You are out of ammo..

fantasy essay, and his praising of Castro, and his calling for public ownership of the means of production. Maybe you can point me to them.

I mean energy, of course, but not everything.

Sanders: "Democracy means public ownership of the major means of production"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/27/1475904/-Sanders-Democracy-means-public-ownership-of-the-major-means-of-production

government the better.

We've been told that a lot. That is the whole pissing point on Clinton, remember?

He was already an elected politician, around 40 years old, when he said that. It wasn't some youthful musings.

The thing is, for all the talk of Hillary's evolutions, changing from an advocate of a state-run economy (which is what "public ownership of the means of production" means) to now a capitalist is by far the most drastic evolution of anyone running on either side of the aisle, with the exception of Trump, who changes positions every 20 minutes.

I don't know if he ever repudiated public ownership of industry before he started running for president. Also, he still declares himself a "democratic socialist", but the platform he's actually running on is "social democracy" and not "democratic socialism". Democratic socialism combines a centrally planned economy with democratic governance. I'm sure Bernie knows this, which is why it's a little strange that he's intentionally mislabeling himself. Unless he's been an actual socialist for a lot longer, maybe up until the day he decided to run for president.

We are in sore need of a new system.

Our form of capitalism is why we have excesses.

What we need is a system with far less ownership by people like Trump or Koch bros or Gates, for that matter, and far more ownership by the people.

You can do that without the government, by the way.

You could argue why we have certain drugs that cure us is capitalism, true to a point.

and a stronger safety net. But I certainly do not agree with "public ownership of the major means of production."

Try looking up the state of roads in the U.S. (or infrastructure in general), the number of people going hungry (especially children), or the ongoing foreclosure crisis since 2008.

And, actually, it's basically a type of socialism that gives us roads, thanks to taxes and all, or at least that's the way it would work if the government wasn't so deeply corrupted. A capitalist system corrupted by...say it with me now...billionaires and corporations growing ever fatter thanks to the elevation of corporations over people, siphoning money away from vital social (so much more acceptable without the "ist&quot programs.

fake

But then you knew that.

Bernie was describing how capitalism should be altered to put more power in the hands of the workers.

Nice try, red baiters.

Here's the actual quote: "Democracy means public ownership of the major means of production, it means decentralization, it means involving people in their work. Rather than having bosses and workers it means having democratic control over the factories to as great a degree as you can.

And when the right wing copies this Clinton camp SMEAR, we will do them a hundredfold what I have just done to you.

We all know what that means.

He stated very clearly that he wants workers to have control over the industries they work for. End of story.

It means a government owned and planned economy. There's no ambiguity whatsoever.

I did, and it's clear to me that that was not what he was describing. If you had read it, you would have also seen that he was describing the views of the Liberty Union Party that he had belonged to 15 years prior to the interview, i.e. the late sixties.

and we probably should turn the government ownership back to prisons...What exactly is it about the government doing things for the people that scares ya'll.

Flinging pooh and running away is something you just did.

With little negative effect. He gains support and she hemorrhages support.

While he continually gains support

on the middle class. That, by itself, a big loser in the GE

until he was in his forties. I mean, that is literally leaving out a couple decades of productivity, being an adult. Can you imagine a message of free college and healthcare, paid thru increase taxes, on the working persons back. Not having gotten into the work force until he was in his forties?

I could play with that ad.

Or more, the ironic.

you run around calling others, liars.

I thought that's what all people who value truth do?

No?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1637198

Also ... what exactly did he fantasize about at 72?

I have a whole list of being hidden for it on my profile page. Are you now the site monitor?

And I don't think it's nearly as bad as stealing private medical info to pass around to hurt someone with. How about you?

discussed as you claim. That seems to be your main issue going on years now.

ugly and damaging thing ever seen here, I have NO problem reminding her of it. I don't like having fingers wagged in my face by hypocrites.

Just when the finger wagging comes out.

In fact, it's the first post I responded to. That's how easy it is to find.

Member of society prior to running for public office when he was 40. The provable facts are that he worked sometimes at a bunch of odd jobs, often had no job at all, had his power turned off frequently for lack of payment, and was a miserable part time, short lived carpenter.

Even my youngest child can match that resume before they graduate High School. He simply couldn't or wouldn't work a regular job until he turned 40. Once he found his cash cow, he laid down sideways on the public trough accomplishing next to nothing and collected a pay check.

He DID work regular jobs that got paychecks. I just posted an article listing them.



'Found the public cash cow' - wow, do you hate ALL politicians? You sound like you want to get rid of government.

Who are you going to believe, the fact checkers or HCS?

hurt anyone.

(The good news is ............ they are obviously desperate and very, very afraid. )

LOL.


Kind of strange the outrage is cranked up about 50 notches over what it was when it was talked about here the first 5 or 10 times.

I read it again, polly, catch me!!!

You're going to burn out your womanly neurons reading it twice like that!



I'ma scared for you

Going in and on about something that was written in a medical journal, it's like watching kids try out for a school play. Totally convincing.

Best to post it in the Bernie Group when it's sure to be met with appreciative applause.

Adults are more than capable of reading the essay and understanding it's about gender stereotypes.

And we're all adults here, right?

And then to have it all fall down. Must be very disappointing.

But ..... tomorrow's a new day.

He has a very long history of accomplishing nothing. It will not go unnoticed.

But that's all it would be, playing ....

Bernie Sanders graduated from the University of Chicago in the early 60s and worked a variety of jobs (and collected paychecks) throughout the 60s and 70s. He was elected the mayor of Burlington, Vermont, in 1981.

Before that, Sanders worked as an aid at a psychiatric hospital, as a pre-school teacher for Head Start, as a property tax researcher for the Vermont Department of Taxes, and for a non-profit called the Bread and Law Task Force.

why the hell was he working as a carpenter and unemployed after graduating from such a fine university?

Ask him.

Some of the people I know who graduated from university many times took years to settle into careers that had nothing to do with their majors.

That's just life.

He grew up lower middle class and as an adult scraped by until he became mayor.

At least get your facts straight.

Sanders is fool's gold. He doesn't stand a chance under serious scrutiny.

Posted my thoughts on it downthread.

No one has thrown the kitchen sink at Bernie Sanders. There have obviously been negative pieces about him, but they are scattered and never pronounced and dominating enough to have an impact. He's the only major candidate who hasn't had to endure an entire news cycle of negative scrutiny, which is probably why he is polling the way he is against republicans.

We saw she isn't above that in 2008. So what's holding her back? I'll tell you. There's nothing to it. It won't stick to the wall.

I commend her for keeping it positive. Too bad Bernie's going the dishonest route.

you know how she played the sex card regarding him saying " we can shout about issues" Or did you mean honest about her flip flops regarding TPP, keystone, affordable tuition, her transcripts, her claiming he failed to bail out the auto industry, all those honest lies?

He'd be spending so much time trying to explain ... and the candidate who's busy explaining is the same candidate that's busy losing.

Thankfully we won't have to worry about that ... Bernie will not be the nominee.