Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 03:36 PM Jun 2018

For second year, Sanders earns more than $1M

https://vtdigger.org/2018/06/22/second-year-sanders-earns-1m/

For the second year in a row, Sen. Bernie Sanders’ income topped six figures.

A recent financial disclosure report shows the junior Vermont senator made nearly $1.06 million in 2017. Most of his income — $885,767 — came from advances and royalties, according to the report filed in May.

Sanders earned $174,000 for his service in the Senate.

The senator hit the $1 million mark for the first time in 2016. Most of his income came from a book deal “Our Revolution,” which came out after his failed bid for the Democratic nomination for president.

Sanders, an independent, historically has been among the least wealthy members of Congress. In 2014, for example, he earned little more than his congressional salary and had $330,000 in assets.

The 2016 presidential bid catapulted him to national prominence and paved the way for lucrative public speaking and publishing opportunities.


Sid
325 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
For second year, Sanders earns more than $1M (Original Post) SidDithers Jun 2018 OP
Wait... I thought if you accepted fees or royalties, that made you the devil!... Squinch Jun 2018 #1
No True Democrat, and all that crap. But wait, Bernie is an Independent! Besides... Hekate Jun 2018 #6
+1! eom BlueMTexpat Jun 2018 #152
Boom! NurseJackie Jun 2018 #211
I oppose bashing our leading political leaders Tom Rinaldo Jun 2018 #12
Well, it's understandable. A man's got to work harder since his... brush Jun 2018 #278
People most have liked his book and bought it. Sophia4 Jun 2018 #2
I recall some here denigrating HRC for making money on her book mcar Jun 2018 #9
So they were wrong, right? Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #14
Inconsistent, at least mcar Jun 2018 #20
Should Clinton have donated her royalties? Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #21
Double standards are issue. Attacking Clinton over things R B Garr Jun 2018 #22
I'm not aware that sanders attacked Clinton for Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #23
I bet you know exactly what he attacked Hillary about. Isn't this about R B Garr Jun 2018 #45
So as expected you cannot substantiate Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #159
It is you who is not substantianting your claim. R B Garr Jun 2018 #175
Your claim: Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #176
See my post 66 from yesterday. You keep pretending that there was R B Garr Jun 2018 #178
So you agree that Sanders did not attack Clinton over book royalties. Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #180
Do you have any links to Bernie's rallies about book royalties? R B Garr Jun 2018 #181
No that is why I asked. You made a specific claim. Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #182
No, YOU made a specific claim. Your claim is that unless Bernie uttered R B Garr Jun 2018 #183
You are correct. The only way your statement about Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #191
Wrong. The only way your distraction makes sense is if Sanders message R B Garr Jun 2018 #192
I'd love to see some information about the charitable giving lapucelle Jun 2018 #214
Yes, great question. Tax returns are a good source for R B Garr Jun 2018 #237
And... boom! NurseJackie Jun 2018 #275
You certainly dig in on the irrelevant LanternWaste Jun 2018 #282
Did anyone say he did? George II Jun 2018 #133
Yes the person I responded to. Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #157
I'm guessing you're talking about RB Garr? I don't see that he/she said that. George II Jun 2018 #163
Bernie attacked HRC for not donating book money? I must have missed that. Got a link? Hassin Bin Sober Jun 2018 #25
I bet you didn't miss a thing he attacked her about. You seem to R B Garr Jun 2018 #44
I'm just gonna say hi. pangaia Jun 2018 #84
That's interesting. George II Jun 2018 #121
Does that signature animated gif imply violence against women? George II Jun 2018 #134
So, there's this author, Mary Shelley. progressoid Jun 2018 #212
I see a man throwing a woman into a lake. I don't need google to see that. George II Jun 2018 #213
It's not a woman... it's a little girl kdmorris Jun 2018 #219
A little girl, even worse. George II Jun 2018 #220
You aren't familiar with the concept of playing with children, I see kdmorris Jun 2018 #221
It's not "playing with children". You may want to find that scene and watch it .... George II Jun 2018 #238
This sheshe2 Jun 2018 #244
How does the game end? N/T lapucelle Jun 2018 #241
"A man" ??? Hassin Bin Sober Jun 2018 #223
I really don't care - violence against women and or girls, whether fictional or not, is disgusting. George II Jun 2018 #224
While it seems a noble sentiment... tonedevil Jun 2018 #226
No it's not based on ignorance, it's based on the portrayal of violence. Period. I wouldn't think... George II Jun 2018 #233
That episode does not appear in the novel, lapucelle Jun 2018 #246
Frankenstein is a human character in a gothic novel. lapucelle Jun 2018 #234
Frankenstein is a man, but he's not in your gif. lapucelle Jun 2018 #242
The episode of the mute and inarticulate monster hurling lapucelle Jun 2018 #232
Definetely.. disillusioned73 Jun 2018 #277
Well, lets see who has donated more to charity.... nt Tavarious Jackson Jun 2018 #26
Lets change the subject. Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #27
Is it wrong to imply that people are corrupt because they hold office R B Garr Jun 2018 #46
ooops, I brought up a "subject", it wasn't going the way I expected, so let's "change the subject".. George II Jun 2018 #130
How Can WE? Me. Jun 2018 #30
Bazinga! George II Jun 2018 #122
Is anyone on this thread suggesting that Sanders do so? mcar Jun 2018 #28
Oh my mistake. I thought this was a Bash Bernie Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #31
It is about hypocrisy. You keep changing your tune. nt R B Garr Jun 2018 #47
Yep mcar Jun 2018 #79
She did, LOTS of royalties, millions in fact. George II Jun 2018 #131
They protested at her book signing. Tavarious Jackson Jun 2018 #29
So were they wrong? Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #32
They were hypocrits Tavarious Jackson Jun 2018 #38
So the objection was correct? Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #63
If you paint one person as corrupt because you imply she is profiting R B Garr Jun 2018 #66
Thanks for explaining Double Standards and Hypocrisy Cha Jun 2018 #77
Yeah, this isn't about writing books at all...at least now that R B Garr Jun 2018 #85
Well said mcar Jun 2018 #80
Thanks. Notice how the scope keeps changing with every entry. Soon R B Garr Jun 2018 #82
Oh yes mcar Jun 2018 #83
Of course, but like with so many like-minded people, the idea was to be obstructive and to disrupt stevenleser Jun 2018 #207
+1! eom BlueMTexpat Jun 2018 #153
Why do you keep asking questions? George II Jun 2018 #137
To understand what people are actually saying. Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #199
For the reasons given at the time, yes. George II Jun 2018 #125
Yes, they were wrong when they bashed her book sales. joshcryer Jun 2018 #59
We are making progress. Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #65
Making progress, indeed. Thanks for finally seeing the R B Garr Jun 2018 #68
Hillary Clinton donated royalties of approximately $1M to charity for "It Takes a Village"..... George II Jun 2018 #124
Actually that's not totally true. George II Jun 2018 #120
Right, it's not corruption when popular politicians R B Garr Jun 2018 #284
Depends on who is seeking the politician for speeches, books and other personal appearances Sophia4 Jun 2018 #285
THANKS for stepping right into the exact reason people are calling out Bernie's hypocrisy. R B Garr Jun 2018 #289
The facts speak for themselves. Sophia4 Jun 2018 #293
Back to reality. That's the point. One man's preferred R B Garr Jun 2018 #294
He told us. "Money & Media" looks like he got what he came to the Party for. Wwcd Jun 2018 #3
that's bullshit. . He doesn't condemn millionaires or billionaires simply for being millionaires JCanete Jun 2018 #154
What's up with bernie-the-millionaire's Dark Money Pac? Wwcd Jun 2018 #160
when yhou have so little to work with I guess you'll just keep shouting it I guess. You're still JCanete Jun 2018 #185
lololol, now you are asking R B Garr Jun 2018 #187
heh..wow that was some shitty reading on your part. I said I give a shit JCanete Jun 2018 #188
Naw, you don't get to parse others and not be called on your own contradictions. R B Garr Jun 2018 #189
what did it disclose exactly? I remember when Sanders spoke in favor of that pac, and the JCanete Jun 2018 #193
Of course it undermines his position about PACs, as the Vermont Digger R B Garr Jun 2018 #194
Yes, I've read articles from them, and they are often embarassingly obvious hit-pieces. That doesn't JCanete Jun 2018 #196
Pointing out hypocrisy is the point. If one politician puts himself R B Garr Jun 2018 #197
It's not true that most PACS are dark money organizations. lapucelle Jun 2018 #235
thanks, that's insightful, although I'm still confused about what is and isn't JCanete Jun 2018 #262
In 2014, for example, he earned little more than his congressional salary and had $330,000 in assets Tom Rinaldo Jun 2018 #4
Career politicians will almost always cash out on their way out the door. NCTraveler Jun 2018 #5
Yup... SidDithers Jun 2018 #8
Don't you think he could be a great lobbyist? DURHAM D Jun 2018 #13
Maybe fight for 15 could hire him? Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #24
yeah, right, making money because people bought his book is the same as getting JCanete Jun 2018 #155
You literally just made up your own apples and oranges theory. NCTraveler Jun 2018 #165
I don't see what you're saying here. JCanete Jun 2018 #186
You made up a story in order to claim apples and oranges. NCTraveler Jun 2018 #190
well that's fair. You are simply calling him a career politician trying to cash out on his way out JCanete Jun 2018 #195
Well... Me. Jun 2018 #7
Wow. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #10
Has he been giving speeches at Goldman Sachs or something? Ron Obvious Jun 2018 #11
BERNIE MUST RELEASE THE TRANSCRIPTS OF HIS SECRET GOLDMAN SACHS SPEECHES!! Jim Lane Jun 2018 #15
How about he just releases his taxes first? nt Maven Jun 2018 #16
You can quit with the false drama over transparency. R B Garr Jun 2018 #18
Well, the tax returns he promised would be nice. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #39
Well, Jim. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #101
I will make ONE effort to elaborate Jim Lane Jun 2018 #202
Ha! Of course you have no problem with book royalties now because Sanders earned R B Garr Jun 2018 #203
By saying "now" you imply that I said something different earlier. That implication is a lie. (n/t) Jim Lane Jun 2018 #204
Do I get to say you are lying in your word parsing? Is focusing only R B Garr Jun 2018 #205
Why are you mentioning fictional "secret Goldman Sachs speeches"? Who did that? George II Jun 2018 #129
CRICK-ETS sheshe2 Jun 2018 #136
Every speech he gave, he consistantly campaigned against 'millionaires & billionaires' Wwcd Jun 2018 #17
Bullshit. Hassin Bin Sober Jun 2018 #34
Is he paying his fair share? (n/t) OilemFirchen Jun 2018 #42
Well if he runs again, he will have to release his taxes. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #43
No. He complained about income inequality, i.e., class wars. R B Garr Jun 2018 #48
Ouch sheshe2 Jun 2018 #138
Wow! That is a great Twitter thread. What is glaring at this point is R B Garr Jun 2018 #179
Damn! NurseJackie Jun 2018 #215
Hey! sheshe2 Jun 2018 #227
He consistently campaigned against "the 1%", which are predominantly (but not exclusively).... George II Jun 2018 #139
George, thank you I noticed that too. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #143
Please remove your sig line. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #144
Good lord! That's correct... not funny. NurseJackie Jun 2018 #216
Good thing we have drama over a movie that is 87 years old. Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2018 #286
LOL! NurseJackie Jun 2018 #290
That movie is only 19 years old. Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2018 #291
Don't play me for a fool. I'm smarter than you think I am. NurseJackie Jun 2018 #292
