What is sickening is the poutrage when actual facts about another candidate are brought up, and that is called Hate and Bashing. Sad that this is happening so early in the primaries, but not unexpected. Handy, having records to look back on, for everybody involved.

On the eve of her big launch...that kind of Shit?

Yeah I completely understand how annoying and frustrating it can be.

on her big launch today anywhere. I must have the right people on ignore.

Your team apparently are not really team players?

but you should alert on those posts in the celebratory threads . I still see no negative OPs about her today so I will call BS on that.

No dissent or unsightly criticism in the HRC group. All spic and span inside the protective bubble, except the occasional horse poop. But, that's entirely self-imposed.

You would like to extend the bubble until it encloses all of DU, wouldn't you?

Doesn't that tactic have the Team Hillary stamp all over it? There's the Bernie doesn't appeal to Blacks meme - implication: he is a racist. Now, Bernie doesn't speak to Hispanics enough - meme: he's anti-immigrant.

Who's shitting whom here?

**There is nothing in Bernie Sanders’ record to indicate that he does not care about these issues — quite the opposite, in fact.


Additionally, it interests me how some of the articles do not appear to me to utilize the word, corruption..which
underlies Sanders message all the time..he has been speaking about that elephant in the room forever.

I don't remember his ever calling it out by it's name.

Corruption does need to be said out loud, clear and often.

I suspect he is restrained by his old school political sensibilities and ethics especially as a seated Senator.

Unfortunately, the rest of the actors are not playing by those rules.

president and as you say. I am not ok how some of the msm pretends and has
for many years what this has been all about...the level of corruption. They're complicit,
to say the least and another reason why we must fight for public funded elections.

When you look at these trade agreements, and I am being kind referring to them as
such..we are expected to believe there are no other alternatives to NAFTA and now
the slew of TPP etc. That infuriates me and is quite frankly, insulting..they appear to
rely on selling it as oh well, that's how the world works.

The Caroline Kennedy letter I read yesterday almost made me scream out loud.

I had not read Caroline Kennedy's letter.. heard about it on NPR (I think).

Since she is the Ambassador to Japan.. no surprise she'd be cheer-leading for this. But I can't bring myself to read or listen to her position this.

Your point wrt to the corporate media's complicity and avoidance on the high level of corruption underpinning the funding in elections is spot on.. and really the entire political machinery whether its matters before the Supreme Court, Congress, etc. (It's the CORRUPTION Stupid!) the Corrupt Media may as well be a spin off of Goebbels Ministry of Propaganda's play book, IMO.

I am hopeful with Bernie's voice, we have a chance.

avoiding the sand traps which only pulls me in the direction of despair.. ugh.

eom

When that is done unfairly, the attackers embarrass themselves in that effort.

n/t

because for every 'nasty' thing they say about Bernie probably means at least a few hundred
more people will be FOR Bernie. Best advertising he can get.

Money out of politics but consistently back the candidates who receive the most money from corporations. It is to be expected from the media, their masters are writing the scripts. It's disheartening to see the attacks here from dems though.

For POTUS

that's going to continue until the day he leaves the WH.

Right now, everything Bernie is greater than life for the folks who are all in on him.

MOVEMENT!

SMEAR CAMPAIGN!

if what Gutierrez said was SMEAR, then there are a couple hundred smears that have been done by the clownshow on the R side already.

Whatever tone he wants for his campaign, this is like a pickup basketball game, there are no refs and people are going to throw elbows, push, trip, do whatever they can get away with.

You have to counter this stuff, that is part of the game.

But, he is going to get more of this LIKE ANY OTHER CANDIDATE, and if his campaign actually gets some good wind in it and starts polling as a real threat for the nomination you are going to see some for real bullshit thrown at him.

Iraqi civilians dripping from her hands . . . that kind of elbow? Sanders can take it as well as dish it out.

Elect Hilary and we'll be at war with Iran within six months of her inauguration.

Short on the sublty, but whatever.

Hills taken this kind of shit for a quarter century so dish away.

But, not surprising you miss the point.

It isnt about dishing it, its about balling about it.

Fortunately, Bernies constition isnt as weak as some of his supporters.

All we hear from Hillary supporters is how mean Bernie supporters are. They're the ones plotting in their war room against Bernie supporters.

