The POLITICO photo of Bernie Sanders was not anti-semitic

[Vidal]

Much has been written about how anti-semitic it was for POLITICO to wrote a story about Bernie Sanders' large increases in income and net worth over the past four years, and publish it with a photo of Bernie with money.

But I do not think this was anti-semitic. I'm pretty sure the fact that Sanders is Jewish was not mentioned by POLITICO. It wasn't until Ocasio-Cortez tweeted about it that I even thought about Sanders' religion.

It seemed like a normal and fair way for POLITICO to write a news story about what I believe is a very legitimate issue.

Here is the tweet from POLITICO

Link to tweet

[dsc]

1. Oh please

This would be as if illustrated a story about Cory Booker with him wearing full rapper regalia or put Buttigieg on the cover with Chippendale dancers in the back round.

[Hortensis]

11. So Democrats shouldn't learn about a candidate's finances

if he's Jewish -- because that'd make them not just antisemitic but also racist and anti-gay.

Uhuh.

It's far from clear so far why the Sanders campaign and his followers think insulting and offending Democrats by the millions is a good strategy. Will some end goal of this become obvious later on?

[dsc]

12. I didn't say the article was anti Semitic but that the photo was

Yes his finances, just like everyone else's is relevant. It should be noted, I am by no means a supporter of him and I think the fact he was able to paint Hillary as non transparent while refusing to release his tax returns was outrageous. But that picture is nothing short of anti Semitic. Similarly the history of self promotion that Cory Booker has engaged in is totally in bounds. But a photo of him in rapper regalia to illustrate it would be out and out racist.

Politico knows better and should do better.

[Hortensis]

14. We can't control Politico, but we know and should do better.

Politicians are often pictured with money for obvious reasons. I'm married to a Jew and always very sensitive to these things, and I don't see merely juxtaposing his picture with a modest money tree as antisemitic, not when it's illustrating this:

The upward trajectory from that jalopy of his to his relative riches now—as off-brand as it is for a man who once said he had “no great desire to be rich”—is the product of years of middle-class striving, replete with credit card debt, real estate upgrades and an array of investment funds and retirement accounts.

Which is exactly what I expected. A $3M estate, most in personal residences, is not at all wealthy for a U.S. senator whose working years coincided with an era of unprecedented wealth build-up.

In any case, hostiles have leaped on this TO use it to accuse Democrats of antisemitism. People genuinely concerned with it really shouldn't be accusing the Democratic Party, which is the traditional home of most Jewish Americans, but rather looking farther left, where antisemitism has once again become rampant and blatant.

It's as bad now on the radical left as it was in the 1970s when Sanders and my Jewish husband were both young. Sanders would have found most leftist counterculture and/or socialist-leaning groups unpleasant environments for some while.

I don't doubt for a minute that some of those opportunistically leaping to accuse Democrats of antisemitism are exactly those types, even if they're currently supporting a Jewish candidate they know can't win. Political bigotry is a huge indicator of other types, and the kind of hostile, dishonest behaviors so typical of all bigots are huge red flags.

[dsc]

19. He isn't the only one who had an upward trajectory in terms of money

but fancy that the only Jewish candidate is the one they use a money tree to illustrate. I am sure it was a total coincidence.

[Hortensis]

25. He's the one who's built a following by inveighing

against wealth accumulation and the greed of the wealthy. Now that he's finally being looked at, of course his own affluence is a point of interest.

I can understand how it could be intended as antisemitic, just not that it must have been. Any more, to use your own analogies, than that someone who doesn't prefer Cory Booker for president must be racist.

[dsc]

68. I didn't say one couldn't oppose Booker without being a racist

in point of fact Booker would be way down on my list of choices due to his education positions, but if I were to write a post opposing him and add to it an illustration of him as a rapper that would indeed be racist.

[Hortensis]

92. Of course you didn't. That's actually the point. :)

[lapucelle]

27. BS is the only millionaire socialist in the race. That's what the Politico story is about.

The Secret of Bernie’s Millions

How did he amass three houses and a net worth approaching at least $2 million? The surprisingly conventional middle-class climbing of a radical-sounding socialist.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/05/24/bernie-sanders-millionaires-226982

[Hortensis]

45. Right. A typical college-educated, very well paid socialist who

didn't develop serious health problems would have some trouble NOT becoming a "millionaire" in this era: Have a good-paying job with good health insurance, invest some of each paycheck, buy real estate in nice neighborhoods that appreciate substantially. Wash, rinse, repeat through the working years (and note this socialist only started working steadily at 40). And socialism does not equate to charity, so his restraint there is not hypocrisy.

As for any other financial issues, large dark-money donations, problems with FEC filings, etc., those of course are different.

[whathehell]

104. Politico leans Right..

and their would be "provocative" question has a very simple answer:. After decades of being one of the POOREST people in the Senate, he wrote a best selling book.

[lapucelle]

109. No it doesn't.

Politico

Factual Reporting: HIGH

Analysis / Bias

Both sides of the political spectrum have accused Politico of either having a left or right bias. For example, Media Matters for America, a progressive media watchdog group in Washington, has accused Politico of having a “Republican tilt.” Politico also published an article criticizing Obama for not being a strong supporter of Israel: “Obama’s Jewish Problem”. In another article Politico states that Liberals are not as tolerant as they say they are: “Why Liberals Aren’t as Tolerant as They Think.” Further, here is an article criticizing Democratic Socialism: “Down Goes Socialism” and another criticizing Bernie Sanders, “Bernie’s army in disarray.” Lastly, according to the Poynter Institute, Politico is balanced.