Really, it came out in 1999. Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2018 #296
Sure. Whatev'. NurseJackie Jun 2018 #298
... sheshe2 Jun 2018 #295
No drowning occurs... tonedevil Jun 2018 #230
Frankly I don't care what the story line is. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #231
I'm betting you won't wake up with malaria in the morning. A HERETIC I AM Jun 2018 #248
Nice post Heretic. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #251
Please remove your sig pics. A HERETIC I AM Jun 2018 #255
! progressoid Jun 2018 #257
Those are contemporary dance photos, not ballet. betsuni Jun 2018 #261
This message was self-deleted by its author A HERETIC I AM Jun 2018 #263
Nope, that is not a classical ballet position. betsuni Jun 2018 #264
This message was self-deleted by its author A HERETIC I AM Jun 2018 #266
Hey man, only five positions for feet and arms in ballet. betsuni Jun 2018 #267
... A HERETIC I AM Jun 2018 #268
"Their use is limited to Lifar's choreographies." betsuni Jun 2018 #270
This message was self-deleted by its author A HERETIC I AM Jun 2018 #269
And BTW, I didn't scream at you. A HERETIC I AM Jun 2018 #256
Yes, that "most famous monster movie of all time" is one hour, ten minutes long....a total of.... George II Jun 2018 #253
You're right....1931. My dyslexia kicked in..... A HERETIC I AM Jun 2018 #254
This message was self-deleted by its author betsuni Jun 2018 #258
My response to the self-deleted post above A HERETIC I AM Jun 2018 #260
I deleted my comment because I decided I didn't want to get into a weird back-and-forth. betsuni Jun 2018 #274
By the way, from Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein": betsuni Jun 2018 #280
As I mentioned above, the monster in the movie has such great lines as Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2018 #288
The novel and the movie go for different themes. Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2018 #287
Duh. Thanks for Frankensteiniansplaining it. betsuni Jun 2018 #307
Well, you were trying to conflate the movie with the novel. Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2018 #309
Conflate. LOL. betsuni Jun 2018 #310
Not sure what's funny. Perfect word for what was happening. Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2018 #311
... betsuni Jun 2018 #312
Went to Incredibles 2 yesterday. One of the characters used "conflate." Cuthbert Allgood Jun 2018 #325
A drowning does occur after the Monster hurls the little girl in the water. lapucelle Jun 2018 #300
LOL leftstreet Jun 2018 #41
What really bothers me is that Bernie won't provide a transcript of his book. aikoaiko Jun 2018 #19
"What is he hiding? " sheshe2 Jun 2018 #51
His taxes? Is there anyone still looking for them? aikoaiko Jun 2018 #64
How about the transcripts to his essay? sheshe2 Jun 2018 #67
Yeah, where are they? aikoaiko Jun 2018 #70
You haven't read them? sheshe2 Jun 2018 #103
If you say so. aikoaiko Jun 2018 #107
Let me then put it another way. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #108
Have you read the link in the OP? This Vermont paper wants some answers. R B Garr Jun 2018 #109
Will he bash himself now ? lunasun Jun 2018 #33
No. He will give himself the "tax return" exception. nt Blue_true Jun 2018 #114
K&R ! stonecutter357 Jun 2018 #35
This message was self-deleted by its author AlexSFCA Jun 2018 #36
So who are you saying took bribes from lobbyist? sheshe2 Jun 2018 #69
Good question. That is weird how sinister motives are only implied for some R B Garr Jun 2018 #74
They won't answer. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #105
They never do. It is shoot and scoot with that crowd. Blue_true Jun 2018 #113
Oh. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #116
Self deleted. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #146
What? mcar Jun 2018 #81
"Bribes from lobbyists"? Who, when, how? George II Jun 2018 #119
Who received "bribes from lobbyists"? George II Jun 2018 #127
They deleted. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #147
Running for president has been lucrative for Bernie, but he won't release his tax returns. yardwork Jun 2018 #37
Maybe he can donate the proceeds to that college that Jane bankrupted? Tarheel_Dem Jun 2018 #40
Ouch. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #72
Hey, dear she! Tarheel_Dem Jun 2018 #89
Hey, my dear Tarheel! sheshe2 Jun 2018 #93
WHOA! VTDigger asked about "dark money" among other R B Garr Jun 2018 #49
Very interesting. n/t Tarheel_Dem Jun 2018 #88
I sent TurboTax Jane instructions on how to download historical returns in 3 clicks. swag Jun 2018 #50
Bwahahahaha sheshe2 Jun 2018 #73
Bazinga! George II Jun 2018 #140
Nevermind that. At least he's all over this immigrant thing! JNelson6563 Jun 2018 #52
Yup. That "immigrant thing" smells too much like "identity politics" for BS & Co. Tarheel_Dem Jun 2018 #54
That "telling the truth about Bernie" thing smells too much fairness for some Bernie-bashers Jim Lane Jun 2018 #58
Selective vision, eh? Tom Rinaldo Jun 2018 #162
I'll give him this, BS knows a good "bandwagon" when he sees one. Leads one to believe that his... Tarheel_Dem Jun 2018 #206
Yes, he took the time to travel to California and R B Garr Jun 2018 #208
The children. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #209
Speaking of children... lapucelle Jun 2018 #217
I find it disturbing as well, lapucelle.nt sheshe2 Jun 2018 #228
You do understand... tonedevil Jun 2018 #229
Yet you did not drown them. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #245
I've noticed that, too. It's a limited view of real life events R B Garr Jun 2018 #239
Which is really odd, because BS knows that wherever he shows up, the cameras will follow. He wants Tarheel_Dem Jun 2018 #210
Great points. Those Reagan Democrats are well known R B Garr Jun 2018 #240
Pretty good for a guy who never held a real job lol. Tipperary Jun 2018 #53
+1 Tarheel_Dem Jun 2018 #55
Post removed Post removed Jun 2018 #102
Give it up. mac56 Jun 2018 #104
"You're making a fool of yourself".. all you have is an insulting personal Cha Jun 2018 #110
Please self delete this right wing smear of many long term Democrats, who spend their lives in karynnj Jun 2018 #273
It looks like that response goes to hypocrisy again and not R B Garr Jun 2018 #281
The comments are brutal. Wow. R B Garr Jun 2018 #56
I went to the link but Cha Jun 2018 #90
They are still there on my phone. They were way down at the end. R B Garr Jun 2018 #112
I'll look again.. down at the end on the right.. Cha Jun 2018 #115
Just checked again. They are on the left all the way down. I saw a blue banner R B Garr Jun 2018 #117
I found them! Yeah, Gary Cha Jun 2018 #118
Mahalo to you, Cha! R B Garr Jun 2018 #177
So what. n/t kacekwl Jun 2018 #57
So what is the point of this post? PatSeg Jun 2018 #60
His "net worth" two or three years ago was $350K-$800K (as reported to senate.gov)..... George II Jun 2018 #141
White male privilege. nt LexVegas Jun 2018 #61
So he ran hard against Hillary and amassed a small fortune. ucrdem Jun 2018 #62
;) sheshe2 Jun 2018 #149
you mean he did not take a vow of poverty?????? dembotoz Jun 2018 #71
I seem to remember "other folks" being accused of all kinds of nasty R B Garr Jun 2018 #75
isn't it dembotoz Jun 2018 #91
Accusing "other dems" of wrongoing is a coincidence? R B Garr Jun 2018 #95
Sop dembotoz Jun 2018 #156
There are politicians on our side who make a lot more. I helped Autumn Jun 2018 #76
I haven't seen those politicians on our side accusing Bernie R B Garr Jun 2018 #78
Of course it does. Autumn Jun 2018 #87
Those fabricated talking points are very identifiable, and no one has R B Garr Jun 2018 #92
Yeah right. Autumn Jun 2018 #94
Double standards. Hypocrisy. Check out the comments section. nt R B Garr Jun 2018 #96
Double standards? Hypocrisy? See it all the time. Autumn Jun 2018 #97
Those fabricated talking points about making a million are not from anyone R B Garr Jun 2018 #98
You make money when you write books people buy, Autumn Jun 2018 #100
This is about hypocrisy. Double standards. When you imply that R B Garr Jun 2018 #106
You bought his book. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #150
Just like a socialist too get rich under a capitalist system. dubyadiprecession Jun 2018 #86
I lulz'd KG Jun 2018 #99
Who? Eko Jun 2018 #111
To be in the dreaded "1%" one only needs to earn about $300K. Hmmm. George II Jun 2018 #123
Really! I thought Cha Jun 2018 #126
What woah. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #151
Post removed Post removed Jun 2018 #128
Way to go Bernie! Power 2 the People Jun 2018 #132
FDR was 73 years ago. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #145
What kind of "fresh ideas" would you like to see? liberalnarb Jun 2018 #184
fresh ideas from young candidates. sheshe2 Jun 2018 #247
Social and economic justice go hand in hand. liberalnarb Jun 2018 #250
Yes! sheshe2 Jun 2018 #252
Social justice can not be achieved without economic justice. They are not separate, they are liberalnarb Jun 2018 #259
Is he now a 1%er? redstateblues Jun 2018 #135
A "1%er" earns between $275-$300K a year. $1M? Deeply ensconced. George II Jun 2018 #142
Don't really care about that... but I do want... Adrahil Jun 2018 #148
Hail, hail, the gang's all here! ms liberty Jun 2018 #158
Nobody's doing that. NurseJackie Jun 2018 #218
Repeating yourself doesn't make it so. ms liberty Jun 2018 #225
It's still here... NurseJackie Jun 2018 #236
We have an actual Nazi in the White House. Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #161
Why do we have a Nazi in the White House when we were So Warned. Wwcd Jun 2018 #164
We have an actual Nazi in the White House Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #166
WTF? Wwcd Jun 2018 #167
No. I said this thread is worse than useless. Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #168
Haaahaa. Ok sure. NOW lets not divide us. Wwcd Jun 2018 #169
Like I said this strategy, this message of perpetual Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #170
We'd be in power today. But but but.. Wwcd Jun 2018 #171
So this is how we win in 2018? Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #172
We win by voting BLUE. that's how Wwcd Jun 2018 #173
So we do that by obsessively attacking Bernie? Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #174
Based on history, it would also be great for him to apologize R B Garr Jun 2018 #200
"Take responsibility and apologize" has been a mantra in the past. lapucelle Jun 2018 #243
Nobody is doing that. NurseJackie Jun 2018 #299
Lulzd Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #303
Nobody is "obsessively attacking" Bernie. Nobody is "smearing" Bernie. NurseJackie Jun 2018 #308
Lulzd Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #313
Your "lulzd" at other Democrats being maligned is exactly why the double standards R B Garr Jun 2018 #314
Lulzd at what? Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #315
What is amazing is that you replied twice with "lulzd", posts 303 and 313 R B Garr Jun 2018 #316
Oh I know what made me laugh. Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #318
You make me laugh, too. R B Garr Jun 2018 #319
Glad we are all getting our Lulzd. Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #320
Laughing at the posts you responded to makes you glad. R B Garr Jun 2018 #321
Lulzd. Voltaire2 Jun 2018 #323
I agree with what post 308 had to say R B Garr Jun 2018 #324
Yes, looking forward to his apology. R B Garr Jun 2018 #201
I've no problem with that, except for the blatant hypocrisy,but we all probably knew it would be so. OnDoutside Jun 2018 #198
Good on Bernie. Owl Jun 2018 #222
Good for him! Lordquinton Jun 2018 #249
Post removed Post removed Jun 2018 #265
Have you now lol Blues Heron Jun 2018 #276
"lucrative public speaking"? karynnj Jun 2018 #271
Just Another Disaster Thread ProfessorGAC Jun 2018 #272
yes jcgoldie Jun 2018 #305
2020 is gonna be fun.. disillusioned73 Jun 2018 #279
Hillary 2020! Because it makes as much sense R B Garr Jun 2018 #283
She can campaign for him ;) disillusioned73 Jun 2018 #304
She's the Democrat, not Independent. R B Garr Jun 2018 #306
Sarah, Bernie, or Larry? lagomorph777 Jun 2018 #297
You forgot Barry and Deion. TexasTowelie Jun 2018 #301
I don't know them, but I just remembered Harlan. lagomorph777 Jun 2018 #302
He and his family can Skidmore Jun 2018 #317
That is minimum wage for San Francisco. KWR65 Jun 2018 #322

