2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie Sanders Voted Against the FIRST GULF WAR. His Words That Day Were Prescient!
When Bush Sr and Cheney were preparing to go to war with Saddam Hussein claiming to be protecting Kuwait from an unlawful invasion (they always have their excuses don't they as if that should be any of OUR business) there WAS opposition to military action, though you might not have known it at the time.
Many pleaded for a Diplomatic Solution which fell on deaf ears.
When they finally went to Congress to get Autorization, one day after the war began, for their ill-conceived adventure Bernie Sanders stood alone in an empty chamber delivering the speech ALL democrats should have delivered!
Here are some of Bernie Sanders words which accurately predicted the tragic outcome of that 'good war', which we were told was supported by 90% of Americans. It took courage back then to do what Bernie did but he wasn't going to allow politics to stop him from doing what was right:
Bernie Sanders Predicted Invading Iraq Would Cause 'More Wars for Years to Come' -- in 1991
"We should make no mistake about it, today is a tragic day for humanity, for the people of Iraq, for the people of the United States, and for the United Nations as an institution. It is also a tragic day for the future of our planet and for the children, 30,000 of whom in the Third World will starve to death today as we spend billions to wage this war and 25 percent of whom in our own country live in poverty in our country because we apparently lack the funds to provide them with a minimal standard of living. ...
"Despite the fact that we are now aligned with such Middle Eastern dictatorships such as Syria, a terrorist dictatorship, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, feudalistic dictatorships, and Egypt, a one-party state that receives seven billion dollars in debt forgiveness to wage this war with us, I believe that in the long run, the action unleashed last night will go strongly against our interests in the Middle East. Clearly the United States and allies will win this war, but the death and destruction caused, will in my opinion, not be forgotten by the poor people of the Third World and the people of the Middle East in particular. ...
"I fear that one day we will regret that decision and that we are in fact laying the ground work for more and more wars for years to come."
Regardless of the way the political wind was blowing, Sanders, who was a new Representative at the time stood against that tide, not worried about his political career and did the right thing, one of just a very few with the courage to do so.
THIS is the kind of leader we need. Someone who gets it RIGHT THE FIRST TIME and doesn't need to apologize after the horse has left the barn, or when the tide turns again.
He went on to vote against the Second Iraq Invasion, consistent as always, standing by his principles and GOOD JUDGEMENT regardless of the possible political fallout.
You can watch his entire speech here:
Right about our disastrous and tragic wars.
Right when he predicted the Wall St collapse.
Right about Civil Rights for all Americans way before it was politically safe to do so.
This country so badly needs a leader who has both the foresight and good judgement that Sen. Sanders clearly has.
And later, his speech demanding an end to the war to stop the bloodshed and violence:
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Quelle surprise.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)to defend. All you have to do is post his record.
It's been a long time since I could do that.
Rove tactic: 'Don't attack your opponent on his/her weaknesses. Attack them on their strengths'
The problem now is we know that old tactic. So far every such attempt only caused more support for Bernie Sanders as people are sick and tired of having the candidates THEY want smeared and attacked paid for by Corporate money.
I wonder how many Think Tanks they are paying millions of dollars to try to stop Bernie right now.
The three surrogates with their 'socialist' attempt, only had it backfire on them as these old Think Tanks appear to be way out of touch with the times we now live in.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)They will try to overwhelm with all the hit pieces. They even have a website dedicated to "correcting the record" if anyone tries to hit her, a super pac that is skirting the rules of campaign coordination because it is not on traditional media. That means that is what they in fact intend to do.
I expect many, many more of these hit pieces. I will follow your lead:
Step 1: Do not respond or kick thread. Let it sink.
Step 2: Post facts and record
That's all you have to do. They are hoping all the uninformed voters will take the bait, and believe me, they will. The red baiting is their ace in the hole, but they are trying to put up everything and see what sticks right now. The gun nut campaign, coordinated with the O'Malley super pac is the one they are trying now. When they find a good one, all that campaign cash from those $2700 a plate dinners will be mobilized. But it seems that she wants to appear to be above the fray, so it will be attacks from other quarters and then she has an alibi.
It just actually shows that she has no intention of running on her record. She is in fact running from it.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)is going to work when people SEE THE RECORD. I don't know why anyone goes into those threads, they are intended to get people caught up in trivia so they are not discussion the issues.