The right leaning Daily Caller has also criticized Politico for having a liberal bias when they compared a New York Times headline to Politico’s Playbook headline, by claiming that it “Extended further to the left than the NYT on this headline.”

In review, Politico occasionally publishes listicles such as “All of Trump’s Russia Ties, in 7 Charts.” They also publish articles with minimally loaded words such as “Ocasio-Cortez warns Trump Jr. about subpoena power in response to meme”, and they source to credible media outlets such as Reuters and the NY Times. However, they sometimes do use emotional headlines such as this: Establishment looks to crush liberals on Medicare for All.

Editorially, Politico provides a balance of opinions as evidenced by the criticism they have received from both sides. Further, their news articles tend to be balanced through covering both sides and counterpoints to the story they are reporting on.

A factual search reveals they have not failed a fact check.

Overall, we rate Politico Least Biased based on balanced coverage of news stories and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record. (5/18/2016) Updated (M. Huitsing 12/10/2018

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/politico/

[whathehell]

119. According to one source. Many think otherwise

Sometimes the "bias checkers" have their own biases.

[Vidal]

120. Good point

what you say is very true. we have to be aware of biases, but everyone has them.

[whathehell]

121. Thanks..

It's true..No one is completely 'objective'.

[lapucelle]

123. ...

[lapucelle]

122. "Many think otherwise"? Who, exactly?

Do you have any sources? I do.

Politico media bias rating is Lean Left.

February 1, 2018: After analyzing results from our most recent blind bias survey and editorial review, the Politico media bias rating has moved from Center to Lean Left

https://www.allsides.com/news-source/politico-media-bias

What news sources are left-leaning, centrist, or right-leaning?

There is no completely clear answer to this question because there is no one exact methodology to measure and rate the partisan bias of news sources.

Here are a couple of resources that can help:

AllSides

All Sides is a news website that presents multiple sources side by side in order to provide the full scope of news reporting.

The Allsides Bias Ratings page allows you to filter a list of news sources by bias (left, center, right).

AllSides uses a patented bias rating system to classify news sources as left, center, or right leaning. Components of the rating system include crowd-sourcing, surveys, internal research, and use of third party sources such as Wikipedia and research conducted by Groseclose and Milyo at UCLA. Note that while the Groseclose & Milyo results are popular, the methodology it is not without critique.

snip=====================================

Pew Research Center - Political Polarization
Survey data reveals the news source favored by people according to their political beliefs.

https://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=637508&p=4462444

Do you have any sources for your unsubstantiated claim that Politico leans right, besides the apocryphal "many people"?

You previously posted that "[s]ometimes the 'bias checkers' have their own biases".

Have you stopped to think that as a self-appointed bias checker and spokesman for the oft-cited "many people", it may be you, who in fact, has his own biases concerning Politico?

[Amimnoch]

41. Nobody gives 2 shits about his upward trajectory in terms of money.

If it weren’t for his hundreds of speeches of “oligarchy” “the rich” and his entire approach to class warfare that makes him 100% a fair target. It’s not his money, it’s his hypocrisy.

HE made his finances and wealth a fair talking point, and 100% fair game for these kinds of political meme.

[highmindedhavi]

60. well said

[LanternWaste]

111. He is however, the only one pretending otherwise.

[melman]

37. "a modest money tree "

[charlyvi]

65. IKR? LOL

I detest Sanders; I have since the Dem convention. However, if you illustrate how a man of Jewish descent got rich by showing him in front of a money tree, modest or not, that is ANTI-SEMETIC! Even if you detest the guy in the illustration.

[wasupaloopa]

17. It can only be anti Semitic if you know Bernie is Jewish. That is an important ingredient.

Even then I don’t think it is anti Semitic. That is a stretch. If Bernie were Catholic what then?

[dsc]

18. the magazine is called politico

not ignorance illustrated. If you edit a magazine called Politico and you don't know that Sanders is Jewish then you shouldn't have your job. That would be like me, a math teacher, not knowing what 2 + 2 is.

[wasupaloopa]

23. If you looked at the picture not knowing Bernie was Jewish you would not think it

anti Semitic period end of story.

You need additional ingredients to reach that conclusion.

Therefore the picture in itself is not anti Semitic.

Further more, it is an arbitrary assumption as we see in this thread.

Put it in a formula:

Picture + knowledge oh Bernie’s religion + knowledge of anti Semitism = picture is anti Semitic.

Not a logical conclusion. Premises do not lead to the conclusion

[dsc]

24. but they and we know he is

and precisely zero other candidates were illustrated next to a money tree. Again, if they portrayed Booker as a rap star there would be Hell to pay.

[FreeBe]

43. None of the other candidates centered their campaign, their career attacking millionaires and

billionaires.

[dsc]

69. so if a piece of NAZI propaganda were to be posted in its original German

then it wouldn't be anti Semitic in the US since most of us don't know German? I think you need to rethink this.

[LanternWaste]

112. Then why are repeating the unsupported trope that 2+222?

[lapucelle]

26. The article was about BS's millions. There's nothing wrong with the picture.

The story is about the wealth BS has amassed.

The Secret of Bernie’s Millions

How did he amass three houses and a net worth approaching at least $2 million? The surprisingly conventional middle-class climbing of a radical-sounding socialist.

[Amimnoch]

99. Complete bullshit comparison.

If Cory Booker had made his entire campaign about being anti-rapper regalia, then found out that Cory Booker really was a hypocrite and a rapper himself, and wore rapper regalia.. it would be TOTALLY fair to have a cover of Senator Booker in rapper regalia..

