Sanders is more in line with the democratic party than people give him credit for.

[NCTraveler]

He has spent decades working with the party to his political benefit. Supporting democrats over independents, accepting money from democrats in support, apparently including money from hillpac, and working from within the party instead of outside of the party. He is a smart and shrewd politician. He has done all of this while maintaining his "outsiders" image. He knows the anger of the "outsider" crowd is his base. They are the most motivated for him. They are his ground game. He has spent decades keeping that image alive to those people, all while working extremely close with democrats and working to spoil outsider movements against the party. They are his bread and butter an Sanders works to keep them on his side. That doesn't simply tell his story. Politicians cater to their base during elections. It's nothing new.

I thought this was an excellent read. I know many don't like the source. With the support here of so many right wing hit pieces I figure a voice from the left should be acceptable.

But in running for the Democratic presidential nomination as the liberal outsider with almost no chance of winning, Sanders isn't very "bold"--no more so than the fizzled campaigns of Dennis Kucinich in past presidential election years. And by steering liberal and left supporters into a Democratic Party whose policies and politics he claims to disagree with, Sanders--no matter how critical he might be of Hillary Clinton--is acting as the opposite of an "alternative."
snip
Once ensconced in Washington as a member of the House and Senate, he abandoned his principled opposition to the two-party system. As Vermont Democrat Howard Dean--a former candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination himself--stated, "He is basically a liberal Democrat, and he is a Democrat at that--he runs as an Independent because he doesn't like the structure and money that gets involved...The bottom line is that Bernie Sanders votes with the Democrats 98 percent of the time."
snip
And the Democrats have rewarded Sanders. They instructed their Vermont candidates not to oppose him and sent corporate lackeys like Sens. Charles Schumer and Barbara Boxer to campaign for him. Even worse, Sanders accepted a $10,000 donation from Hillary Clinton's Hillpac back in 2006, during his first run for Senate.
snip
His foreign policy positions are to the right of many liberal Democrats. Sanders voted in favor of George W. Bush's original Authorization for Use of Military Force resolution that gave the administration a green light to launch the war on Afghanistan. While he did vote against Bush's invasion of Iraq, he repeatedly supported funding resolutions for both U.S. occupations. He is also a Zionist who supports Israel consistently, even after its recent escalations of the slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza.

Read more at: http://socialistworker.org/2015/05/05/problem-bernie-sanders

It is dated May 2015.

[djean111]

1. Awwww, another hit piece on Bernie - because he won't run as a third party.

We need to win the new left born out of Occupy, public-sector union struggles and the Black Lives Matter movement to breaking with the Democratic Party and building an electoral alternative as a complement to struggle from below. Bernie Sanders' campaign inside the Democratic Party is an obstacle to that project.

Yes, we do need to either fix the Democratic Party, have it actually stand for its platform - or have a new viable alternative. These people are pissy because he won't run from their Socialist Party standpoint.
The whole list of smears is hilariously familiar - yeah, Hillary shilled the Iraq war for Bush - but that dang Bernie voted to feed and clothe and arm the boys who got sent over there by Hilary and Bush.

Another day, another (ineffective, really) smear.

[NCTraveler]

2. I'm missing the smear.

He has decades long history of working within the party. There is a lot of info in that article. Very good info that shows Sanders working within the party, not outside of the party. Hard to discuss things when any perceived negative comment is simply dismissed as a "hit piece." Yes, socialists wish he hadn't joined forces with the democratic party decades ago. That is not surprising nor is it a hit as your are promoting in an effort to dismiss. They showed his insider credentials very well. Not only do I think it isn't a hit piece, I think it is very positive for Sanders. There are a couple of small shots at Sanders in the article. As a supporter of the democratic party, I find the shots to be positive for him. The only way to not view them that way, would be if one were pissed he is so closely aligned with the party. That is the base he has catered to keep angry while working from within himself. Very interesting dichotomy. He knows how to tap into the anger yet keep them at bay while he works from within. Brilliant political move really. One most can't keep going for decades.