And as to the smear campaign, it is in progress. You can see it here, again, by Hillary supporters. You know when the term 'smear' is used it's about telling lies, not simply criticism.

Call it whatever floats your boat, it is a garden variety political shot to the rib.

You want to be all up in arms over this, your histrionics will be completely off the charts if he continues to build up and manages to be a verifiable threat to win the nomination.

He's going to see a LOT worse, and a lot more stupid, if polling shows him to be a real contender.

I know, Hill this, Hill that ...

Great article, cali… I especially want to point to what's left in this salon.com piece…

It's more of the same. Does anyone believe after corporations give her billions they don't think her policy is favorable to them?

I'm taking a break from vacuuming to watch HRC's speech, and she is not believable in what we are asking all this time, while seeing some pretty plain and direct answers so apparently given to all those corporations during the back room board meetings.

Choir preached to, yeah…

The people who would be swayed by the media, will never vote for her anyway. The people deserve answers. Not just the ones she handpicks. She can't answer the difficult questions, the powers that be know that at least in part the country is waking up to the fraud these people including the Clinton's have leveled against Americans.

That will get Bernie into the MSM spotlight instead of being ignored. Watching Faux news crap their pants ought to be a big laugh, when Sanders comes out as a Socialist, and welcoming the accusation.

Something like: "Hey don't accuse me of being a Socialist, I am one"

That's what happened to Obama, he got put in the MSM crosshairs and would have been a no body had the RWNs not turned their attention, and their massive publicity machine, is his direction.

Go for it.

Fucking NPR went with the antisemitic conspiracy theory angle, for fuck's sake.

because he is telling the truth about Washington. And everybody knows it. He can win this.

An.d let him know this sleazery makes you LESS likely to support HRC should she be the nominee. Be civil. A dozen or so calls will get their attention.

...he wasn't.

What I'm concerned about is the way these over-the-top criticisms serve to preclude legitimate questions about the focus and priority of campaigns. If a campaign just brushes off questions related to the smear, for instance, by harkening back to similar-but-unfair criticisms, what we'll end up with is a barrier to legitimate debate over some very important issues.

I like that Sen. Sanders has begun to include elements of his views on immigration, for example, into his standard speeches - even though he was clearly slighted by the congressman on that issue.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that any political figure is going to eventually fall short of our expectations and will need challenging on some issue, initiative or action. Just as it's important there be a forceful and defining response to misrepresentations of candidate's positions, there's also a need to allow room for legitimate debate. While over-the-top criticisms, like the congressman's, serve to stifle that legitimate debate, pointing out that slander can't be the standard defense to related questions.

I've see a bit of that here at DU. It should be possible to question the senator on his stances, as well as the priority he gives these issues which concern folks in his campaign speeches and discussions, without being tainted with previous smears. That's mainly my own concern; that candidates afford these issues which interest and affect me prominence in their campaign rhetoric. That's what I think propels these issues into the national debate and helps elevate them to a position to be enacted or acted on by our legislature.

Sen. Sanders seems to get it, and I certainly appreciate that.

their immediate audience and so far the audiences have been primarily white. Vermont does not have a huge minority base and neither do Iowa or New Hampshire. That is not to say that minorities do not exist in those states.

If he had spent the majority of his speech in those areas talking about minority issues he would still be setting at the bottom of the polling. That is not to say that those states are not interested in minority issues - those states see all our economic issues as effecting everyone including all minorities.

It is my understanding that he has scheduled a speech before a predominantly Hispanic audience next week and that is when the issue of immigration will be issued. My guess is that will not be held in either Iowa or New Hampshire. I lived in Iowa and in order to get an audience like that he would have mostly persons who are effected by immigration. Iowa farmers lean heavily on this group for cheap labor on their farms. And you can just imagine how that would be used against him.

I think it is a shame that we are assuming that none of the issues he is talking about are of interest to minority groups. My own family are an example. Of Native American/black heritage we are having as much trouble with economic issues as anyone else. We also have troubles with discrimination but since Bernie is of Jewish heritage we are assuming he knows a bit about discrimination as well as about a police state. On the other hand I am not sure about the other candidates. They have not really lived through that.