If Pete Buttigieg had based his entire campaign in opposition to male nudity, then it was found that he had a huge collection of male pornography and photos of him with Chippendale dancers.. it would be TOTALLY fair to have a cover of Pete Buttigieg with Chippendale dancers.

BS actions and positions earned this. It doesn’t have one fucking thing to do with Judaism, or stereotypes.. it’s all about his own damned hypocrisy. He made his bed with his own policies and hypocrisies.

[FreeBe]

100. Clarity with your two examples of Booker and Buttigieg. Thanks.

[ZeroSomeBrains]

2. That wasn't the original image

The original image was him holding houses like he was an all powerful Jewish banker or something. I find it rich from the same people who demanded Ilhan Omar apologize say anti-semetic tropes against Bernie is ok. If Chuck Schumer had the same story written about him holding houses there would be people rightly angry here.

[lapucelle]

28. The original image of what?

Did you even read the Politico story? The picture of BS and his three houses is still there.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/05/24/bernie-sanders-millionaires-226982

[ZeroSomeBrains]

44. Youmean the tweet they took down and yeah I read the garbage

Let me sum it up for you. Bernie's rich so he's a hypocrite since he's a socialist. Having a money tree and having the only jewish candidate holding houses up is anti-semetic. But I'm sure you along with the other people here who have a bizarre irrational hatred of the man will explain to me why it's perfectly fine.

[Voltaire2]

3. Oh bullshit.

A Jew a money tree and mansions.

Wtf.

[RandiFan1290]

4. BULLSHIT

That is 100% antisemitic

So disgusting to see people try to defend that, especially here.

[lapucelle]

30. No it isn't. The story is about how the self-identifying social became a millionaire.

The Secret of Bernie’s Millions

How did he amass three houses and a net worth approaching at least $2 million? The surprisingly conventional middle-class climbing of a radical-sounding socialist.

Why Cortez trying to shut down a journalist who wrote an expose of the truth behind how BS amassed his millions?

[melman]

39. "Cortez"

Link to tweet

?lang=en

[Kurt V.]

5. politico knows sanders is jewish. did you not know?

[Autumn]

6. People seem to really enjoy this antisemitic piece.

It's so obvious why. Those dog whistles won't blow themselves.

[Hortensis]

7. Of course it was not. Gallop says 93% would vote for a Jew.

This is a desperate Sanders camp ratcheting up the negative attacks very early because he's already failing.

Btw, accusing everyone who mentions or wonders about Sanders' finances of antisemitism is about as cynically dirty an attack as we'll be seeing from now to election day. Trump will match many times but never exceed.

[Gothmog]

8. As a Jewish Democrat, I agree with the OP

[robbedvoter]

13. As another one, same.

My ears are trained to spot that particular nuance. Nothing in his article. The houses are the ones he owns. The money - the ones he made out of the $27 donations. He made us wait 4 year to see his tax returns. When he finally came up with some, they were incomplete and with non-matching exhibits. But any discussion ha been drowned under attacks of Think Progress, CAP and Neera Tanden with assist from Ken Vogel. And now, the guy who called himself a "Polish immigrant" in 2016 screams antisemitism? A bit rich. AOC and many making this accuastion aren't even Jewish, I bet.

[Gothmog]

29. I still remember all of the fuss when sandes spoke to Liberty U on a high holy day

A number of congregants were very upset about this and I heard a ton of spirited kvetching during breaks. This is not a good way to win the Jewish vote

Link to tweet

[BannonsLiver]

64. That's the Bernie standard

When Bernie does it it’s okay.

[MaryMagdaline]

9. Anti-Semitic AF

[aidbo]

10. You're wrong.

[JudyM]

47. You're right.

Even if it’s a genuinely innocent assessment, it’s dead wrong.

[Vidal]

15. Agree with RobbedVoter

Copying the comment because it is very perceptive.

"My ears are trained to spot that particular nuance. Nothing in his article. The houses are the ones he owns. The money - the ones he made out of the $27 donations. He made us wait 4 year to see his tax returns. When he finally came up with some, they were incomplete and with non-matching exhibits. But any discussion ha been drowned under attacks of Think Progress, CAP and Neera Tanden with assist from Ken Vogel. And now, the guy who called himself a "Polish immigrant" in 2016 screams antisemitism? A bit rich. AOC and many making this accuastion aren't even Jewish, I bet."

[aidbo]

61. One doesn't have to be part of the maligned group to call..

..out racism when one sees it.

[zentrum]

16. Yes, he rallied to

....tax millionaires at higher rates. Himself included. To help pay for expanded medicare and social security. Willing to tax himself! What a phoney!

His money pales compared to Pelosi's. Or Feinstein's. Who are multi-millionaires.

The Medium net worth of most in Congress is 3.2M.

Bernie's wealth grew mostly from his book sales. Hardly a war, fossil fuel or big pharma profiteer.

[Vidal]

21. The real issue with Bernie

is that he held himself out as a socialist and then made a lot of money after running for president. Some people might think that is a contradiction.

[whathehell]

105. An "issue" to the ill informed only..

"Some people" are wrong.

[zentrum]

115. If he's fighting

..... to raise his own tax bracket, what the hell is the issue?

Socialists aren't against earning money from your own writing---it's not exploiting any one. It's not taking an undue profit.

Bernie would be fine being taxed at high rates. That's part of how, in this economy, you redistribute. He's fighting for that.

Your icon, FDR, would be called a socialist today and was millionaire to boot.

[Vidal]

116. There are legitimate questions

with respect to Bernie's millions, but many people don't want to see that.

