sanders

reasoning of protecting gun manufactures and NRA then Clinton should be protecting Wall Street.

[sabrina 1]

108. Very nicely done. But seriously, is there even a question about this?

[pinebox]

109. Not from me but others? Ya there is

It's sad because when you look at things, it becomes obvious that Bernie is for the people, Hillary isn't.

[sabrina 1]

113. I know, and the paid for talking points can have an impact if people don't know the facts.

Great post, thanks for all the work you do!

[pinebox]

114. Thanks! XD

[avaistheone1]

111. Learned some important things...Your post clearly shows Sanders work to protect us from Wall Street.

In contrast, Hilary was clearly sitting on her feet and collecting Wall Street cash.

Sanders obviously represents the systemic change we greatly need.

[AzDar]

112. K & R