The NEVER talk about their candidate, on the issues, why is that? The seem more interested in talking about Bernie.
I LOVE talking about MY CANDIDATE ON THE ISSUES.
Because I can, because his record is almost perfect on every single issue over the past several decades and there is no smear on his record that cannot be an opportunity to focus on the ISSUES as Bernie wants to do.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)That is exactly right. I will try to follow the two step process. I think it is the only way to go. And the interesting thing is whenever you post the real record, it goes to the top of the greatest page (which means anyone poking around DU will see it). So it does always backfire in the case of DU. And yes, they should start talking up their candidate and the issues instead of taking pot shots and posting memes only. It would make the board much better and cut down on the infighting if everyone posted threads advocating positions.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)I think I found it!
So the attack is now that Bernie is too right wing for Hillary supporters? I'm sooooo confused. When will they make up their minds???
EDITED
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)You're crackin me up! Careful now, some heads are set to esplode!
WDIM
(1,662 posts).
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Bernie otoh, just votes for what is right. That is why he is the right candidate now after decades of WRONG decisions that have cost this and other countries so much.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)"I fear that one day we will regret that decision and that we are in fact laying the ground work for more and more wars for years to come."
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)demonstrates and the courage to stand up when it is necessary.
We do not need leaders who have to evolve on every major issue. That is fine for ordinary people, but NOT for leaders. Look at the consquences of having to wait for many of our Dems to evolve on these wars. If only they had had the good judgement and the courage to support those few who did. What a different world it might be now.
We HAVE to elect people, for President and Congress who have these qualities we can't wait any longer for our leaders to take years to evolve.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)I would say that with the exception of women's issues, on which Clinton has always been a leader and did focus on it at state, the major issues have required an evolution. That should make anyone pause.
Iraq War (military aggression in general as she is now going after Iran)
Marriage Equality
Immigration
Mass Incarceration and the War on Drugs
Trade Agreements
I am sure there are some that I am missing, but these are the CENTRAL issues of the 2016 election and she has been on the wrong side of EVERY SINGLE ONE. That right there is the most important argument to make. All else is theatre.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)by World Organizations I do not believe you can possibly support War and claim to support women.
Eg, in Iraq, women had the same equal rights in the workplace as men. Free education which produced women doctors, lawyers, teachers who were paid the same as men.
NOW, women in that country have been returned to the dark ages as our invasion unleashed fundamentalist control of the country and once independent and professional women, any who have not ended up in refugee camps for the past decade, cannot even go out alone without a man.
Afghanistan is another example of how women there who once enjoyed freedom to be doctors lawyers, wear western clothes etc, lost ALL Rights as HUMAN BEINGS after the two super powers decided to use their country as a chess board.
With that in mind, assuming women's rights are not just for American women, who are also sorely lacking in that department re poverty, war where we sending them off to die in these imperial wars and Rape is rampant in our military with little recourse for female soldiers, I cannot support anyone who supports these egregious foreign policies that have destroyed women's rights in every country we invade.
Libya is another. I could go on and on as I have been following women and the terrible effects our wars have had on them for years.
Another reason I cannot support Hillary. Bernie otoh, is aware of all these things.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)That really makes me think. I hope a lot of people read what you wrote and think about it too.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)Have far more in common with radical Islam than they have differences.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as it were. As evidenced by the hand holding and gentle kisses I see them receiving on the grounds of the capital my forefathers fought and died for.
To them, one giant Dubai would be a great thing. One giant "family", as it were.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)enacted. One example is the Telecommunications Act 1996, which has had terrible results.
She could continue to support it, ignore it, but these kinds of issues should be confronted and any change
would alter/damage his legacy...conflict of interest.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)She runs in the circles of the masters of the universe, and they are elitists to their very core. She is throwing some candy to the base but her real point of view is that the proles do not know how to govern and therefore just need to be placated, not actually listened to. Even on her "Listening Tour" she has been caught meeting with staffers instead of real people. That tells you how much she cares about what the average voter has to say.