Hekate

(90,714 posts)
6. No True Democrat, and all that crap. But wait, Bernie is an Independent! Besides...
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 03:51 PM
Jun 2018

...this falls under the Bernie Exception, so all is well.

NB: I have always maintained that Democratic politicians are just as entitled to speaking fees and royalties as anyone else, and have the DU battle-scars to prove it. Some here really seem to believe that "True Dems" should wear sackcloth, go barefoot, and walk from state to state rather than taking Business Class on an airplane. But I'm not going to call out anyone for hypocrisy until I see what kind of responses the OP is getting regarding this particular politician's good fortune.

Tom Rinaldo

(22,913 posts)
12. I oppose bashing our leading political leaders
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 03:59 PM
Jun 2018

I am not going to bash Hillary about anything, nope, I'm not. Just not gonna do it. I thank her for her continuing service to our nation. Won't start any veiled threads against her either. Nope. I wish she or Bernie were President now.

brush

(53,787 posts)
278. Well, it's understandable. A man's got to work harder since his...
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 09:10 AM
Jun 2018

household income went down. I mean what with his wife's ...er, ah...problems with the college and all.

mcar

(42,334 posts)
9. I recall some here denigrating HRC for making money on her book
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 03:54 PM
Jun 2018

And insisting she should donate the proceeds. Bit of a double standard, no?

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
22. Double standards are issue. Attacking Clinton over things
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 05:31 PM
Jun 2018

you don’t do yourself is a double standard. Not everything is tit for tat. Bernie was never FLOTUS, either.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
45. I bet you know exactly what he attacked Hillary about. Isn't this about
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 06:16 PM
Jun 2018

profiting from being an office holder? General vagaries implying corruption at every turn. The whole gambit. When you put yourself up as a moral authority, then walk the walk yourself.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
175. It is you who is not substantianting your claim.
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 11:14 AM
Jun 2018

I've been clear this is about double standards and hypocrisy. Have you read the link in the OP? It looks like you are just trying to whittle everything away to make it look like any comparison of Bernie is not valid.

Voltaire2

(13,061 posts)
176. Your claim:
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 11:17 AM
Jun 2018

Attacking Clinton over things
you don’t do yourself is a double standard.

When did Sanders attack Clinton over book royalties?

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
178. See my post 66 from yesterday. You keep pretending that there was
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 11:23 AM
Jun 2018

no broader message he had except for book royalties, but we know differently. Do you think his whole campaign was about book royalties? Please provide a link that shows his rallies were about book royalties, thanks.

My post 66 from yesterday:
"If you paint one person as corrupt because you imply she is profiting from holding office, but you don't hold another person accountable for the same thing--especially after the whole ethos of someone's popularity is implying others are corrupt, then that is a double standard. This is not hard. Like the Republican's "family values" ruse. Gingrich types cheating on their wives but claiming only they have family values. This is not hard."

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
181. Do you have any links to Bernie's rallies about book royalties?
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 12:07 PM
Jun 2018

Was his campaign about book royalties? Describe what you remember about Bernie's message.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
183. No, YOU made a specific claim. Your claim is that unless Bernie uttered
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 12:15 PM
Jun 2018

the exact words, I hereby condemn Clinton's book royalties, then nothing about his message matters. But that wasn't his message, was it. Explain in detail how you view Bernie's message. It is about book royalties?

BTW, you can Google for the info and it is readily available. I just did. You can too. Google Chicago Tribune Clinton discloses book royalties and you'll see an article. You can Google all day, for that matter. Post your findings here...

Voltaire2

(13,061 posts)
191. You are correct. The only way your statement about
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:11 PM
Jun 2018

Sanders hypocrisy made sense was if he had made a statement specifically against her book royalties. But if you were just making vague allegations of hypocrisy then indeed no specific claim need be substantiated.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
192. Wrong. The only way your distraction makes sense is if Sanders message
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:14 PM
Jun 2018

of corruption and his specific attacks on Clinton were only about book royalties. You can Google that article I described above. You can see what he is attacking her for. That would be the best thing since this distraction you are trying only shows you are trying to pretend that it is not hypocritical for him to profit from his popularity in office while holding others to a different standard.

lapucelle

(18,270 posts)
214. I'd love to see some information about the charitable giving
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 10:18 AM
Jun 2018

of all the millionaires in Congress, especially those who are ramping up 2020 presidential runs. Any idea where I can find that information?

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
237. Yes, great question. Tax returns are a good source for
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 07:06 PM
Jun 2018

the charity info! They are also a requirement for those who demand transparency from other candidates, no excuses.

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
275. And... boom!
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 08:50 AM
Jun 2018
Tax returns are a good source for
the charity info! They are also a requirement for those who demand transparency from other candidates, no excuses.


 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
282. You certainly dig in on the irrelevant
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 10:54 AM
Jun 2018

I suppose I would too were the OP not validating my narratives, as well.

I'd also pretend I'm merely attempting to clarify an earlier vagary as I continue to hijack the thread... all in the name of truth, accuracy and righteousness, of course.




Of course, we'll rationalize our course with all the pretense of sincerity we can assume.

Voltaire2

(13,061 posts)
157. Yes the person I responded to.
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 07:40 AM
Jun 2018

Attacking Clinton over things
you don’t do yourself is a double standard.

Hassin Bin Sober

(26,330 posts)
25. Bernie attacked HRC for not donating book money? I must have missed that. Got a link?
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 05:37 PM
Jun 2018

In fact, I don’t recall anyone having a problem with her earning book royalties.

Grasping at straws.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
44. I bet you didn't miss a thing he attacked her about. You seem to
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 06:12 PM
Jun 2018

know them well. Talk about grasping at straws.

pangaia

(24,324 posts)
84. I'm just gonna say hi.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:30 PM
Jun 2018

I can't believe this shit is still going on.


Anyway, Bin Sober, if I keep on drinking this mint julep I made with mint from out back and Bulleit 10 year Bourbon, I ain;t going to be so sober tonight..


progressoid

(49,991 posts)
212. So, there's this author, Mary Shelley.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 04:12 AM
Jun 2018

She wrote a book called Frankenstein.

It was also made into a movie.

There's more.

Try the google machine.

kdmorris

(5,649 posts)
219. It's not a woman... it's a little girl
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 10:46 AM
Jun 2018

Last edited Sun Jun 24, 2018, 11:53 AM - Edit history (1)

And they are PLAYING, as they've just thrown a bunch of flower petals in the lake. ... the little girl is one of the only people that doesn't treat him like a monster.