I think that these issues will be brought up when the candidates are actually campaigning in states that have large minority populations where they will mean the most. It is very unfair to insist that a candidate does not care about the issues without looking at the history of the candidate. Or because the candidate wants to address an issue like economics that actually effects every single one of us.

Just to clarify - I am one of three white people in the family. The rest are minorities. Of course so are we - we are all women.

...having the very same priority of concern about issues as the majority of Americans.

their heads and things like that. The only people truly exempt are the 1%. Life has not been good for most of us since raygun was elected.

...like me, too.

that these things are all being split. He will address specific issues to various groups as time and need allow. I fail to see that what he has been talking about is not about everyone. He has a record that can be looked through to find how he has always dealt with issues of minorities and immigration. Still, those issues affect me too even though I am white and was born here. Everything affects all of us, or it should.

IOW, it is the beginning of the primary campaign. He is hitting points right now that affect all of us to get his campaign moving in the right direction. I think it is smart, I would not think so if he did not have years worth of records to look at for the other issues. Something tells me that everything he talks about and has been concerned with is equally important to him. He is just getting wound up.

I would sure rather hear more than a mention of issues. I like that he spends so much time on each issue he is talking about.

Sorry, I think I got carried away but......it is primary season after all. We should all be carried away!

suddenly a "smear campaign"?

It doesn't matter how long ago someone might have supported such issues, it's about what your plans are NOW if you should be the nominee and get elected. And these plans shouldn't be wishcasts narrowed to one specific issue that is promoted as the be all end all that will solve every other problem.

When you are dealing with a populace where probably 90% don't go to political websites to check policy positions, you have to verbalize it.

'You didn't yet specifically mention my special interest group by name' isn't a serious policy criticism.

It's an attempt to obfuscate Sanders record.

This nation has many issues that deserve addressing. It's is part and parcel of what the Constitution describes in the preamble.

To call people with specific grievances "special interest groups", is a RW-talking point IMHO. It has nothing to do with obfuscating a "record" if that "record" is not being put out there in a policy speech.

immigration reform activists.

the whole of the Democratic "base", made up of a diverse group of people who strongly support liberal and progressive polices, but who wish to see those policies include them and address some of the indignities that they may face, is nothing more than pandering to a conglomeration of unimportant "special interest groups" if they ask for such.

It's about acting peevish due to impatience of not getting what you want soon enough. And in the case of Rep Gutierrez it's disingenuous because he well knows Sanders actual record on Hispanic immigration.

Oh snap!

issues affecting any racial minorities? We know how she feels about swarthy-skinned middle easterners since there are far fewer of them walking the planet (like 1,000,000+ fewer Iraqis for starters), thanks to her shitty votes in the past.

Sanders was a SNCC organizer back when SNCC organizers faced the threat of being assassinated by white southern racists. Oh yeah, this was at the same time Hillary was a proud Goldwater Girl. Right, the same Goldwater who advocated using nuclear weapons on Asians, i.e., Vietnamese. So tell me how Hillary's record on issues of racial jsutice is one whit better than Sanders.

FFS.

So why do you assume that I am a Hillary supporter? Or is your comment a diversion from the question that I posed?



I don't care what he did 50 years ago. Elizabeth Warren was a Republican 20 years ago and Ronald Reagan was a Democrat 60 years ago. It's irrelevant.

What do THEY propose to do NOW about the justice system, gentrification, community building, education funding that doesn't wholesale sell school districts to private industry, and restoring the Voting Rights Act provisions and other Civil Rights Act provisions that have been systematically dismantled since he was running with SNCC 50+ years ago and she was supposedly defending the Black Panthers 40+ years ago. The young people today don't give a shit about SNCC or even the Black Panthers. The folks who were part of that movement are in their 70s and are their grandparents. They are looking at the now and a whole host of issues that often don't have any impact on white America.

angle here. And how it would be knee slappingly funny if it wasn't indicative of some truly deep seated almost WILLFUL cluelessness about black people and our issues.

