It makes you sound vindictive and insincere. Sorry. Just my opinion.

...and DUers who have latched on to Bernie as a mechanism to express their hard left hatred of the Democratic party.

Never confuse the two. According to a recent (PPP) poll, 90% of Bernie supporters like Hillary, they just prefer Sanders more. That's quite a bit different than the kind of incoherent hate-filled bile we're constantly subjected to here.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

is an oxymoron, and while the moniker may be worn with pride, it is misguided to claim it has a basis in reality.

As I have to repeat dozens of times, there are half again as many self-described "conservative" Democrats than there are self-described "very liberal" Democrats.


The DU roughly divides roughly equally between very liberal Dems, and frustrated communists who hate the Democratic party for not hating capitalism. But the membership of the DU has nothing to do with the Democratic party itself.

America has two political parties. A mostly centrist party, and an insane lying racist one. They reflect the demographics of the country perfectly.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

The comparison would be between conservative and liberal Democrats (16% to 29%) not between conservative and very liberal. Taken together liberals out number conservative Democrats 39% to 20%.

And I see you continue your program of red baiting with your Communist comment.
Communists exist within the Democratic Party with no need to hate it. That's just silly.

And what I was responding to was an assertion that "conservative democrat" is an oxymoron.

In other words, if a very liberal DUer calls me, a member of 15% of the party, an "oxymoron", what does that make them, given that they only represent 10%?

Oh, and I'm not "red baiting". I'm just calling it as I see it. I am willing though, to bet that you are right about Communists not needing to hate the Democrats. Until the country is actually to the left of where most Democrats think it should be, our two separate interests align (i.e. both parties are pulling, at least slightly, to the left). Try telling that to the angry flaming DU trolls who constantly post attacks bashing the Democratic party here through. They just won't listen. Far more liberal people than I, people who actually agree with them, have tried to talk sense into them.

I don't know what it is, but this site seems to attract trolls and flamers.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

How do you define "conservative?"

I consider myself to be progressive or liberal, a combination, perhaps.

I am opposed to the extreme amount of corruption in our government, and I want economic policies that further the interests of ordinary people, the poor and the working middle class including professionals.

I consider myself a liberal because I favor racial equality, equal opportunity, no discrimination based on race, gender, gender identification, ethnicity, country of origin or faith or lack thereof -- no discrimination for these irrelevant characteristics.

I consider myself a progressive and a liberal because I believe that good government is important and should play an active role in evening the playing field for all who are willing to work and play honestly by the rules.

I consider myself a liberal because I do believe that Black Lives Matter and want to see at this time and until we can consider that we have achieved great racial, ethnic, gender and religious (or non-religious) equality and freedom.

So now, please define why you consider yourself to be conservative.

What are your belief.

I will reiterate that I want a government that is as free from corruption as possible and that represents the majority of the American people and not the majority of the corporations as much as possible.

if you got a well-written reply to your questions.

And as far as conservative Democrats go, all of the ones running in state and higher races last year in Arkansas got their asses handed to them on the proverbial platter.

So much for being based in reality.

Fine. Easy enough.

* NSA. All in favor of them. In the Boston bombing, no one asked "did you violate the rights of those cute guys?". They asked why didn't you know. (We did, but let them go anyway - so much for there being no limits on intelligence agencies.)

* Guns. Are tools. We don't outlaw chainsaws because they're dangerous. There are poor rural people for whom getting a tag means whether they have meat on the table for a season or not.

* Religion. Is not a negative. Yes, there are people who fall to televangelist hucksters. Have you checked your own charity efficiency? Very little Haiti relief actually helped rebuild.

* American exceptionalism. We are literally the first empire in history that goes out of its way to help others. The main service we provide is keeping the peace. Other nations don't have to spend so much money on building guns because they know we're there if a major threat comes up.

* US military. It's not just the troops, but the officer corps, that are overwhelmingly admirable. Yes, there is waste in military spending, and cost-plus contracts should be eliminated. But we have the finest military in the world, and not just from a competence point of view. Morally speaking, these institutions rank among the best.

* Drones. Maybe this isn't a "conservative" position, given that even Senator Sanders is on record in being in favor of them. But let me state clearly that drones have the smallest civilian casualty ratio of every weapon of war ever. One of the leaders of the anti-drone organization in Pakistan ended up reversing his position when he saw the alternative (Pakistani jets being used against militants, resulting in significant civilian casualties).

* "The 1%" Are not my enemy. I remind you, they include people like Barbara Streisand, Oprah, Soros, the Kennedys. I'll go so far as to say that inherited wealth (and specifically the basis-resetting "angel of death" in the US tax code) is extremely bad for the country, but any self-made millionaire or billionaire, who has not done so by sucking off the government teat, is to be lauded. Zuckerberg of Facebook? Great guy. Elon Musk? Combats global warming better than most ineffective government programs.

* Global Warming. Is clearly real, but international agreements about "cap and trade" are practically designed to be abused by corrupt third-world oligarchs, who will be happy to sign pieces of paper for billions of dollars, and then completely ignore what they say. It seems to me that such agreements are bound to fail, and the better path is to encourage technology that makes renewable resources cheaper. (See Elon Musk above.)

* Liberal insanities. "Anti-Vax" - no. "Trigger warnings" because kids think having PTSD is cool enough to pretend they have it! - no. "Safe spaces" where nutcases can protect themselves from being threatened by ideas they don't like - no. "Fat acceptance" for the morbidly obese who are stripping years off their life due to gluttony - "no". All of that crap is richly deserving of mockery.

I don't expect you to agree, but those are my positions.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

Just as I thought.