She has shown that she will vote whichever way the polls go, including for the IWR. But the ultimate goal of any centrist is to shovel money up to the top. Obama's presidency has been exactly that. A little present or two on some social issues, but always siding with bankers and corporations when it comes to money. The huge push for the TPP. The Clinton presidency would look exactly the same way. Anyone who thinks any differently is lying to themselves.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)which include her husbands, she won't need to answer. Whether one trusts her to follow through
is different in my mind. Get her on the record to either support them or not.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)she personally campaigned for, like the crime bill, then you will be called a sexist. She can claim credit for the good stuff but doesn't need to take responsibility for the bad stuff. Win win.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)more than fair questions. If she does not agree there has been harm she needs to say so,
that would tell me a great deal as well. So yes, if she takes on the job of president she
must consider poor policies from prior administrations.
There is ample evidence of harm from Glass-Stegall to the telecom act to name just two.
How to get those questions asked directly may be a real problem.
I want to hear from Sanders on issues I disagree with too.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Her two proposals were
- Body cameras on cops
- Community policing programs
- Some talk of sentencing changes
Nowhere in the speech did she acknowledge the Crime Bill that passed during Bill's tenure. Nowhere did she admit that she personally campaigned for Three Strikes laws. She acted as she has been since she has announced, as a Champion! of the solution for the problem which she at one time supported. It would be funny if it weren't so tragic.
http://www.vox.com/2015/4/29/8514831/hillary-clinton-criminal-justice-transcript
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Why were you campaigning for it in the first place. These are all fair questions, getting her to be
asked those questions directly will take some effort.
The irony of the telecommunications act is that the msm which is heavily relied upon would have to then admit they're
part of the problem..makes me very upset because they don't talk about it.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)The fact that people think that's ok astounds me.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)through the press, and asked her to join him?
I hope to see more of that, it may be the only way on other issues too.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)who then voted for it. Sigh.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)questions. Why should Americans trust an individual that wants to be president but
won't answer?
People can decide why that is when she leaves them no alternative.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)the people who have been deceived so often now, the KNOW when it's happening. I saw the reaction to that 'clever' statement. People knew the fix was in.
The people were right. They should stop trying to deceive the people. Just tell the truth. But it does show that Bernie is right, the people do still have some power left or they wouldn't bother trying to hide so much from us.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)unjust, unconstitutional piece of legislation that I am shocked to know that it was Clinton who signed it.
It went without much notice but it was a huge victory for Civil Rights activists and fair judges who for years have tried to have it overturned.
Again, have those who supported it evolved now, far, far too late for all the lives that were ruined.
It probably did help fill up the prisons providing bodies for the Prison Industrial Complex, a brutal for profit system which in so many ways is enslaving millions of American citizens who never should have been in jail.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Bill Clinton concedes role in mass incarceration
http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/06/politics/bill-clinton-crime-prisons-hillary-clinton/
But Hillary Clinton personally campaigned for Three Strikes, so she can't say this was just her husband's policy. This is a direct quote from 1994. They say that "tough on crime" appeals to young white mothers and is used to attract that vote.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)unconstitutional. Totally. Each crime should be judged on its merit, to overturn that principle was a slap in the face to our judicial system. I'm less and less impressed with lawyers in this country frankly. Either there is something wrong with our law schools or the Constitution itself is under attack on purpose.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)I think her speech was before the ruling. Our judicial system is totally messed up because of the war on drugs. She did acknowledge that but didn't give much in terms of specifics on how to fix it.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)And we need a record to back up anything any candidate now says while they are campaigning.
The ONLY candidate who has that record is Bernie Sanders.
I have said this many times, and will keep on saying it, it is fine to evolve on issues if you are not in a position of power where good judgement and foresight and the courage to implement those qualities at critical times, see Iraq eg, but when you are asking us to give you the most important job in the country where being able to foresee the results of a decision is extremely important, you don't have that luxury, and most importantly WE don't have that luxury.
All these candidates are asking for a job. Like any job, we have to look at their work experience, how they handled important decisions etc.
Hillary may evolve now on some issues, but if her record shows she made wrong decisions at critical times and took years to acknowledge how wrong those decisions were, while we have another applicant whose record is almost perfect on decision making, then there really is no other choice.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)I'm not confident our debates will be enough to accomplish that.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)asking him questions on the issues. Politicians have to respect the fact that the people will be using the press to inform them on where they stand, so they need to use it themselves to make the press properly represents their views.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)asked Clinton to speak out about TPP. I imagine he'll be doing much more of that. The types of
questions asked on the debate level can be limiting, thus my concern.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Kosovo.
I fail to understand the strategy, the man's record is documented, he has tried to
work within the system as he learned in Vermont the alternative led to little
accomplishments.