[FreeBe]

117. Here is the thing. It is not a big deal for him, nor is it for any of our Democratic Leaders.

Because ALL of our Democratic Leaders pay a higher tax than they have to or what they could get away with because they have integrity. And that is something that I have always admired about Democratic Leaders.

Here is the real core of the issue and why this conversation is important to the Democratic base. 2015 and on, Sanders attacked that integrity of our Democratic Leaders and he did it in hypocrisy by bashing them all as "corporate" "Corrupt" and "establishment". There is not a problem with Sanders having made a couple million from his campaign, that he ran with the fundamental foundation that Democrats are bad. They are bought and paid for. No different than the Republican party. HRC got paid for speeches. She let corporations buy her. He really affected the Democratic primary with this rhetoric in 2016.

All the while these very Democrats have fought for my increase in wage, and the rich paying their share. And my Democratic Leaders pay a higher rate of taxes than Sanders 13.4%, while Sanders is off to be a millionaire going after the establishment.

We are calling Sanders out. And that is why it matters. He is running as a Democratic candidate in my primary. He wants votes.

That is why it matters.

[zentrum]

118. He didn't make it

...from his campaign as you say. That would be a crime!

He made it by writing several books which sold well.

There was nothing corrupt or corporate about it.

Best sellers make money.

Please make distinctions between "made money from his campaign"--(that would mean he stole it)---vs. he made money from selling books, once people became wildly interested in what he had to say.

Also he never said Democrats were fundamentally bad. In the primaries he is allowed to mount a critique of an opponent, as did all primary competitors.

In the general he supported Clinton and has caucused with Democrats for years. He has never said Democrats are "bad". And perhaps you don't remember when Bernie defended Clinton in the debates.

You don't have to like him, but please don't mis-characterize what he said.

[hlthe2b]

20. the money tree is such a classic antisemitic image, I disagree strongly on that score...

Was it right to report on the seeming paradox between Sander's positions and the fact that he has acquired wealth? Probably, but the story should include why that mere fact may or may not be an influence on him going forward and not merely suggest it was "ill-gotten" gains. And the imagery--geebus!

I neither count myself among Sanders supporters, nor am I a strong opponent, but heavens. This is crappy.

[Igel]

86. I've never seen it as one before.

"Money doesn't grow on trees" goes back to the late 1800s, but doesn't have a Jewish/anti-Semitic connection.

It's a trope I grew up with. On the other hand, the first Jew I met was when I was 18, and she was in the (Xian) church I'd joined. "Wealthy" doesn't begin to describe her (any more than athletic would; she was in a wheelchair, Parkinson's disease.

It's one thing to say that he's greedy or that somebody who's Jewish is only interested in money; that goes back to the "benjamins" quip unpacked.

But in this case the hypocrisy is what's at issue: You rail against millionaires, all millionaires go back to some sort of injustice or taking advantage of others, then as soon as you become one you shift your rhetoric to exclude "millionaires" without saying, "Um, sorry, I seem to have accidentally become one, so just ignore what I said because it doesn't apply to me."

You may agree with the allegation; you may disagree with it. But it strikes me as a dodge to say, in response to the charge, "Anti-Semitism!" It cheapens the allegation in an attempt to say, "Instead of a valid criticism, I'll scream discrimination!" Then the allegation goes uncontested because a smear is the best defense. Now that's a common trope in modern American discourse.

Its billing as anti-Semitic by those themselves accused of anti-Semitism is an attempt at a tu quoque argument with the same ends--"How dare you criticize me!" I think it fails, and itself is shameful: What was almost certain anti-Semitic, or very plausibly anti-Semitic is to be excused or even justified because of a very weak (at best) claim against somebody else.

[hlthe2b]

91. Anti Defamation League (ADL) agrees it was anti-semitic. That's good enough for me.

I would not want to be arguing the opposite side of this debate. Perhaps you will read their stance and reconsider.


The Anti-Defamation League calls out Politico's Sanders/Money Tree/Mansion trope as Anti-semitic

Link to tweet

[FreeBe]

101. "such as those about Jews and wealth."

ADL says Jews and wealth is an example of what is not allowed to be discussed. I can hardly believe it is being suggested that because Sanders is Jewish, we are being told we cannot call out his hypocrisy about his own newly acquired wealth.

Seriously asking, are we no longer not allow to discuss that due to the 2016 campaign, Sanders has become a millionaire and has now stopped his attacks on millionaires which he has campaigned on for decades, and now only complains about billionaires?

This cannot be.

And to be clear, Politico did not talk about Jews, at all. Only Sanders wealth.

[hlthe2b]

103. That is NOT what is being said at all. Here's an example of what Republicans used in last election

which, btw never referenced the target (Soros) as being Jewish but the same ugly, damned and damnable antisemitic symbols were unmistakable. This is what you want to defend? REALLY? Disgraceful, as is your attempt to conflate honest reporting about finances with the most horrendous of symbolic antisemitism. We (DUers who are concerned about this politco piece) argue about the latter, not the former.

I am no more Jewish than the majority here; nor am I a Sanders supporter but this is indefensible.

[FreeBe]

106. You find RW bigotry, post it and accuse me of supporting it.

Politico's piece is obviously controversial. I am seeing ADL making a statement vs other org. recommending the piece. ADL tweet was clear, and that is what I asked about. Accusing me of supporting the link you put up is wrong.

[hlthe2b]

107. the money imagery--one of history's most well known antisemitic tropes are the SAME

You appear to have no issue with that particular symbol. You claim ADL is WRONG to be aghast at its use in Politico--which is a right-leaning publication, btw. So, how is it YOU know more about what is antisemitic than Anti Defamation League whose entire reason for being is to fight back against encroachments that would have us reliving the horror of the 1930s.