If you had told me last year that there would be people on a liberal/Dem web site who believe that a candidate cares about minorities because they participated in a march 50 years ago or "grew up in Brooklyn" I'd have laughed in your face. I refuse to believe that anyone in their right mind, that anyone with a shred of intellect or political savvy would say something so irrelevant and so blatantly, openly STUPID. And yet... here they are.

is that Sanders is Jewish. And historically, in many urban areas (particularly in neighborhoods that were segregated and became almost 100% black), often the only "white" person folks had day to day contact with happened to be of Jewish heritage/religion, who often owned a little store in the neighborhood and interacted freely with the neighborhood customers without the racial animus that the community was accustomed to. The inter-cultural dynamic during the '50s and '60s, became symbiotic, as Jews were under vicious attack along with blacks, so there was a mutual oppressive experience going on with both groups and their relationships offered a level of "protection" for each other. My mother would tell me stories about what was going on during the WWII era when she was in high school where a number of European Jews had immigrated here to Philly and some were attending her high school. And at that time, she said that the the other white girls (back then there were essentially only 2 black girls per grade at that school) would beat up the Jewish girls and the black girls would come to their defense. Thus a number of Jews joined blacks in the Civil Rights movement at the time, in order to bring about equality for all - regardless of race or religion.

But as we moved forward in time, the relationship between the communities became more and more estranged as the European Jews began to assimilate into the larger white population and moved out to the suburbs, while blacks were left behind, unable to live in those suburbs by law or stipulation of the development's owner - and this notably included famous developments owned by families like the Levitts, who refused to sell homes to blacks -

Good luck taking that patronizing tack.

Gutierrez knows Sanders record and played word games around it.

Gutierrez is a member of the House Progressive Caucus. Sanders founded the progressive caucus in the House and remained a leader of the House Progressive Caucus even while in the Senate.

Gutierrez knows he and Sanders have very similar interests on The Dream Act, detention of undocumented aliens, deportation, funding cities of refuge, labor, trade agreements, education, veterans care, etc.

He's not honest about not knowing where Sander's is on issues. It's one thing to ask for more direct statements on policy, it's another to intentionally mislead citizens with such a public statement.

To frame it. You really think people are petulant and just require a mention? Like for their egos or something? Lol. Sorry your post was not just about This one politician.

for making a dishonest performance

I believe I've explained how it is that Gutierrez is being purposefully, deceitfully and utterly intentionally petulant

Or was that your imaginary knee-jerk interpretation?

this is about the The budding smear campaign against Bernie Sanders, and the following comments from Illinois Rep. Luis Gutierrez, a Democratic point man on immigration issues: “I don’t know if he likes immigrants.” You've implied that crap like that is "critiquing policy issues not being addressed on the stump". So, no. Clearly not my imaginary knee-jerk interpretation.

read the rest of my posts in this thread. DUers have been whining about "smears" with respect to any critique for months now, so what Gutierrez said is not my point. There are people who are part of the Democratic "base" who would like to hear some other ideas that directly address the issues that WE face that no financial reform will ever solve (given that both black billionaires and black homeless are treated the same by white America - as n***ers). And when the critiques are mentioned, we are told that we are "petulant".

knows what his policy positions are. They are not going to login to DU or onto any website for that information. HE has to elucidate that on the stump. Don't make it personal in the echo chamber of DU.

We are a 6 months away from primary season and he, Hillary, and O'Malley are going to need the votes of the big cities to get anywhere near a nomination. And they are going to have to appeal to a broad range of perspectives within the Democratic Party, and that includes demographics who are under literal physical assault, let alone the economic assault that he is professing.

However, there has been a concerted effort to paint Sanders as being only "for white males" and that his economic policy is "trickle down". And more than one DUer has posed as a Sanders supporter expressing their 'concern' over his white male policy. Then there was that vile OP that posted racist pics in an attempt to have readers connect Sanders to racism.

It's one thing to say, as you have, that he needs to put his record out there better, it's another to ignore his record and insinuate that he is a racist which is what has been happening on DU and now with Gutierrez.

He, Clinton, and O'Malley have their work cut out for them because this nation not only has a myriad of social demographics, but those demographics actually react differently based on region - i.e., people tend to cling to "regional worldviews" first and can quickly identify those not from their "region" (regardless of race). And sadly, this requires a candidate to "finesse" the targeting of their messaging to that region. It's extremely difficult and is rarely pulled off effectively in a speech or rally, as the person ends up looking phony trying to "identify" with people in that region if they are not cognizant of that region's foibles.

Bernie has broad appeal, as I've been witnessing with the people in my life. I hope this time the media tricks don't work.