Seriously... try Google... it's your friend.

kdmorris

(5,649 posts)
221. You aren't familiar with the concept of playing with children, I see
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 11:56 AM
Jun 2018

Do you see the entire world in such a negative, horrible light or just things on this board that upset you because you don't like the person you've responded to?

For a child, play is necessary to grow brain cells, learn and grow. It's how young children learn best. I'm not sure why playing with a little girl makes it "even worse".

Maybe this will help: http://www.earlychildhoodnews.com/earlychildhood/article_view.aspx?ArticleID=240

George II

(67,782 posts)
238. It's not "playing with children". You may want to find that scene and watch it ....
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 07:08 PM
Jun 2018

...(posted below for your review)

As Frankenstein picks up the little girl she screams "no, you're hurting me...NO!"


And then she drowned.

Sorry, my idea of "playing" doesn't include hurting little girls and drowning them. That some are defending the use of that sadistic scene is very disappointing and disturbing.

sheshe2

(83,789 posts)
244. This
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 08:01 PM
Jun 2018
Do you see the entire world in such a negative, horrible light or just things on this board that upset you because you don't like the person you've responded to?


This is a very unkind accusation you are hurling at George. You said that his response is only because he does not like the poster. Really? How do you know this? And from the clip George posted below, he threw her in and she died.

For a child, play is necessary to grow brain cells, learn and grow. It's how young children learn best. I'm not sure why playing with a little girl makes it "even worse".


You should watch the clip George posted. Others here that "said they watched the movie and she did not drown" you are making things up. Georges post of the video shows she did and this is not playing. She died and cried "you are hurting me" before he threw her in.

Hassin Bin Sober

(26,330 posts)
223. "A man" ???
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 12:45 PM
Jun 2018

You know Frankenstein is a fictional character, yes?

It’s from a film you probably saw in the theater as a kid.


These aren’t real either







?itemid=5488863

George II

(67,782 posts)
224. I really don't care - violence against women and or girls, whether fictional or not, is disgusting.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 01:22 PM
Jun 2018

It may not bother you, but I'm sure it's disturbing to many of the members of DU.

 

tonedevil

(3,022 posts)
226. While it seems a noble sentiment...
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 02:17 PM
Jun 2018

your position here is based on ignorance. You have been provided a literary explanation yet you cling to your ugly interpretation. Do not read The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn the language will shock you.

George II

(67,782 posts)
233. No it's not based on ignorance, it's based on the portrayal of violence. Period. I wouldn't think...
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 04:24 PM
Jun 2018

....of posting a graphic of Hannibal Lechter or any other violent person or incident unless it was to prove a specific point and I EXPLAINED that point.

We're still waiting for that explanation, which hasn't been forthcoming.

lapucelle

(18,270 posts)
246. That episode does not appear in the novel,
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 08:23 PM
Jun 2018

and Mary Shelley's monster bears little resemblance to the character as portrayed in this movie.

Anyone eager to posit "literary explanations" should probably base them on actual literature.

lapucelle

(18,270 posts)
234. Frankenstein is a human character in a gothic novel.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 04:25 PM
Jun 2018

Last edited Sun Jun 24, 2018, 05:55 PM - Edit history (1)

The film is quite different. The scene of the Monster hurling the child into the water is one of the most haunting and horrifying in the 1931 film. Why anyone would want it on a continuous loop is bewildering at best.

lapucelle

(18,270 posts)
242. Frankenstein is a man, but he's not in your gif.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 07:33 PM
Jun 2018

Pictorial and cinematic violence might not be real, but that doesn't mean it's not disturbing.

lapucelle

(18,270 posts)
232. The episode of the mute and inarticulate monster hurling
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 03:43 PM
Jun 2018

a little girl into a lake does not occur in the novel.

Voltaire2

(13,061 posts)
27. Lets change the subject.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 05:39 PM
Jun 2018

I’m still trying to find out if it was wrong to attack Clinton for not donating her book royalties.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
46. Is it wrong to imply that people are corrupt because they hold office
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 06:18 PM
Jun 2018

and write books that others want to read?

George II

(67,782 posts)
130. ooops, I brought up a "subject", it wasn't going the way I expected, so let's "change the subject"..
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 11:50 PM
Jun 2018

...

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
66. If you paint one person as corrupt because you imply she is profiting
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:11 PM
Jun 2018

from holding office, but you don't hold another person accountable for the same thing--especially after the whole ethos of someone's popularity is implying others are corrupt, then that is a double standard. This is not hard. Like the Republican's "family values" ruse. Gingrich types cheating on their wives but claiming only they have family values. This is not hard.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
85. Yeah, this isn't about writing books at all...at least now that
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:30 PM
Jun 2018

He has income from books. Thanks, Cha.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
82. Thanks. Notice how the scope keeps changing with every entry. Soon
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:28 PM
Jun 2018

it will be that none of this ever happened or it was all a big misunderstanding...lol.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
207. Of course, but like with so many like-minded people, the idea was to be obstructive and to disrupt
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 10:07 PM
Jun 2018

by asking a ton of clarifying and deflective questions that have nothing to do with the point.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
59. Yes, they were wrong when they bashed her book sales.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 08:00 PM
Jun 2018

And when they bashed the talks that the Clinton's gave.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
68. Making progress, indeed. Thanks for finally seeing the
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:15 PM
Jun 2018

hypocrisy of double standards that have turned many off. And it wasn't just book income bashing. C'mon now. This is not fooling anyone.

George II

(67,782 posts)
124. Hillary Clinton donated royalties of approximately $1M to charity for "It Takes a Village".....
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 11:41 PM
Jun 2018

...you can google it.

But this is a discussion about Sanders' book royalties, surely you're not trying to "refight the primaries", are you?

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
284. Right, it's not corruption when popular politicians
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 11:35 AM
Jun 2018

are sought after for speeches, books and other personal appearances. It is shameful to fabricate baseless attacks on others that imply otherwise. Glad you attribute it now to plain ol’ popularity instead of some nefarious underhanded dealings.

 

Sophia4

(3,515 posts)
285. Depends on who is seeking the politician for speeches, books and other personal appearances
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 11:55 AM
Jun 2018

and what the people seeking the politician for those speeches, books and other personal appearances may want in return for the favor of seeking the politician and giving the politician time from the politician.

Popularity out of context is what makes politics work.

Popularity is only nefarious when it suggests nefarious underhanded dealings -- and it sometimes does depending on the politician and the people seeking out the politician.

There is a huge difference between being sought after by the crowds on Amazon or at your local book store and being sought after by Wall Street. A big difference.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
289. THANKS for stepping right into the exact reason people are calling out Bernie's hypocrisy.
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 12:09 PM
Jun 2018

As we all know by now, none of those Wall Street attacks were proven. None of them. It was all a fabricated attack meant to benefit himself by drawing a contrast with other politicians about transparency. Tax returns are also a big indicator of transparency. That whole "Wall Street" canard was fabricated and used for his own personal gain. So "Wall Street" was indeed beneficial to one candidate, just not the one you are inferring. Most people saw that. That is probably why you are seeing double standards and incorrect assumptions about other politicians being called out.

 

Sophia4

(3,515 posts)
293. The facts speak for themselves.
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 01:26 PM
Jun 2018

Hillary's books are also very popular. I was just talking about that with a friend on Saturday. I've read and own some of her books.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
294. Back to reality. That's the point. One man's preferred
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 01:29 PM
Jun 2018

gotchas are not facts. In fact, no facts were provided, which is the point.

We also should have learned a lesson about phony attacks on Democrats and how much they hurt our party. Contrived assumptions are not facts. They only help the GOP.

 

Wwcd

(6,288 posts)
3. He told us. "Money & Media" looks like he got what he came to the Party for.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 03:44 PM
Jun 2018

Well at least he was blunt & truthful when asked why he joined the Dem Party as a candidate in 2016.

Here ya go.
Thanks for posting.

I read where he condemned 'billionaires', in a recent statement.
No mention of millionaires anymore, tho.

Hmm.



 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
154. that's bullshit. . He doesn't condemn millionaires or billionaires simply for being millionaires
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 02:52 AM
Jun 2018

Last edited Sat Jun 23, 2018, 03:23 AM - Edit history (1)

or billionaires, but go ahead and keep constructing those strawmen. He condemns the unfairness of the system that benefits them so completely and the money that they put into the game. Iis it millionaires and billionaires who have been buying his book fostering even the semblance of impropriety regarding the potential to buy or to have bought political favors? No? No shit.

 

Wwcd

(6,288 posts)
160. What's up with bernie-the-millionaire's Dark Money Pac?
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 07:50 AM
Jun 2018

Hmm hmm hmm ..

"He condemns the unfairness of the system that benefits them so completely"
Until he is one too.

From Dark Money Pac, to hiding taxes

That's the real bull shit .

No wonder he's now only condemning billionaires.
Until he becomes one, that is.
Cha ching.."money & media"..bernie's own words. He told us.




 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
185. when yhou have so little to work with I guess you'll just keep shouting it I guess. You're still
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 12:31 PM
Jun 2018

sticking to the stupidest argument imaginable, that because now that he is a millionaire he won't say that millionaires and billionaires are getting unfair advantages. He's not now nor has he ever been calling to round up millionaires and billionaires just for being rich. He is still calling for a fair tax system and infrastructure etc. which would presumably tax him more today under his rhetoric the same as it would have before. That shit you guys spout here is just thin.

Yeah, I wish he hadn't supported a pac that allows for dark money...like every other super-pac out there that benefits just about every mainstream politician in the nation. Of course that part is forgotten when people go at him for this, but yes, I wish it hadn't been done. I think it was a horrible decision. You get one point for sanders endorsing a pac that can take dark money for progressive endeavors, I guess, presumably, siince he actually bothers to make this situation we have with money in politics a talking point. I'm not clear on the reasons for it and propbably won't accept that those reasons are good enough. Do you really give a shit about anybody elses' dark money?