So, perhaps you need to self-reflect on what they are trying to tell us.

[FreeBe]

114. Is there more to ADL statement than the tweet because I am not seeing aghast.

How does one have a story about Sanders newly acquired wealth due to the 2016 campaign without talking about wealth because he is Jewish?

And please quit defining what I feel and think. You are wrong and it is offensive.

[OregonBlue]

22. I don't see it. Unless it said, "Bernie Sanders, who is Jewish", it seems

like they are pointing out possible hypocrisy, not his Jewishness.

[Eric J in MN]

31. Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren have more money

...than Bernie Sanders but Politico didn’t print a picture of them next to money trees. Just the only major presidential candidate who is Jewish, Bernie Sanders.

I’m Jewish and I consider this anti-semitic. I don’t call any criticism of Israel or of Bernie Sanders anti-semitic.

[SouthernProgressive]

36. Are you sure about your first statement?

And while Biden's net worth may not compare to the likes of the president or even fellow politician Bernie Sanders, it doesn't necessarily validate him for his self-proclaimed title as "the poorest man in Congress."

https://www.thestreet.com/amp/lifestyle/joe-biden-net-worth-14935510

[Eric J in MN]

38. The article you linked to

...links to another article which says Joe Biden signed an $8M book deal by April 2017. https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/book-deals/article/73268-biden-books-go-to-flatiron.html

[SouthernProgressive]

40. That statement is in the original link.

As is the quote I outlined.

[Amimnoch]

42. They aren't hypocrites about it. BS is.

Neither Joe Biden nor Elizabeth Warren identify as Socialist.

Neither Joe Biden nor Elizabeth Warren have built their entire campaign attacking the “wealthy” the “oligarchs”.

Neither Joe Biden nor Elizabeth Warren have taken on the class war cause as central to their campaigns.

If they did, would be totally fair game to do the exact images of them..

It’s his gross disgusting hypocrisy that makes this 100% totally fair political commentary and doesn’t have one damn thing to do with his religion.

[aikoaiko]

32. I don't think Political is our friend anymore.

They've gone from serving the left to stirring the shit among the left for the clicks.

[BannonsLiver]

52. The media isn't supposed to be anyone's friend.

[msongs]

33. would there be a stink about this if another person was pictured instead of bernie, say trump? nt

[SouthernProgressive]

34. The images were not needed for the article.

Imagery means something. If it was just the image with the houses I wouldn’t take issue. But that one combined with the tree one is a step too far. Imagery means a lot. It upholds many stigmas. It should have been recognized by the editor, at least. When I see someone like Politico doing this I don’t believe they had nefarious intentions. But it is an imagery fail. I don’t think it’s some great big deal. I do think some people clearly need to think about what it’s like to be in someone else’s shoes.

[Honeycombe8]

48. I am female.

Let's say I'm campaigning on the fact that women in this country have to pay twice the amount for a pair of shoes than men do. And in particular, it hits working class women the hardest, since they need to buy special shoes for their work. I propose legislation for helping working class women buy work shoes.

Then it's discovered that I own 2,000 pairs of shoes, all bought with the proceeds of wealth I'd accumulated as a result of writing about my campaign about working class shoes and cost of shoes for women.

So someone writes an article about it, with an image of me, with a background of a bunch of high heels.

"Sexist!" they cry. To attack me because I'm female by using high heels as a backdrop. Promoting the stereotype that women own a lot of shoes! They didn't have an image like that for Biden or Buttigieg or Sanders or Beto!

That's basically the argument about the Politico article with pics. If you can spot the ridiculousness of the argument.

[FreeBe]

49. Excellent analogy. Point on.

[SouthernProgressive]

50. Your argument works with the house image.

Not with the other one.

Add an image to the one you describe with a husband behind you throwing out cash and credit cards.

[FreeBe]

51. Money does not grow on trees. For some, I think was the point.

So, an husband throwing out cash and cr card. I do not get the analogy on that one, though interesting. Husband taking care of "the little lady" from your image.

[SouthernProgressive]

59. You spell it out very clearly.

You hit it perfectly.

[Honeycombe8]

56. No. Your "husband" image doesn't belong in my scenario.

The "husband" image isn't parallel to the Bernie image used...of money. The "house" image isn't as spot on, IMO.

Money was used, because his campaign rhetoric was about wealth.

High heels used in my scenario is used because my campaign rhetoric was about shoes for women.

But you get the idea. The wealth used in the pic, represented by cash, was directly tied to his campaign, and the wealth he accumulated as a result of that campaign. (Mind you, I don't think there's anything wrong with him making that money, and it has nothing to do with his position on wealth disparity or even his version of socialism.) The fact that he's Jewish doesn't enter into it. In my view, and I'm pretty sensitive to antisemitism.

[Vidal]

66. Interesting analogy

I think you are spot on. To me it is all ridiculous. The pic was certainly not over the line.

[lapucelle]

35. Jewish Journal recommends and links to the story on its "Best of the Web" tab.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287133064

[Vidal]

55. Fascinating

It's very interesting to see what the Jewish Journal has to say.

[Honeycombe8]

46. Of course it wasn't. You'd have to be looking for a way to attack the article, to think that. nt

[Mosby]

53. I don't think the pic is Antisemitic

And 2M net worth at his age does not make him rich, he worked his ass off, scraped by for years, and finally made a few bucks writing books. Big fucking deal. Good for him.