The smear on the Diane Rehm show the smear by s Hillary supporter. And the usual vile output from fox.

Bernie's no slouch, however, and I'm confident that he can handle it. So far he's been fine turning the criticism around and making the critics look foolish.

It does suck, though.

who has smeared Hillary by questioning her citizenship (or something equivalent) or claiming she is dismissive of immigrants (or a similar sector of the population).

is to ignore everything negative said about Bernie. It sure works well for another candidate.

People get worn out presenting information of dubious credibility and when no one answers the charges...... they stop making them..

to the DNC or DLC or whoeverthehell makes these decisions.

If he had fought the liars about the boat stuff in 2004, he would have expected to stay in for 8 years, which was too long because another candidate had already been chosen to run in 4 years, that would be 2008. Trouble is in 2008 Obama showed up and the predesignated candidate lost.

Nobody but ordinary people wanted Kerry to win, but the DLC didn't, because of this other candidate waiting in the wings to run in '08 when W's term will have been over.

Kerry was out there 12 plus hours a day for at least a year - as was his entire wonderful extended family. Earlier he was out in Iowa fighting for the nomination, staying at meetings until anyone who wanted to speak to him had heard what he wanted to hear -- this just a few months after an operation for cancer.

As to the smears, HE did fight back. When the lies appeared in the spring, he had his entire record put on his web site and his team found 30 plus pages worth of provably false statements in the book, they also proved the effort was financed by supporters of Bush - they even shared a lawyer with the B/C campaign. Note: There was no "Kerry" version versus the SBVT, they contradicted the official record, that the media had -- all they had to do was read it.

The truth is the media condoned a character assassination - long after they were shown to have lied, the SBVT were given coverage and the media then acted as if the sides had equal credibility. This would be as if you produced your college transcript and the comments of an enemy of yours that you really failed a few classes were considered to may have been true - even when the transcript showed the opposite.

It is pretty hard to respond when the media unfairly gives more coverage to those against you. Consider that an ad by you would get far less credibility if the "news" differed. Even now, on twitter and in comments on various sites, many people will NOT believe that 10 of the 11 men who were on any swiftboat under Kerry were incredibly behind him in 2004 -- and still were years later.

it was Gore all over again - the media gleefully channeling the republican negative frames of the democratic candidate while foisting the bullshit narrative put into place to positive frame dipshit.

or criticism when you say 'negative'?

before they can be called "lies." But they are never answered much less proven to be lies.

Wake up, son of mine
Momma got something to tell you
Changes come
Life will have it's way
With your pride, son
Take it like a man

Hang on, son of mine
A storm is blowing up your horizon

Changes come
Keep your dignity
Take the high road
Take it like a man

Feeling the heat. His message is working.

Decades even. Bobby was a populist. JFK was a populist. FDR was a populist.

The establishment doesn't like Bernie and never will. He'll be smeared by surrogates for his Democratic opponents, and the mainstream media will actively try to ignore his message, and will instead ask him about the smears.

Then, when he becomes more popular, the Republicans will take notice and begin very well funded smear campaigns against him, and the mainstream media will ignore him even more fully.

When he's finally the Democratic candidate, he will still be smeared by corporate-owned Democrats and Republicans. Fox 'news' will have a heyday painting him as a (gasp!) socialist (shudder) and will rouse the Republican base to hitherto unscaled heights of frothing hatred.

But you know what Bernie HAS? He has US. And we have to have his back, and make sure we're doing everything we can to see that his message gets out there. Because if it does...

He'll WIN.

If he's not up to it, maybe he should quit.

considered necessary. But with poor Bernie it's a "smear." It appears the same people can't take the criticism they are so willing to dish out for the others!

complained about the rigors of campaigning? Has he done so? No, no, and no. I simply used your own inane statement to show how senseless it was. Where in the world did you come up with the thought that Bernie was somehow making an issue of the taxing nature of running for president? It's a long way to the primaries and if you keep throwing those victim cards down over nothing you'll run out before the first caucus... pitiful.

Have to say his supporters on DU are a major turn off and likely are hardening opposition to him. These posters have been criticizing Obama for 7 years and claiming it was constructive. Slight criticism of Bernie and they are calling it a "smear". In fact brining up his voting record on guns is a "smear." Funny they can't take constructive criticism. They thought it was so wonderful before.