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
187. lololol, now you are asking
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 12:36 PM
Jun 2018

"Do you really give a shit about anybody elses' dark money?"

Apparently it is *you* who doesn't really give a crap about anybody elses dark money, as long as it benefits the politicians you most favor. The hypocrisy and double standards are truly stunning.

And most politicians running for office talk about money in politics. The subject matter does not belong to Sanders.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
188. heh..wow that was some shitty reading on your part. I said I give a shit
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 12:44 PM
Jun 2018

and don't like it. And if I were given an opportunity to ask Sanders about it directly I would. Yes, other politicians have mentioned money in politics. I can't think of any who have run on it as a campaign issue. And, I'm not a purist. I'll take the best candidate I can get. Put up somebody else talking about the issues I think are most dire (and at the heart of so many of the other toxic symptoms) who did not endorse a PAC that takes dark money, and that person gets my vote over Sanders.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
189. Naw, you don't get to parse others and not be called on your own contradictions.
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:02 PM
Jun 2018

Look at the contradictions from the first paragraph to the second.

Then look at the never-ending irony. The Vermont Digger discloses Sanders' dark money and you are talking about "issues" as if all that matters is what someone says on the stump and not what their actions are. The hypocrisy and double standards are stunning.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
193. what did it disclose exactly? I remember when Sanders spoke in favor of that pac, and the
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:14 PM
Jun 2018

fact that it was structured the way it was did come up and was spoken to, but not adequately to me. And if you want to dig through any post I've ever made on the subject of that pacs ability to take dark money, you will find a consistent note of distaste. It does undermine the position. I don't care what the benefits are, I don't know how they could outweigh that. But that hardly puts sanders on par with the most of the field.

No, all that matters is not the rhetoric. I thought that I'd made that clear. Give me a better candidate who hasn't put up any question marks and I will choose that candidate over Sanders. That is hardly what Washington politics tends to offer. And this is an issue I would want us to hold Sanders feet to the fire for. I don't mind that, if at least being honest enough in that endeavor to take him in context of the field.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
194. Of course it undermines his position about PACs, as the Vermont Digger
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:18 PM
Jun 2018

noted his dark money. It's in the OP link. That's the point -- the hypocrisy. Why dig through anything, especially your posts. What is written on the internet is not the same as what a newspaper like Vermont Digger discloses about their hometown Senator.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
196. Yes, I've read articles from them, and they are often embarassingly obvious hit-pieces. That doesn't
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:24 PM
Jun 2018

mean they don't report any facts, but their slant is hilariously transparent.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
197. Pointing out hypocrisy is the point. If one politician puts himself
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:26 PM
Jun 2018

out as a moral authority but does not apply the same standards to himself, that is hypocrisy. Vermont Digger is his hometown newspaper. It is hardly a hit job to expect one politician to uphold transparency standards he set for others.

lapucelle

(18,270 posts)
235. It's not true that most PACS are dark money organizations.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 06:09 PM
Jun 2018

Neither is it true that Our Revolution is a PAC of any kind.

Our Revolution, launched this week to continue the movement that his campaign started by raising and spending money to support “candidates in lockstep with Sanders’ ideals.” But it’s disappointing many who agreed with Sanders’ call for getting money out of politics because as a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, the group would not be required to disclose its donors.

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

501(c)(4): Also known as “dark money groups,” these make up some of the most relevant political nonprofits today. Technically deemed “social welfare organizations,” these groups can’t have political activity — such as making ads advocating for or against candidates — as their “primary purpose”; this has unofficially been interpreted to mean they must spend less than 50 percent of their activities on politics or elections. But they can raise unlimited amounts of cash from individuals and organizations alike — without having to disclose who contributed that money.


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

Dark money: Dark money is money spent on political activity that comes from undisclosed donors. A huge source of dark money is 501(c)(4)s, which don’t have to disclose their donors but often engage in political activity, but it can also come from 501(c)(6)s and shell LLCs. (An important point to note is that super PACs do disclose their donors, and are not considered to be dark money because of this.)

https://sunlightfoundation.com/2016/08/26/bernie-sanderss-new-political-group-wont-have-to-disclose-its-donors/

https://sunlightfoundation.com/2016/02/17/a-glossary-of-campaign-finance-in-the-u-s/#501(c)(4)

https://sunlightfoundation.com/2016/02/17/a-glossary-of-campaign-finance-in-the-u-s/#d
 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
262. thanks, that's insightful, although I'm still confused about what is and isn't
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 02:14 AM
Jun 2018

dark money, since, according to this quick google search that came up with an NBC story,

super PACs do benefit from some loopholes in disclosure.


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/how-democrats-use-dark-money-win-elections-n849391

Tom Rinaldo

(22,913 posts)
4. In 2014, for example, he earned little more than his congressional salary and had $330,000 in assets
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 03:48 PM
Jun 2018

"Sanders, an independent, historically has been among the least wealthy members of Congress".

For a man in his 70's I think he's adequately paid his dues.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
5. Career politicians will almost always cash out on their way out the door.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 03:50 PM
Jun 2018

You think this is a lot, wait until he retires. It will make this look like chump change.

DURHAM D

(32,610 posts)
13. Don't you think he could be a great lobbyist?
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 04:08 PM
Jun 2018

Pretty sure a nurse in California will pay him a giant salary.






 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
155. yeah, right, making money because people bought his book is the same as getting
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 03:42 AM
Jun 2018

a lobby position in DC for Golman Sacs or getting a million dollar speaking fee from one of those companies. Totally not apples and oranges.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
190. You made up a story in order to claim apples and oranges.
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:10 PM
Jun 2018

I never said what you claimed which would be a requirement to make your charge accurate.

Nothing I wrote can be defined as apples and oranges useless one does what you did, pull oranges out of the air.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
195. well that's fair. You are simply calling him a career politician trying to cash out on his way out
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:21 PM
Jun 2018

the door, as if that is really what is happening here. He didn't decide to get popular with the American public because he was on his way out. He hasn't rebranded or attempted to make himself more marketable or corporate friendly for that lobby job when he retires, etc. What moves has he made that would suggest that he's been gearing up to cash in? How do you envision him doing that when he retires?


 

Ron Obvious

(6,261 posts)
11. Has he been giving speeches at Goldman Sachs or something?
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 03:58 PM
Jun 2018

Apparently three of those net about a million.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
15. BERNIE MUST RELEASE THE TRANSCRIPTS OF HIS SECRET GOLDMAN SACHS SPEECHES!!
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 04:23 PM
Jun 2018

Uh, well, that is to say, he must release the transcripts of those secret speeches if he actually made any such speeches.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
18. You can quit with the false drama over transparency.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 05:07 PM
Jun 2018

We know he was never really serious about that anyway.

sheshe2

(83,789 posts)
101. Well, Jim.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:53 PM
Jun 2018

May I call you Jim? You as a lawyer knows a sitting candidate can not receive speaking fees.


Jim Lane
15. BERNIE MUST RELEASE THE TRANSCRIPTS OF HIS SECRET GOLDMAN SACHS SPEECHES!!

Uh, well, that is to say, he must release the transcripts of those secret speeches if he actually made any such speeches.


Your point is silly and indeed pointless.
 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
202. I will make ONE effort to elaborate
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 03:43 PM
Jun 2018

As to forms of address, my friends call me Jim. Feel free to do so.

As to my point: This thread is awash in accusations of hypocrisy. There are many of us who have no problem with book royalties, be they Bernie's or Hillary's, but who do have a problem with large speaking fees from companies with a stake in government actions. Even if you disagree with that position, it's not a double standard.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
203. Ha! Of course you have no problem with book royalties now because Sanders earned
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 03:56 PM
Jun 2018

some, lol.

This thread is also about double standards and his own demands for transparency, especially from Hillary. Not to mention the entire arc of his message which we all know by now, one of them implying corruption if profiting from holding office. Think about what he includes in all of that -- we all know them by now, as well. Like accusing people of nefarious actions because they are popular and sought after for speeches-- the same reason people buy his book -- they like him and he is sought after. Double standards galore.

Transparency for some but not for him is most certainly hypocrisy and double standards.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
204. By saying "now" you imply that I said something different earlier. That implication is a lie. (n/t)
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 05:03 PM
Jun 2018

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
205. Do I get to say you are lying in your word parsing? Is focusing only
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 05:11 PM
Jun 2018

on book royalties a "lie" about Sanders' overall message? You are now parsing to get a desired result -- the result that even Sanders own words still on the internet don't match about book revenues. What do I get to call that?

Look up Chicago Tribune Clinton reveals book revenue and see what Sanders words were. This is hilarious that you think book revenues are the magic ticket out of the whole Clinton message.

 

Wwcd

(6,288 posts)
17. Every speech he gave, he consistantly campaigned against 'millionaires & billionaires'
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 05:00 PM
Jun 2018

Until he became one.

Now its just 'billionaires'...

Hassin Bin Sober

(26,330 posts)
34. Bullshit.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 05:43 PM
Jun 2018

He never “campaigned against millionaires and billionaires” - that’s malarkey.

He’s campaigned against millionaires and billionaires not paying their fair share and tilting the playing field completely in their favor.

sheshe2

(83,789 posts)
43. Well if he runs again, he will have to release his taxes.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 05:59 PM
Jun 2018
He’s campaigned against millionaires and billionaires not paying their fair share and tilting the playing field completely in their favor.


He will be a multimillionaire by that time. Many states have laws requiring this to get on the ballot.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
48. No. He complained about income inequality, i.e., class wars.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 06:21 PM
Jun 2018

But he's dropped the millionaire part -- interesting.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
179. Wow! That is a great Twitter thread. What is glaring at this point is
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 11:37 AM
Jun 2018

how he dwells on the cliché and superficial trappings of billionaires as being the evil bad things, yet ignores the Russian billionaires/oligarchs who are infiltrating our government, influencing our policies, positioning to raid our coffers with the help of the GOP, have pending indictments over actual and provably criminal methods of attacking our elections......ETC.

George II

(67,782 posts)
139. He consistently campaigned against "the 1%", which are predominantly (but not exclusively)....
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 12:51 AM
Jun 2018

....millionaires and billionaires. That's not malarkey, that's truth.