[FreeBe]

54. If making over $200,000 and paying only 13.4% in taxes is scraping by.

I am making 25K and living in the Northwest. Admittedly, I am not even scarping by but I would like to scrape by with $200,000 a year.

[FreeBe]

58. You are simply incorrect. I certainly did pay state and fed tax.

And because of Trumps tax bill I paid an addition $141 in state tax. At 0 dependent and getting all I could get taken out of my paychecks, when it was all said and done, I owed another $141. At 25K a year you bet it is a slap in the face when state tells you they want a little more of your dollars.

I paid state and federal at a higher rate than Sanders.

[RandiFan1290]

62. Yes, it is

Link to tweet

[BannonsLiver]

63. Agreed

That was a desperate attempt to hijack a thread and change the subject away from the fact Bernie is filthy rich.

[Vidal]

67. According to reports, Joe Biden's net worth is $1.5 million in 2019.

Back in 2017 there were news reports of a book deal with Flatiron, but nothing has come of that. That may have never happened.

This article says Biden owns very little but does have a pension.

He is a person who spent his life in government service and never got rich.

link: https://www.thestreet.com/lifestyle/joe-biden-net-worth-14935510

[Celerity]

71. Celebrity Net Worth.com? LOL, yep that is always the definitive place to always find accurate info

And it is a flat out falsehood to say he didn't sign an multi million dollar book deal and it is ludicrous to say he only has 1.5m in worth when he just bought a house that is worth almost double that alone

Your own article says this and gives a link saying it was for 8 millon dollars

https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/book-deals/article/73268-biden-books-go-to-flatiron.html


Your trying to frame it as if it is rumour and may not exist is pure gaslighting.


PLUS he bought a 2.7 million dollar house with some of the advance money from the book deal.

‘Middle-Class Joe’ rakes in millions
The former VP on the brink of a likely presidential campaign has done quite well financially since leaving office in 2017.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/18/joe-biden-2020-money-wealth-1221934


Joe Biden Is Running for President in 2020. Here’s What We Know About ‘Middle Class’ Joe’s Money, Including Speaking Fees and His $2.7 Million Beach House

http://money.com/money/5642611/joe-biden-net-worth-2020-democratic-presidential-candidate/



https://www.mansionglobal.com/articles/bidens-snag-vacation-home-in-rehoboth-beach-65395

Joe Biden has snapped up a vacation home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, a spokeswoman has confirmed.

The former vice president and his wife, Jill Biden, have expressed a fondness for the Jersey Shore, but it looks like they set their sights a bit further south in the end. They landed on a three-story home at the edge of Cape Henlopen State Park with views of the Atlantic Ocean.

snip

Property records do not yet show how much the home sold for, but it was most recently listed for around $3 million. The property last sold in 2007 for $3.258 million, according to property records.




plus


His Wilmington Delaware other home is worth almost 2 million (1.9 million or so) as well

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1209-Barley-Mill-Rd-Wilmington-DE-19807/72996610_zpid/






plus he is raking in $100,000, $200,000 USD per speech, including 200K for a Republican, helping him win a narrow election

Joe Biden’s Paid Speech Buoyed the G.O.P. in Midwest Battleground

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/23/us/politics/biden-speech-fred-upton.html




just stop

you are making yourself look foolish from every angle, especially still pushing the discredited 'antisemitism here' line

The ADL cased-closed that one >>>> https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287133122

[Hav]

83. "Just stop"

The same applies for the continuation of the lie that Biden got 200k specifically for a speech for a Republican. I wonder how long we will see this kind of deliberate misinformation going on.

[Celerity]

87. take it up with the New York Times

[Hav]

88. No need to take it up with them as they are not the ones misrepresenting

But let's see:
"Several people involved in planning the event said Mr. Upton, 65, had no role in arranging Mr. Biden’s appearance, and Mr. Upton said he was not involved. There is no evidence Mr. Biden was motivated to praise the lawmaker by anything other than sincere admiration, stemming from Mr. Upton’s role in crafting the 21st Century Cures Act after the death of Mr. Biden’s elder son, Beau, from cancer in 2015."

Your version: "plus he is raking in $100,000, $200,000 USD per speech, including 200K for a Republican, helping him win a narrow election"

He clearly wasn't paid 200k to hold a speech for a Republican with the aim to help the R's re-election efforts. I don't know why this wrong narrative gets repeated here. You could have voiced your disappointment about the speech without misrepresenting actual events.

[Celerity]

90. from the article

But Mr. Biden’s appearance in Michigan plainly set his lucrative personal activities at odds with what some Democrats saw as his duty to the party, linking him with a civic group seen as tilting to the right and undermining Democrats’ effort to defeat Mr. Upton, a powerful lawmaker who in 2017 helped craft a bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

Eric Lester, a retired physician who chaired the Democratic Party in Berrien County, Mich., during the midterms, said he viewed Mr. Biden’s supportive remarks about Mr. Upton as a betrayal. Mr. Lester, who attended the speech, said he had confronted an aide to Mr. Biden in the hallway, telling him the former vice president had badly damaged the Democratic cause.

“It just gives Fred Upton cover and makes it possible for him to continue to pretend to be a useful, bipartisan fellow,” Mr. Lester recalled saying, adding, “I entered the hall with positive feelings about Mr. Biden and felt very frustrated.”

snip

The contract for Mr. Biden’s visit shows he was paid $200,000 for his appearance, including a $150,000 speaking fee and a $50,000 travel allowance. It also specifies that the audience would be “primarily older, conservative Republicans and local community members.” The document was disclosed in response to a Freedom of Information request made by America Rising, a Republican group that conducts research on Democratic candidates.