The question people should consider is why is this man asking for a political
revolution at this point in time. Should be fairly easy to discern that he is
explaining why the system does not work..plutocracies are not democracies.
Thank you sabrina for the OP.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Last edited Mon Jul 6, 2015, 01:14 AM - Edit history (1)
with the facts. It's so easy to do. I do not go into threads that try to distort the record, I make sure though whenever I see the latest attempts, to correct the record where people can judge for themselves.
I don't get it either, this attempt to deceive on something that is so easily countered.
I do believe it is the intention to get people into those threads and distract from the issues.
So rather than bother with that nonsense, just post the truth.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)interviewer was trying to get them to comment on another candidate: 'I'm not here to talk about HIM, you will have to ask HIM that question'! It was hilarious, I guess they are all watching him now to see what the magic is that is bringing out the crowds and the donations from increasing numbers of voters.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)DU could certainly use some of his lessons at the moment.
mopinko
(70,275 posts)and the socialists hate him for it, must to my surprise.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)Beautiful.
PatrickforO
(14,600 posts)What he said in this speech was right on the money.
historylovr
(1,557 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)AwakeAtLast
(14,134 posts)K & R!
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)MisterP
(23,730 posts)Bonobo
(29,257 posts)There simply is nothing they can say.
kath
(10,565 posts)NanceGreggs
(27,820 posts)... at the idea that on top of all of his other endless virtues, Bernie is also "prescient".
TM99
(8,352 posts)Nitpick a word that is actually accurate instead of addressing the meat of the OP.
He was right. He has been right on quite a few issues that are now at the forefront of our current primary campaign. He has not had to evolve. He is showing and has shown leadership skills and that upsets the Clinton supporters who must be content with a follower or opportunitist, take your pick.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)were prescient, who knew that this would cause so much death and destruction, regardless of the lies that our 'smart bombs' were capable of going down chimneys and hitting ONLY the bad guys, they CAN'T laugh.
Thanks for your comment. I remember Byrd's words when he too was prescient regarding the next and predictable war considering the criminals who were running things then 'I weep for my country' but he too thought about and mentioned the victims in Iraq who would die though even those of us who most opposed these wars could not have imagined the brutality and the war crimes our own country commit.
No one who cares about human beings is laughing. But I'm sure there are plenty who do, which is why we are where we are.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)In fact, he was prescient in this case, or rather it would be more accurate to say that he showed wisdom.
In either case, the lack of the same on the part of Hillary is rather an ugly and festering wound on her suitability to be POTUS.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)beemer27
(463 posts)Had we not invaded Iraq, there would be no Isis. There would have been no American troops killed in those pointless wars, and the national debt would not be where it is now. I would love to see a man this wise in the White House. He will not be able to cure all that is wrong in Washington, but he will be able to make some difference. Perhaps the government will consider the effects of it's decisions on all the people instead of doing everything just for business and wall street.
stonecutter357
(12,698 posts)lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)Indepatriot
(1,253 posts)hootinholler
(26,449 posts)But this thread isn't about Bernie's positions on reasonable gun control which aligns with every liberal gun owner's views that I know.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)since most of it is the same old negative garbage people are so sick of, we don't have to worry about it other than show people what OTHER politicians are doing while Bernie is not engaging in those nasty tactics but continues to talk about the issues people care about.
And yes, the gun thing isn't going to help them at all, I don't know who their target audience is, but as you say, Dems own guns too and Bernie's position on guns is mainstream and is going to HELP him rather than hurt him.
malthaussen
(17,219 posts)As a general principle, I do think aggression should be discouraged, especially against countries with whom we are more-or-less friendly. That the same can be applied to our own aggression is an unfortunate detail.
There was, after all, no doubt or propaganda about the fact that Iraq did invade Kuwait, overtly and with malice aforethought. (Whether or not the attack was justified -- or justifiable -- is a separate issue)
As for response leading to chaos, I think the area has been in chaos for quite some time, and if it can be said our actions haven't helped any, I wonder how much our actions have really added to the problem. I think, for example, that ISIS would be wiping the floor with the Iraqi army even if they didn't have abandoned US equipment to use. Revolutions tend to get a lot of equipment from the national army to begin with. Just look at, eg, Cuba and Vietnam.
-- Mal
JEB
(4,748 posts)d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)Someone who doesn't talk out of both sides of his ass.