Why do you you have a signature seemlingly advocating violence against women?

sheshe2

(83,789 posts)
143. George, thank you I noticed that too.
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:05 AM
Jun 2018
Why do you you have a signature seemlingly advocating violence against women?


For any woman that has been through domestic violence/ any physical violence. I gotta say images like that are both disturbing and triggering. I remember their last one as well.

sheshe2

(83,789 posts)
144. Please remove your sig line.
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:24 AM
Jun 2018

You have a picture Frankenstein tossing a child/woman into the water and drowning her. I know you are trying to make this about something else, yet with all that is going on at the border it is not funny. You depict violence against women and children and that is never something to be joked about. I ask you to please remove it. It hurts all of us that have suffered violence.

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
216. Good lord! That's correct... not funny.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 10:36 AM
Jun 2018
You have a picture Frankenstein tossing a child/woman into the water and drowning her.
Good lord! That's correct... not funny. It's absolutely disgusting. But I must also say that I'm not at all surprised at any effort like this to twist things around and make it about someone else, and that's all I have to say about that for obvious reasons.

Cuthbert Allgood

(4,921 posts)
286. Good thing we have drama over a movie that is 87 years old.
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 11:58 AM
Jun 2018

But, hey, you understood it was silly to go after that gif when when you said "not at all surprised at any effort like this to twist things around and make it about someone else" or something else.

Cuthbert Allgood

(4,921 posts)
291. That movie is only 19 years old.
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 12:43 PM
Jun 2018

Probably don't want to trigger anyone with a problem with staplers, though.

Cuthbert Allgood

(4,921 posts)
296. Really, it came out in 1999.
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 04:21 PM
Jun 2018

I mean, I didn't know that off the top of my head--I had to Google it.

But since I don't know what you're talking about, I guess you are smarter than I.

Though it seems to this not-so-smart person that less time spent making sure people on the same side as you do exactly what you want and more time figuring out a way to make sure Republicans actually lose power might be a better tactic. But, hey, you're the smart one.

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
298. Sure. Whatev'.
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 04:52 PM
Jun 2018
But since I don't know what you're talking about,
Sure. Whatev'.



I guess you are smarter than I.
In this case, I think the only thing it meas is that an Academy Award won't be in your future.

Though it seems to this not-so-smart person that less time spent making sure people on the same side as you do exactly what you want and more time figuring out a way to make sure Republicans actually lose power might be a better tactic.
Nobody is doing that.

But, hey, you're the smart one.
Smarter than you give me credit for, that's for sure

sheshe2

(83,789 posts)
231. Frankly I don't care what the story line is.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 03:15 PM
Jun 2018

Isolating that image as a gif depicts violence of a female child and that is disturbing.

A HERETIC I AM

(24,370 posts)
248. I'm betting you won't wake up with malaria in the morning.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 09:22 PM
Jun 2018

Or that your arms will fall off.

Or that you will eat a grilled cheese sandwich for lunch and contract leprosy.

In fact, in spite of the fact that Hassin Bin Sober, someone who has been a member here FOUR YEARS LONGER THAN YOU HAVE, has as a sig line pic a one half second .gif of a scene from one of the most famous monster movies of all time, released all the way back in 1937, ........


ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WILL HAPPEN TO YOU.


You'll be fine.

sheshe2

(83,789 posts)
251. Nice post Heretic.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 10:22 PM
Jun 2018
A HERETIC I AM
248. I'm betting you won't wake up with malaria in the morning.

Or that your arms will fall off.

Or that you will eat a grilled cheese sandwich for lunch and contract leprosy.


good bet. I am sure you are making some profound point here, yet it alludes me.


In fact, in spite of the fact that Hassin Bin Sober, someone who has been a member here FOUR YEARS LONGER THAN YOU HAVE, has as a sig line pic a one half second .gif of a scene from one of the most famous monster movies of all time, released all the way back in 1937, ........
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WILL HAPPEN TO YOU.


You'll be fine.




Hmmm all caps screaming at me that they have been here 4 years longer than I have. I assume you have a point here since you yelled at me, so what does it matter how long I have been here compared to them? What is your point?


The clip has been explained to me many times. Some say google it.She did not die. She did. One said he was just playing.He was not. The point. An isolated gif depicting violence against women is disturbing. The poster has been called out here with people telling them that the violence is disturbing , yet keeps that image. You call it a classic monster movie where children die from violence. It is far to close for what is happening to women and girls daily. There should be no place for it here. A considerate poster that has been here 4 yars longer than I should understand where posters are coming from and how the gif disturbs many woman would remove what many find offensive


…………………………

PS. Your entire post is offensive.Screaming at me in caps and defending an indefensible sig. that women here found offensive and you are condescending about our concerns,

A HERETIC I AM

(24,370 posts)
255. Please remove your sig pics.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 11:41 PM
Jun 2018

Ballet is offensive to me. Your pics glorify an activity that is dangerous and is a serious risk to young women as well as more experienced dancers.

It is an ancient patriarchal art form that makes objects out of women, demeans their individuality and is harmful to their physique. Many thousands of ballet dancers over the last tens of decades are permanently crippled due to the strenuous and dangerous requirements of ballet.

Ballet is an affront to all those who care about women and their health.

Your pics demean women and promote this cruelty.

Every single post you put up that includes those pictures is offensive.

Please delete them.

Response to betsuni (Reply #261)

betsuni

(25,537 posts)
264. Nope, that is not a classical ballet position.
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 02:19 AM
Jun 2018

It is contemporary dance. But you would know because were a dancer, right? You think the little girl in the Frankenstein movie wasn't killed by the monster even though in the movie she was. Suddenly nitpicking is bad?

By the way, according to your ballet-other link, Marilyn Monroe, Audrey Hepburn, sneakers, shoes and "other" are ballet.

Response to betsuni (Reply #264)

Response to A HERETIC I AM (Reply #266)

George II

(67,782 posts)
253. Yes, that "most famous monster movie of all time" is one hour, ten minutes long....a total of....
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 10:43 PM
Jun 2018

...4200 seconds. That means, if your estimate is correct, there are 4199.5 other seconds that could have been used, yet that half second was chosen - a scene of a girl being thrown to her death. Sweet!

This is why violence against women and children is treated so nonchalantly these days. It's beyond belief that some have no qualms about it and seemingly joke about it.

Inexcusable.

PS - the movie was released in 1931.

A HERETIC I AM

(24,370 posts)
254. You're right....1931. My dyslexia kicked in.....
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 11:31 PM
Jun 2018

Or was it the bourbon?


Anyway.....


...4200 seconds. That means, if your estimate is correct, there are 4199.5 other seconds that could have been used, yet that half second was chosen - a scene of a girl being thrown to her death. Sweet!

This is why violence against women and children is treated so nonchalantly these days. It's beyond belief that some have no qualms about it and seemingly joke about it.



Being thrown to her death?!? Seriously?



The Monster threw her 2 feet from the fucking shore of the lake!!!



Frankly I think there are entirely too many people on this board who simply can not fucking wait to find the next stupid ass, innocuous, banal thing to be offended by and that gives them yet another chance to wag their school marm fingers at the offending party.


Jesus Hortensis Christ on a lakefront throwing daisy's. Fuck me sideways, but this board is getting tedious.

Response to A HERETIC I AM (Reply #254)

A HERETIC I AM

(24,370 posts)
260. My response to the self-deleted post above
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 01:28 AM
Jun 2018

Which said and asked;

"The little girl dies. Didn't you know that?"


I don't give a shit

The whole point of this sub-thread is that exception was taken to a tiny, obscure little flash of a looped .gif image from a monster movie that is over eighty fucking years old! The little girl in the film didn't die! It's a fantasy! A MOVIE! The movie doesn't center on the monster and his wanton desire to kill women, by any possible stretch of the imagination! It is about the hubris of a scientist who thinks he can cheat death. The scene from which the .gif is taken demonstrates the unreliability of a cobbled together being, such that it is missing compassion and/or understanding. To make a huge deal out of such a tiny portion of a classic film that has a totally different message, such that it misses the larger point of the thing is the height of inanity.

This sort of bullshit sidetracking is what makes DU suck these days. It is in part why we have lost so many great writers, thinkers, posters and just decent liberals from this site over the last few years. This sort of platitudinous crap is everything people hate about the liberal side of the political spectrum. The mere fact that a prolific poster can not get past such a banal fucking half second .gif and chooses to call out a poster with a ten year membership completely defies credulity (Edit. Credulity is the wrong word. It should read "Reason, logic and any semblance of perspective". That's better).

I'll take the good humor and give the benefit of the doubt to someone who has been here ten years and averages 5 posts a day over someone who has been here 6 years and averages over 23, every single day of the fucking week.

betsuni

(25,537 posts)
274. I deleted my comment because I decided I didn't want to get into a weird back-and-forth.
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 08:46 AM
Jun 2018

Did anyway and won! The reason why DU has lost so many great writers, thinkers, posters and just decent liberals over the last few years is because of disruptors who hate Democrats/liberals. Everybody knows this. The excuse that they were driven away by politically correct liberals is ....

No, the monster is not missing compassion and/or understanding. The monster is all too human. Read the novel.

betsuni

(25,537 posts)
280. By the way, from Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein":
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 09:54 AM
Jun 2018

The monster says, "A considerable period elapsed before I discovered one of the causes of the uneasiness of this amiable family: it was poverty, and they suffered that evil in a very distressing degree. Their nourishment consisted entirely of the vegetables of their garden and the milk of one cow, which gave very little during the winter, when its masters could scarcely procure food to support it. They often, I believe, suffered the pangs of hunger very poignantly, especially the two younger cottagers, for several times they placed food before the two old men when they reserved none for themselves. This trait of kindness moved me sensibly. I had been accustomed, during the night, to steal a part of their store for my own consumption, but when I found that in doing this I inflicted pain on the cottagers, I abstained, and satisfied myself with berries, nuts, and roots, which I gathered from a neighboring wood."