It is unclear whether the fees Mr. Biden received in this case are standard for all his speeches. Mr. Biden’s aides have declined to confirm what his rates are for paid appearances, including the appearance in Michigan, or how much he has earned through paid speaking since leaving office. In at least one instance, his speaking bureau, Creative Artists Agency, offered a reduced rate of $100,000, plus travel expenses, to the University of Utah.

If Mr. Biden were to have charged a similar range of fees for all his comparable speeches since leaving office, he would most likely have collected between $4 million and $5 million through speeches over the last two years.

all my points stand, including the utter refutation of the poster I replied to (not just the tiny part you took umbrage with)

the same poster btw, trying to defend Biden said 'Upton is a good guy'


Really?
























Upton has changed his views to the hard right on climate change in an effort to win the committee chairmanship.

Fred Upton’s Climate Changeup

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/fred-upton-global-warming/

Late last week, Upton coauthored a Wall Street Journal op-ed with Tim Phillips, the president of Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group that has opposed action on climate change. In it, the pair wrote that a new EPA regulation to curb greenhouse gas emissions, which took effect on Sunday, “presumes that carbon is a problem in need of regulation. We are not convinced.” They also decried the carbon rules as “an unconstitutional power grab that will kill millions of jobs.”

Phillips’ position is not surprising. Denying climate change is an institutional priority for AFP, which has received millions from fossil fuel interests, including $5 million from the philanthropic arm of the oil and gas giant Koch Industries. AFP has even coordinated a climate change-denying “Hot Air Tour,” which made a stop in Cancun last month during the UN climate summit there.

snip

Upton claimed there is “no real science to verify” that cutting emissions would stave off climate change.

In the months since Republicans claimed the House, Upton’s taken a much harsher stance against regulating emissions. He faced stiff competition from more conservative members for the energy and commerce committee for the chairmanship, and he had to overcome complaints that he was “too moderate” for the post. (Then there’s the money factor: Koch was among Upton’s top contributors this election cycle, along with several other energy companies.)

[Hav]

94. "All my points stand"

No, they don't, as was clearly shown. All the arguments to criticize the speech itself or the Repub would have been fine which is the point: Why the need to knowingly post false information instead? Because at this point, they are just used a diversion when they could have stood alone. These issues don't address your initial claim that Biden got paid to hold a speech for a Republican at all and don't change that what you said was simply not true. I only quoted the part that was deliberately misleading, the other part of the discussion with the other poster was of no interest to me.

[Celerity]

97. I disagree

You just keep focusing on one tiny part and trying to make it go away as you happen to not like it. I accept that. I posted nothing false and sourced everything. You can say 'false info' till you are blue in the face and that changes, nor refutes anything.

Done here.

[TreasonousBastard]

70. Isn't there enough real hate out there that we don't have to invent it? I searched for...

"money tree" and this is what I got:



It's a popular houseplant.

Then I searched for "money tree anti-semitic" and still got more of the same plus a lot of links to the Politico story. No doubt I could try more permutations, but what would be the point?

I am not Jewish, but grew up in a neighborhood that was about half Jewish professionals and business owners. Many of our neighbors lost relatives to the Nazis, and there were even a few survivors with numbers tattooed on their arms. I went to more b'nai mitzvah than confirmations. I cannot tell you the mutual love and respect with those wonderful Jewish neighbors.

None of that gives me any special knowledge or understanding, but I think I have some hint about antisemitism.

This is not it. And I think we have a huge problem if we have to tiptoe around things in case we "might" be accused of some form of bigotry.

[melman]

72. "This is not it"

The ADL disagrees.

Link to tweet

[TreasonousBastard]

75. As is their right. However, while they argue against tropes, do they...

give us a way to distinguish between rich people who happen to be Jewish and those who are rich because they are Jewish?

It's that second case that is the problem. I have known wealthy Jews who all made it through hard and smart work, not Protocols or cabals. Simply mentioning their wealth should not be called out unless it's specifically an ethnic or racial charge.

This whole money tree thing is invented outrage, and if the ADL wants to carry torches against it instead of fighting hatred in the streets, that is its choice.

[melman]

77. "instead of fighting hatred in the streets"

Let me get this straight. You are saying the ADL has chosen to focus on this ''instead of fighting hatred in the streets" ?

What's your basis for this assertion?

[TreasonousBastard]

78. That's all you focus on in my post?

[melman]

79. Yeah that's what I focused on

Do you have an answer?

[TreasonousBastard]

82. No.

[George II]

95. +1,000,000

[Honeycombe8]

73. I agree that "this is not it." If it were a site w/a history of antisemitism....

I might think it's a hidden message to the site's readers. But that's not the case.

I had a great uncle who was Jewish, from Czechoslovakia, and friends who were Jewish. This doesn't make me Jewish, by any means, but I do think my eyes and ears are sensitive to antisemitism, raising my hackles at the sign of it. "This is not it."

Although, I don't think there's anything wrong with Sanders making money from his own work. That's great! I don't think he HAS to be poor to push for programs for the working class. FDR sure wasn't poor. Instead of objecting to antisemitism of the pics, I would have gone after the argument for the whole article.

[TreasonousBastard]

81. I agree that his wealth should be irrelevant since there is no hint or suggestion...

of anything illicit with it.

We're in the political silly season now (when are we not in it?) and the anti-Bernie memes are working hard to outdo the pro Bernie ones.

[backtoblue]

74. The imagery matters to me

It may not to others, and that's up to each individual.

I'm fighting nazis in my town. They marched with their hate during a Holocaust Remembrance event just recently.