[Bluenorthwest]

9. It's a hit piece. In the author's view, Bernie being a Democrat is not a good thing.

Note that the author calls Barbara Boxer, a Democrat elected by the voters in California for many years, a 'corporate lackey', this means a personal servant, a footman. Even if you despise Boxer, that sort of verbiage is filled with contempt for the voters who elect her. The author can't say 'mainstream Democrat' or 'Party loyalists' or even 'tepid moderates' but has to say she's is a servant to corporations. Because the people are idiots, fools and those stupid voters need sages such as the author to inform them of the truth. In fact, I hear a whistle appropriate for calling dogs in that term. Chuck and Barb and Bernie, not exactly Methodists.
The shots are at the entire Democratic Party, and at Sanders for taking part in and helping to build the Democratic Party.

[NCTraveler]

12. "Bernie being a Democrat is not a good thing."

In my view, it is a very good thing. They did a good job drawing that distinction. That might be why I don't view it as a hit piece. I'm not offended he has a decades long track record of working within the party. I don't view the democratic party as they do. Seems others do and are upset he has been working from within for decades.

[djean111]

17. We are getting the Bernie voted to fund the war crap from the Hillary folks.

Yes, I think he has been brilliant, but I feel this pieces, and pieces like it will be cherry-picked.
They are mad because Bernie is working as a Democrat, the Hillary folks faux-complain that he is not a Democrat.

[NCTraveler]

18. I do get your point here and am not dismissing it.

I think their points need to be countered. He simply has decades showing he works from within. I also think the funding part is acceptable for debate. If I were in Sanders corner, I would simply reply "how did he vote on the IWR, someone has to support the troops after giving Bush authorization to send thousands to their death." Once again, I find that to be acceptable debate.

[djean111]

20. I agree with that. It just gets tiresome.

[FSogol]

3. Why don't those socialist guys just admit they are nothing more than malcontents and that

there is no candidate, past, present, or future, that will meet their lofty goals/ principles. If they can't get behind a Sanders candidacy, they really aren't to be taken seriously. They should take up something constructive such gardening, Pilates, or fantasy golf and leave politics to more level-headed folks.

[TM99]

4. I get a real chuckle

noticing that the only time I used to see Socialist Work articles was when they showed up in the Socialism group.

Now, they appear here in GD-P whenever they want to attack Sanders again for not being fringe, leftist, or socialist enough. Yet, the New Dem coalition will bleat on about Sanders being too far to the left, way too socialist, and definitely the fringe candidate.

The sad truth is that Sanders' positions and policies are what the Democratic party used to be about before Reagan and the Bushes pushed the GOP so far to the right that no one noticed that Clinton and now Obama have pushed the Democratic party equally rightwards.

But yes, yet again, this is another tiresome smear piece to chum the waters. I am sure the Clinton sharks will be here shortly as they love the smell of blood.

[Armstead]

6. Bingo -- You get the prize

"The sad truth is that Sanders' positions and policies are what the Democratic party used to be about before Reagan and the Bushes pushed the GOP so far to the right that no one noticed that Clinton and now Obama have pushed the Democratic party equally rightwards."

For many of us THAT IS THE WHOLE F'IN POINT!

[NCTraveler]

7. If one is a democrat and supports the party.....

This is in no way a smear on Sanders. It looks very good for him. I'm missing the smear. He has been working within the party for decades, and this outlines many of his political moves showing just that. With the current conversation going on, it is well worth the read.

One thing I promise, every comment calling this a smear will be from people who do not support the party as Sanders has spent decades doing. I actually address how good he is at keeping those people on his side in my op. He makes sure to continue to tap into their anger all while supporting the party they despise.

I posted this more for the Hillary crowd who are really going after him for his lack of party support. Yet he has been working within the party for decades. I know that fact won't be popular with the "outsider" crowd. He has been brilliant at playing them and keeping them on his side, as he works from within, for decades.

Your opposition to the link is noted. You won't be the only one who doesn't appreciate it.

[TM99]

11. I am sorry if I implied that you were smearing him.

I have seen the Socialist Workers posts used that way, and you are right, those who will come here and use this as a smear are very well known.

He is the only voice right of the pre-New Dem take over. I agree with all reasons why he has remained an independent AND still worked within the two party system by caucusing with the Dems.

[NCTraveler]

14. I really think there was some good insight in the article...

that would put to rest many of the current threads being promoted by Hillary supporters. Sanders is not a socialist, and has often worked within the party to their(socialists) chagrin, so I wouldn't expect the socialistworker to speak very glowing of him. Yet when I read it, I saw a lot of positive information that goes completely against the current rhetoric being used by some Hillary supporters. Sanders record is that of excellent support. He also often brings us left. Something I can get behind at every point. His voting record shows he is more aligned with the democrat party as a whole than a handful of other sitting democrats. That says something to me. It should say something to the people vilifying him incorrectly as being opposed to the party.