Cuthbert Allgood

(4,921 posts)
288. As I mentioned above, the monster in the movie has such great lines as
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 12:01 PM
Jun 2018

"fire bad." So it's a different literary work.

Cuthbert Allgood

(4,921 posts)
287. The novel and the movie go for different themes.
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 12:00 PM
Jun 2018

The monster in the novel is extremely intelligent, can speak, etc but looks like a monster. The monster in the movie is lacking a lot of what the novel offers. This scene in the movie is about the innocence of the monster not the overwhelming humanity of him.

Cuthbert Allgood

(4,921 posts)
309. Well, you were trying to conflate the movie with the novel.
Tue Jun 26, 2018, 09:28 AM
Jun 2018

Specifically, you were applying the themes from the novel to the movie and that just isn't correct.

So either be more clear about what you know or realize maybe you aren't correct in what you are typing.

Cuthbert Allgood

(4,921 posts)
311. Not sure what's funny. Perfect word for what was happening.
Tue Jun 26, 2018, 10:18 AM
Jun 2018

Feel free to use it in the future. It's a great word.

lapucelle

(18,270 posts)
300. A drowning does occur after the Monster hurls the little girl in the water.
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 07:40 PM
Jun 2018

From the TCM synopsis of the plot:

As the wedding of Elizabeth and Henry is celebrated, the monster drowns Little Maria, a village child who plays with him, then menaces Elizabeth. Ludwig, Maria's father, carries his daughter's body into town, and an angry search party is formed.

http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title/75587/Frankenstein/full-synopsis.html

Of course, in Mary Shelley's book no drowning of a little girl occurs because the entire episode itself never occurs. That's why "literary explanations" are irrelevant at best.

Anyone interested in old movies should check out TCM. It's a treasure trove.




aikoaiko

(34,171 posts)
64. His taxes? Is there anyone still looking for them?
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:05 PM
Jun 2018

I guess some people are.

I'm more interested in the transcripts of his book. Where are the transcripts, Bernie?!

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
109. Have you read the link in the OP? This Vermont paper wants some answers.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 10:13 PM
Jun 2018

It's a Vermont paper. You should read Jeff Weaver's sidestep, lol. It is similar to some responses in this thread.

Response to SidDithers (Original post)

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
74. Good question. That is weird how sinister motives are only implied for some
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:18 PM
Jun 2018

popular politicians who write books that people want to read due to their popularity, but not for others. I'm wondering who took bribes, too.

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
113. They never do. It is shoot and scoot with that crowd.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 10:27 PM
Jun 2018

They almost never come out and bare knuckle it with you over ideas, when their catchphrases are being blown apart, they vanish into the forest. Three of them will fight it out, but most don't remotely put up any fight when their BS is called.

yardwork

(61,650 posts)
37. Running for president has been lucrative for Bernie, but he won't release his tax returns.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 05:45 PM
Jun 2018

Speaking fees were lucrative for Hillary Clinton. She turned over that income to the Clinton Foundation, as shown in the years of tax returns she released to the public.

Where are Bernie's tax returns?

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
49. WHOA! VTDigger asked about "dark money" among other
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 06:32 PM
Jun 2018

questions about hypocrisy. This is a Vermont paper, WOW. Very interesting link.

Thanks for posting this, Sid. This kind of vetting is long past due.

edit: this is a paragraph from the Vermont paper, VTDigger (see link)
Sanders formed his own “dark money” group at the same time he railed against 501(c)4s, which are not required to publicly disclose financial information, and have been effectively used by conservatives to influence elections and policymaking.
Link from the OP:
https://vtdigger.org/2018/06/22/second-year-sanders-earns-1m/

swag

(26,487 posts)
50. I sent TurboTax Jane instructions on how to download historical returns in 3 clicks.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 06:32 PM
Jun 2018

Still no "thank you" note from her.

*sigh*

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
58. That "telling the truth about Bernie" thing smells too much fairness for some Bernie-bashers
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 07:57 PM
Jun 2018

More than a month ago, The Hill reported on Bernie's response to Trump's actions: "Bernie Sanders: Separating immigrant families is ‘heartless’". So whoever told you that Bernie would ignore the issue because it was "identity politics" was lying to you.

Speaking of lying, one of the lies Trump tells is that he's just continuing an Obama policy. Although that assertion is false, there is a nugget of truth in it -- namely, that there were valid grounds for criticizing the government's actions before the November 2016 catastrophe. Even back then, Bernie was addressing this "identity politics" issue. See "Sanders: Stop the Separation of Immigrant Children and Families".

Tom Rinaldo

(22,913 posts)
162. Selective vision, eh?
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 08:11 AM
Jun 2018

In addition to what Jim Lane noted, this is linked to elsewhere in DU:

Sen. Sanders: 'Hypocrite' Trump rants against undocumented immigrants, but hires them at his properties
By Justin Wise - 06/22/18 04:16 PM EDT
http://thehill.com/latino/393708-sanders-hypocrite-trump-rants-against-undocumented-immigrants-but-hires-them-at-his

In part: "What a hypocrite! @realDonaldTrump makes hateful and racist rants every day about how immigrants are “bad” for the country, but he had no problem hiring undocumented immigrants to help him build the Trump Hotel in DC or Trump Tower in New York City."

Tarheel_Dem

(31,234 posts)
206. I'll give him this, BS knows a good "bandwagon" when he sees one. Leads one to believe that his...
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 08:59 PM
Jun 2018

convictions, whatever they are these days, are fungible.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
208. Yes, he took the time to travel to California and
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 10:16 PM
Jun 2018

rally with the Disneyland workers, but I haven’t seen him travel to McAllen Tx with the other politicians over the immigration issue.

sheshe2

(83,789 posts)
209. The children.
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 11:30 PM
Jun 2018

Not saying he does not care, yet they just don't fit for him. To personal to talk a Juan or a Maria (identity politics/social justice) he only rails at the abstracts, Wall Street, whatever that means, billionaires (having left out millionaires) as he has done for 30 years. The only thing he stands for is economic justice sadly he has no understanding what social justice means to a majority.

lapucelle

(18,270 posts)
217. Speaking of children...
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 10:36 AM
Jun 2018

am I the only one who finds a gif of a monster hurling a child into a lake disturbing?

 

tonedevil

(3,022 posts)
229. You do understand...
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 02:55 PM
Jun 2018

it is not a depiction of an act of violence. The scene is Frankenstein's Monster playing with the only person who doesn't recoil from him. If a man throwing a child in the river disturbs you regardless of context I am very glad you never saw me throwing my daughters into lakes, rivers, and even swimming pools when they were young.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
239. I've noticed that, too. It's a limited view of real life events
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 07:09 PM
Jun 2018

when everything is measured in terms of rally talking points.

Tarheel_Dem

(31,234 posts)
210. Which is really odd, because BS knows that wherever he shows up, the cameras will follow. He wants
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 12:25 AM
Jun 2018

to have it both ways. He wants to claim to be doing something, just not in front of those who might call out his hypocrisy for his former statements about "identity politics". Slick move, if you can get away with it.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
240. Great points. Those Reagan Democrats are well known
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 07:16 PM
Jun 2018

for disliking identity politics, so keeping on the right side of their issues may explain some of it, which may be about immigrants taking their jobs. I recall Sanders talking to Lou Dobbs, where they were concerned about that very issue. Can’t link from my phone now, but the video is easily findable. Agreed about your last sentence!

Response to Tipperary (Reply #53)

karynnj

(59,504 posts)
273. Please self delete this right wing smear of many long term Democrats, who spend their lives in
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 08:21 AM
Jun 2018

public service. Do you think that being mayor of a small, but wonderful city is not a real job? Do you really think that being a Congressman or Senator is not a real job?

Your avatar is supporting Hillary Clinton, was she out of the workforce from 1992 through 2013? In the decades John Kerry ran for reelection to his Senate seat and his 2004 race, were his crediendials that he started a small cookie business with a friend or his two years as a private lawyer worth more than his work as Senator, Lt Governor, deputy DA, and his military service? Was Hillary Clinton more qualified in 1992 than Bill Clinton because being a lawyer was a real job - unlike being the Governor of Arkansas? Was Trump better because he "ran a company (into bankrupcy several times) while Clinton was a hard working First Lady, Senator and Secretary of State?

For most people, though obviously not all, with the qualities needed to be elected to Congress actually could use those same skills to get jobs paying far more than their Congressional salaries. I have never seen a Democratic opponent use this argument against a long term Republican office holder. I assume that is because we recognize the value of public service.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
281. It looks like that response goes to hypocrisy again and not
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 10:36 AM
Jun 2018

as you are trying to distract about it. The hypocrisy is unique to Bernie because of the image he has crafted for himself for attacking others about profiting from office, yet he is doing the same thing.

Other politicians are popular and sought after, too. People want to see a former President and First Lady speak and read their books, Bernie has his followers who seek him out and want to hear from him. It is not corruption as he often implies about others, It is a pleasant experience to enjoy meeting public figures that share your views and motivate you, It is a shame that was reduced to attacks on other candidates. It is hypocrisy and double standards. Fabricated attacks from which he stood to benefit, so that’s why the hypocrisy is being called out.

Cha

(297,299 posts)
90. I went to the link but
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:37 PM
Jun 2018

couldn't find the comments.. darn!

Thanks for telling us about them, RB

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
112. They are still there on my phone. They were way down at the end.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 10:23 PM
Jun 2018

One wanted to know if he was going to represent Vermont if reelected or keep traveling around. One from someone called "Gary...….." is especially to the point. I left out the last name so as not to post it too obvious here.

Cha

(297,299 posts)
115. I'll look again.. down at the end on the right..
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 10:30 PM
Jun 2018

past all the other news stories at the bottom? I want to see them.

Mahalo!

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
117. Just checked again. They are on the left all the way down. I saw a blue banner
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 10:34 PM
Jun 2018

about "New Users" and signing up for commenting.

George II

(67,782 posts)
141. His "net worth" two or three years ago was $350K-$800K (as reported to senate.gov).....
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 12:55 AM
Jun 2018

.....all the while he was railing against the rich.