There was a cross burning within 10 miles of my home a few weeks ago.

If you'd like to look at the news story, Google Russellville Arkansas, nazi protests.

I'm on the front lines here....

I'm in red hell and I need you guys for support and sanity.


To those who completely dismiss this, please have empathy toward those of us who have seen first hand what these hate groups are capable of.

[TreasonousBastard]

76. You are fighting the good fight. Nazis and their fellow travelers are growing in...

this age of Trump where they feel they can freely come out from under their rocks. We have them around here, although thankfully we haven't had any cross burnings.

Yet.

Please don't think I am denigrating the appearance of bigotry in any form-- I'm simply asking that that we do better targeting.

[backtoblue]

80. Thank you for your thoughts

We're in crisis here and across the country. The ADL has sent me educational material to use here for a grassroots effort to combat the rise in hate and anti-Semitism.

The supremacy groups that marched here has a website that attacked the Mayor and college, using imagery fabricated to suit their "ideas".

Thank you for understanding where I'm coming from. I see your point as well.

[BannonsLiver]

93. Are your local Nazis carrying imagery of money trees?

[backtoblue]

96. Seriously?

Don't talk to me anymore.

[BannonsLiver]

98. Seriously.

Since you’re fighting Nazis in your town one would think you would be able to differentiate between real antisemitic imagery and the imagery in the Politico piece.

[Freethinker65]

84. No longer a Bernie fan, but the entire premise is crap.

A 77 year old man, from a two income family, that has been a Federal legislator for decades, lived frugally during his lifetime, and made some investments in real estate and the market (as well as writing a book that did pretty well) is worth perhaps near 2 million dollars, and this is questioned and frowned upon?

I know many people in their seventies with former average jobs that lived frugally for decades ,never topping near six figure salaries, that have savings and investments for retirement worth over one million dollars. Some of it was due to luck, but much of it was choices they made in how they saved and spent their money over the years.

Honestly, if anything, I am surprised Senator and Mrs. Sanders are not worth more. If the money was made honestly, WTF does it matter how much he is worth? What are his policies, how has he treated his constituents and others, and how has he lived his life is what should matter. Is he a seemingly rich asshole that has treated people like shit his whole life like Trump? Is he a pandering populist like John Edwards (who I mistakenly trusted for a brief while)? I think Bernie is the real deal. I appreciate his honesty. I have some issues with some of Bernie's policies and some of his supporters, but not Bernie personally nor his "wealth".

And yes, I can see how the money tree might be viewed as anti-Semitic. It could also be viewed as the old saying "money doesn't grow on trees", so where did he get it? Either way, it appears to be a typical hit piece headline...though I honestly did not bother to read the attached story.

[Hav]

85. Initially I thought it wasn't as well

and I'm still not sure about it and I don't know whether it was intentional. But there is something absurd about this image to the point that you have to wonder why it was chosen and whether it would have been chosen for other candidates. And I don't care what Sanders said or how much money he earned regarding this topic, the image just seems odd. Another poster mentioned that there was an initial picture with houses dangling from Sander's hand. That sounds awful and if the poster was right, there had to be a reason why the image was changed.
It doesn't mean that Politico as a whole is anti-semitic, a few deplorables to get the story through would be enough.

[Honeycombe8]

89. The houses pic vs the money tree

It's the money tree that people are criticizing. Not the house pics. Both are in the article. The pics weren't changed.

I think the houses pic may refer to the three homes he owns now, obtained in the last few years. I think. The money tree represents the "wealth" distribution & such; that issue is the cornerstone of his campaign.

I have no problem with anyone making money honestly as a result of his own pursuits or work, like Sanders has done, and don't see a contradiction between that and promoting programs to help the working class. I don't have a problem with the pictures, either. I think they would have been used, no matter who the candidate was...if the candidate called himself a socialist and based his campaign on helping the working class and the poor and getting more money down to the working people and taxing the rich more. I just don't think that's a valid argument...that wealthy people can't want to make things better for the working class. They can and do.

Besides, Sanders isn't that wealthy, for someone who's been in politics for decades, is famous, and compared to many others in Congress. I think the criticism of the pics has taken away from the invalid premises of the article itself.

[FreeBe]

102. Money does not grow on trees, is what I got from the money tree.

The is all I get from money tree.

[Honeycombe8]

108. Fair enough. What does that have to do with the article, though?

The reason for the pic is the article, of course. As is the pic of him holding houses.

[FreeBe]

113. Campaign of 2016 had money growing on trees for Sanders.

And gaining another house. This feels to me like Kelly Anne the other day going after Pelosi, stating Pelosi was being sexist because she would not have the conversation with Kelly Anne.

Is Kelly Anne a woman? Yes. Did Pelosi refuse to have a conversation with her because she was not at Pelosi's level? Yes. Doesn't mean Pelosi was a sexist but that she was not gonna get into the gutter with Kelly Anne. But we could throw out all the tropes just like this one.

The story is Sanders new wealth resulting from the campaign of 2016 and his five decades attacking the very millionaire and billionaire he became. Because he is Jewish does not mean we have to stay away from a conversation about wealth.

[Vidal]

110. Maybe the real issue is censorship

I'm finding that many people on all sides of the spectrum want to limit the expression of others.

Many people seem to want to tell POLITICO what kind of article they can write, or what kind of images they can attach to their tweets and articles.

Which seems like censorship to me. Just sayin'

[Celerity]

124. BULLSHIT

The ADL indirectly called your OP out as false and you have sadz and feel the need to passive-aggressively self-kick by replying to your own OP.