Interesting rebuttal to Krugman's NYT article: Sanders over the Edge

[emsimon33]

Here is the Krugman opinion piece:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/08/opinion/sanders-over-the-edge.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0

Here is my friend's rebuttal on Facebook:
"The actual sequence of events:
1) In early debates Sanders explicitly dismissed issues like Benghazi and Clinton's email server. Sanders said that Clinton was absolutely preferable to any Republican candidate. Implicitly and explicitly, Sanders asserted Clinton's qualification to be President.
2) On Scarborough's "Morning Joe" show, Clinton was asked three questions that spoke to Sanders' qualifications to be President. Each time, Little Miss "Obama is not a Muslim . . . as far as I know" failed to say, implicitly or explicitly, that Sanders was qualified to be President. She said Sanders didn't seem to do his homework, like he's some schoolboy.
3) Sanders responded to Clinton's "Morning Joe" performance by calling her on exactly the issues he has been running on for the entire campaign (and his entire career), which went no further (and not over any edge) than his campaign has ever done.
4) Clinton's campaign cries foul, because apparently Sanders is not allowed to do what Clinton does. The Clinton campaign cries "sexism" (Is calling Trump unqualified "sexist" as well? Trump is not a woman. As far as I know.).
Essentially, Sanders has not only been running on legitimate issues, but has asserted that Clinton's governing experience and expertise qualify her to be President. Sanders has called Clinton on her record, not her intelligence, not her work ethic, not her managerial skills.
Sanders is not making anything up. Clinton and her surrogates feel free to do so."

If every time Hillary is called out, she or her surrogates scream: "Sexism, misogyny, our first woman president, Democrats can't criticize Democrats, etc. ," it will be a very long 4 to 8 years! It's her record. She needs to own it, not try to revise it, lie about it, or call "unfair" when it is mentioned.

[Jim Lane]

1. K&R (n/t)

[Qutzupalotl]

2. Ironic and outrageous for her to claim Sanders didn't do his homework

when she herself admitted to not having read the Iraq intelligence estimate before giving Bush the green light to invade.

[Raster]

3. She didn't need to read the Iraq intelligence estimate. She already knew or had a very...

...good idea of the information it contained. Her husband receives DAILY CIA briefings (every ex-POTUS is entitled to such), and would have doubtless discussed said information with his "better half." Hillary Clinton made a calculated decision to vote for the illegal Iraq invasion based on how it would benefit HER. Not the country. Her. As she ALWAYS DOES.