Now he appears to be worth ~ $2M or much more. That's curious.

ucrdem

(15,512 posts)
62. So he ran hard against Hillary and amassed a small fortune.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 08:32 PM
Jun 2018

Some might say that he earned his pay. I would not be among them.

dembotoz

(16,808 posts)
71. you mean he did not take a vow of poverty??????
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:16 PM
Jun 2018

i seem to remember other folks who are dems did pretty well too......

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
75. I seem to remember "other folks" being accused of all kinds of nasty
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:20 PM
Jun 2018

crimes and character flaws for doing the same things described here. Wow, this is such a coincidence.

Autumn

(45,106 posts)
76. There are politicians on our side who make a lot more. I helped
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:22 PM
Jun 2018

him by buying his book. I'll buy any book he wants to write.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
78. I haven't seen those politicians on our side accusing Bernie
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:24 PM
Jun 2018

of character flaws or other wrongdoings for writing a book, so the analogy falls flat.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
92. Those fabricated talking points are very identifiable, and no one has
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:40 PM
Jun 2018

given Bernie the same treatment. So no it doesn't. It falls completely flat -- double standards and all.

Autumn

(45,106 posts)
97. Double standards? Hypocrisy? See it all the time.
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:46 PM
Jun 2018
He is not the the only politician on the Dems side to make a million in a year. That was my comment to the OP and I have no interest in where you want to take your conversation.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
98. Those fabricated talking points about making a million are not from anyone
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:48 PM
Jun 2018

else's mouth but his. He is the only one to impose those standards. But when he makes a million, well...different story.

Double standards. Hypocrisy.

This is from a Vermont newspaper. They are the ones who took the conversation.

Autumn

(45,106 posts)
100. You make money when you write books people buy,
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 09:51 PM
Jun 2018

or when you give speeches. That's how it works .

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
106. This is about hypocrisy. Double standards. When you imply that
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 10:06 PM
Jun 2018

others have character flaws by profiting from holding office, and then you profit from the same thing, that is a double standard.

No one imposed Bernie's own standards on him, so your analogy that others do it falls flat. You can't ignore his past words and standards without being a hypocrite. That's how it works.

Eko

(7,317 posts)
111. Who?
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 10:20 PM
Jun 2018

Oh, the guy that used the Democratic party and who's campaign said he will do so again and then throw the party under the bus again. I don't care what that dude says or does and cant wait till he fades away from our party. That's the only news about him that I wait to hear.

Response to SidDithers (Original post)

Power 2 the People

(2,437 posts)
132. Way to go Bernie!
Fri Jun 22, 2018, 11:56 PM
Jun 2018

I hope the royalties and advances double and triple for him next year. It means more and more people are interested in what he has to say. He deserves every penny. One of the last of the true FDR Democrats. A fighter for true democratic principles.

So sick of the haters on this board who attack Democrats and people who caucus and vote with Democrats.

[link:

|]

Stop letting the work of Trump and his Russian bots continue to divide us.

sheshe2

(83,789 posts)
145. FDR was 73 years ago.
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:37 AM
Jun 2018

I would like some fresh ideas not stagnant ones from years gone by. The world has changed immensely we need to as well.

Hmm

So sick of the haters on this board who attack Democrats and people who caucus and vote with Democrats.


Cleverly said.

sheshe2

(83,789 posts)
247. fresh ideas from young candidates.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 08:44 PM
Jun 2018

would like to see social justice front and forward and not a forgotten shadow of economic justice.

 

liberalnarb

(4,532 posts)
250. Social and economic justice go hand in hand.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 09:41 PM
Jun 2018

Democratic candidates serious about economic justice are usually progressives who tend to lean further left and would probably fall into the “FDR Democrat” category. Maybe a more modern oriented title like Social Democrat would be preferred but they are much in the same realm.

sheshe2

(83,789 posts)
252. Yes!
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 10:36 PM
Jun 2018
liberalnarb
250. Social and economic justice go hand in hand.


At least they should. Some only believe economic justice is the answer and it is not.

I want younger ones running. It is time.
 

liberalnarb

(4,532 posts)
259. Social justice can not be achieved without economic justice. They are not separate, they are
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 01:20 AM
Jun 2018

intertwined. Social Justice is “justice in opportunity and privilege as well as distribution of wealth.” We cannot have social equality for all without the economic/financial liberation of all people.

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
148. Don't really care about that... but I do want...
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 01:51 AM
Jun 2018

... too see those axes Bernie! Otherwise you are stone cold hypocrite.

ms liberty

(8,580 posts)
158. Hail, hail, the gang's all here!
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 07:40 AM
Jun 2018

Funny how certain people only show up when there's a Bash Bernie thread. Bless their hearts.

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
218. Nobody's doing that.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 10:40 AM
Jun 2018
Funny how certain people only show up when there's a Bash Bernie thread. Bless their hearts.
Nobody's doing that.


 

Wwcd

(6,288 posts)
164. Why do we have a Nazi in the White House when we were So Warned.
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 09:23 AM
Jun 2018


Yes there are urgent issues today.

I'm sending this pic to everyon on MSM.
They all failed to protect this country, these immigrants, our allies, us.

I hope their stepping headfirst into the border crises now will help salvage America in the coming midterm election because it is over if we fail to give full power to the Dems.

Its the minimum they can do for their blatant incompetance of 2016.



Voltaire2

(13,061 posts)
166. We have an actual Nazi in the White House
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 09:39 AM
Jun 2018

but the problem is Bernie made 1m last year. Got it. That should carry us to victory in November. Good work.

Voltaire2

(13,061 posts)
168. No. I said this thread is worse than useless.
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 09:48 AM
Jun 2018

It is in fact aimed at keeping us divided.

Here was the original post I responded to. It was completely rewritten on edit:


167. You're saying bernie's new millionaire status gave us the Nazi?
Umm. Ok.

Dang.
 

Wwcd

(6,288 posts)
169. Haaahaa. Ok sure. NOW lets not divide us.
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 09:54 AM
Jun 2018


This thread isn't dividing anyone. It's pointing out a fact about politicians.

Yes, With a Nazi in the WH there should be no one campaigning against anyone but the Republicans this fall.
NO ONE.

As I see it anyway.
You may view the thread differently however.

Voltaire2

(13,061 posts)
170. Like I said this strategy, this message of perpetual
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 09:58 AM
Jun 2018

Infighting and obsessing over 2016 is just the ticket we need to get back in power.

 

Wwcd

(6,288 posts)
173. We win by voting BLUE. that's how
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 10:20 AM
Jun 2018

Anyone else is for the Red Wave coming from Russia.

Nothing left to argue.
Bye

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
200. Based on history, it would also be great for him to apologize
Sat Jun 23, 2018, 03:12 PM
Jun 2018

and acknowledge mistakes made. Right?

lapucelle

(18,270 posts)
243. "Take responsibility and apologize" has been a mantra in the past.
Sun Jun 24, 2018, 07:40 PM
Jun 2018

I'd like to see those who are in any way responsible for Trump being in office to do just that, starting with the press.

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
308. Nobody is "obsessively attacking" Bernie. Nobody is "smearing" Bernie.
Tue Jun 26, 2018, 09:28 AM
Jun 2018

Nobody is "obsessively attacking" Bernie. Nobody is "smearing" Bernie.

All I'm saying is that it's completely fair to talk about him and criticize and point out any inconsistencies and hypocritical statements (or word games) for ANY politician. Besides, the thread is still here. If it's still active after all this time, it's not what you claim it is.

Here's the thing: and I see it here all the time... some of our most ardent and steadfast and loyal Democratic leaders are brutally attacked, and our party is smeared by so-called "allies" who say it's "feeble" and "corrupt" and "ideologically bankrupt". I see honorable Democrats like Harris, Franken, Feinstein, Pelosi being raked over the hot coals. Why is it, then, that gentle criticism or probing questions about Bernie are met with such howls of outrage? Why should any politician get special treatment?

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
314. Your "lulzd" at other Democrats being maligned is exactly why the double standards
Tue Jun 26, 2018, 10:50 AM
Jun 2018

are being called out. No more double standards. No more hypocrisy.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
316. What is amazing is that you replied twice with "lulzd", posts 303 and 313
Tue Jun 26, 2018, 12:52 PM
Jun 2018

and then don't know what you lulzd about. That is truly amazing.

Voltaire2

(13,061 posts)
318. Oh I know what made me laugh.
Tue Jun 26, 2018, 05:15 PM
Jun 2018

What is now cracking me up is what you have magnanimously decreed makes me laugh.

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
324. I agree with what post 308 had to say
Tue Jun 26, 2018, 07:32 PM
Jun 2018

Double standards are not going to fly going forward. No more hypocrisy and no more badmouthing Democrats. That just plays into the GOP's hand.

Response to SidDithers (Original post)

karynnj

(59,504 posts)
271. "lucrative public speaking"?
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 08:06 AM
Jun 2018

Members of Congress can not accept payment for speeches. It was forbidden since 1991. http://library.clerk.house.gov/reference-files/112_20120104_Salary.pdf Go to page 5 of the pdf (page 1 of the document.)

jcgoldie

(11,631 posts)
305. yes
Tue Jun 26, 2018, 08:00 AM
Jun 2018

Kids interned at the border and shipped all over the USA, whats to talk about? I know how about Bernie vs. Hillary taking book profits!

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
283. Hillary 2020! Because it makes as much sense
Mon Jun 25, 2018, 10:59 AM
Jun 2018

and she actually won. The hypocritical and superficial attacks on her from the Sarandonites, the FBI, the RWers, and a foreign attack from Russia will all be on notice this time.

Yippee Hillary 2020 !!!!l!!

R B Garr

(16,954 posts)
306. She's the Democrat, not Independent.
Tue Jun 26, 2018, 09:06 AM
Jun 2018

If anything, she’ll be calling out how the Russian’s attacked our election. And the FBI, the Sarandinites AND the GOP.

Skidmore

(37,364 posts)
317. He and his family can
Tue Jun 26, 2018, 12:52 PM
Jun 2018

get out of my rearview mirror and my front view too. We have some serious work ahead and he's not the one to contribute to a group effort.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»For second year, Sanders ...