You will also find recent posts of mine standing up for many people who write for or are disseminated by counterpunch. If it is a view from the left, I think it should be welcome here for discussion. I have taken issue with some articles being disseminated by the right.

[RiverLover]

13. Exactly. His positions are the Democratic Party positions before "centrism" moved in & they're the

IDEAL of what the party should be today if we hadn't sold out after Reagan.

[Cal33]

5. Sanders is more in line with the Party of FDR, Truman and Kennedy than some of the present-day

Establishment Democrats are. That's for sure!

[NCTraveler]

8. No doubt about that. Fully agree.

Last edited Tue Aug 4, 2015, 10:45 AM - Edit history (1)

One of the reasons I am extremely happy to see him start to more publicly embrace the party, instead of doing it behind the scenes.

I do think those you mention would be excoriated on du today.

[Cal33]

22. "I do think those you mention would be excoriated on du today." Yes, I agree. The Dem. Party

as a whole has been moved quite a bit to the right, as has been noted in some posts above. I'd
like to see the direction reversed to its former state, and Bernie is the one who will do it best.
With Elizabeth in the Senate, they'll be making quite a team. I'm hoping that in 2018 the two
of them will be able to convince enough Americans to vote for more Democratic representatives
in the House, too. Wouldn't that be the day!!!

Right now the Republicans have dragged us down into the cesspool. We are living in a shit-house.
Thanks to the corporate execs' limitless greed for money and power.

[MineralMan]

19. I think you may not remember FDR, Truman and JFK all that well.

All did some excellent things. All did some less than ideal things.

FDR - imprisoned thousands of Japanese-Americans and started the development of nuclear weapons.
Truman - The only President to use nuclear weapons against a civilian population.
JFK - Took the first steps to put Americans at war in Vietnam.

Selective memory is, well, selective.

[Cal33]

21. I remember quite well the events you mentioned. I didn't say these

Last edited Tue Aug 4, 2015, 02:19 PM - Edit history (2)

presidents were perfect. The good they had done was far and away beyond the wrongs
they had committed.

FDR did wrest away power from the Republicans who were interested in maintaining money
and power in the hands of the few rich, and spread it more equally among the citizens of the
entire nation. The Republicans of that time brought about the Great Depression of the 1930s,
which followed the stock market crash of 1929, just as the present-day Republicans brought
about the financial collapse of 2008, from which we have not yet recovered.

Even today many people don't yet know how close we were to World War 3 in the early 1960s,
when JFK fought against the Republican militarists, who wanted war with the USSR.

These are only 2 examples, but they are biggies.

[Armstead]

10. Moderate Radicals Unite

I've realized over time that I'm a Radical Moderate or (Moderate Radical).

Or somewhere between a "purist" and a "pragmatist."

I agree in theory with Socialism, but I'm not opposed to Capitalism in theory. I'm cynical enough to believe that both ideologies are prone to abuse and excess, so they need to be a check and balance. I'm idealistic enough to believe that both have something to offfer, and that a mix of both is a good thing.

In other words, I believe in a lot of the traditional values of Mainstream Liberalism.

To some, in the off-kilter political system of today, that makes me a fringe radical leftist. I havta admit that the so-called centrism of the modern Democratic Party (Aka Clintonsm) is just Corporate Conservatism in a kinder and gentler and somewhat more socially enlightened package.

But when I see "all-or-nothing" ideologues of the left, I also feel frustrated. A viable truly liberal/progressive third (or fourth on the right) party is a worthy goal. I'd prefer to see a Parliamentary system where the mainstream parties have to bargain with the principled alternative. But that's not going to happen anytime in the foreseable future.

Ultimately life does have to be about compromise.

So basically, that article reinforces my own belief that Bernie has got it right. A pragmatic idealist. I'm all for that.

[NCTraveler]

15. Thank you for that reply.

My thoughts were similar from reading the article. Then again, I read who was writing it before reading it. Something very important in order to put it in perspective as you have.

[Vattel]

16. well, there is the argument that the more extreme purist types on the left are useful

because they make the less extreme and more pragmatic leftists seem more moderate and more respectable.