The NSA is in violation of the Fourth Amendment when it does not get a warrant to obtain the personal records of Americans.

Our rights are vital to our way of life. The right to privacy guaranteed in the Fourth Amendment is no less vital than our right to self-defense or our right to religious freedom.

The Boston bombers would have been observed earlier had we coordinated our terror defense program better with the Russians. Remember. The NSA program was in place long before the Boston bombing incident. The NSA program was in place at least during the Bush administration if not before. So the NSA program failed to prevent the Boston bombing.

I also oppose "free" trade. We should be in control of what comes into and goes out of our country. We should not leave that to the decisions of multinational companies, some of which are controlled by countries that may not be working for our best interest or by countries in which cheating is acceptable. I won't mention any names.

Where we probably differ is that I think that my kids should not have to repay student debts in the same early years of their working lives in which they are both working, paying for child-care, big early childhood medical bills and so many other costs. Why not spread the payment of those costs across society and across our lifetimes. It's smarter to pay a bit more of our tax revenue toward basic social programs like lifetime education rather than to spend so much on war.

I agree very much about drones. As awful as they are, I know people and have known many people who were on the ground in Europe in WWII. The devastation of the bombing raids shocks the conscience. Drones are far more targeted. It would be great never to need wars, but so far humankind is not at that point.

We agree on more things than we disagree on. So why the anger?

I get tired of the simple-minded scapegoating on the DU. That's all.

Again, the vast majority of Bernie supporters I have no problem with. I know a lovely lady who is very much enamored with him, but that's much different than the screed writers you read on this site, who look like they're using him more as a vehicle to express their hatred of mainstream Democratic positions than anything.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

How do you pigeonhole that?

But anyway, to bore down to the nub, a respondent who says they're "Conservative" isn't identifying with Conservative politicians. Conservatism is not Republicanism/Conservative Democrats.

Conservative means opposed to spending trillions on war in foreign countries (Billions for ICBM's, yes).

Conservative means wanting to foster family life, not seeing parents who can't afford time with their kids.

Conservative means wanting bang for the buck. They're disgusted at how lobbyists inflate costs for government doing its job.

Etc. Lots of Progressives and Liberals are conservative about how our money gets handled by politicians. How much of that loot shoveled off of trucks in Iraq fell into the wrong hands? How much money spent on contractors, and the defense industry, ended up back in our political system, promoting more defense spending and more spending on contractors?

Liberals, Progressives, and real conservatives minded people, have always risen up over that kind of criminal fraud. It's why our government would often got things done in the past.

It's Republicans, and DINOs, who've gone along with the unending fraud of public resources, and immoral war. Though to be fair, I have to say that I see it as the case that the Democratic party as a whole, as a political machine, cheerfully went along with a lot of crap just so that things could keep chugging along.

People see inefficiencies and corruption in government. As a result of the successful propaganda to brand that as the result of Liberals controlling government many people see themselves as opposed to them.

The poll in question doesn't identify people's politics, it identifies how they prefer to brand themselves. That's a huge difference, and one that Republicans capitalize on.

Want to cut SS benefits?

Want more money spent on foreign wars?

Want drug companies to charge less/have more competition?

Want payback from Wall Street for the collapse?

Want banking more tightly regulated so as to avoid a repeat of their last disaster?

Think Dick Cheney screwed things up?

Poll that, and then wonder about the meaning of self branding as "Conservative". It's not what Republicans want it to mean.

16 million American children living in poverty and another 16 million living in low income homes and the conservative don't care. They want Goldman-Sachs to get higher profits and if it's at the expense of the poor, so be it.

There are two sides to the class war. That should be obvious. One side is the 1% that has in the last 40 years been engaged in transferring wealth from the 99% to the 1%. That's the side that supports HRC. Goldman-Sachs doesn't even care if Clinton or Bush win the WH. Both serve the 1%

The other side of this class war wants to fix the poverty problem without asking other in the 99% to sacrifice. HRC will not tax or ask her friends in the 1% to help the poor.

You mean with an unemployment rate lower than it has been for decades?
More people with health care insurance than, since, ever?
And a child poverty rate lower than it's been since they started recording it?

I'd say the hard-left has more in common with conservative Republicans than we do. As the President recently noted, you guys are all grumpy-cat.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

last 8 years. The income and wealth disparities have skyrocketed. Our infrastructure is crumbling, worse than ever. We still have way too many people w/o health care and jobs. Unemployment rates don't include the millions that have given up. Social services like foodstamps are at an all time low. Millions are being denied access to Medicaid. The conservatives are pushing cutting SS benefits and Medicare benefits. We are up to our ears in war in the middle east and killing illegally with drones (110 to 1 ratio of innocents to every suspect killed). Fracking is ruining water supplies for oil corp profits. And Free Trade agreements are sending jobs overseas and giving big pharma rights to gouge the public. Most if not all of these issues are agreed on by both the Conservative Democrats as well as the Conservative Republicons.

This is where the conservatives have brought us:

And the reason why so many children live in poverty in the U.S. is because (if you look very closely), the majority of them are children of illegal immigrants. They have double the poverty rate of US citizens. However, they're still better off, because they would have been impoverished in Mexico as well. At least here, they have a chance. Same thing for food stamps. Food Stamps are for citizens, not illegal aliens. So if you have a bunch of Mexicans living in the U.S., they're not going to get any benefits.

In as much as "We still have way too many people w/o health care and jobs." one can always argue that things could be better - but right now unemployment is at dramatic lows, health care is at dramatic highs. People being denied access to Medicaid is a Republican state problem, not a Democratic problem.

We're actually not "up to our ears in war in the middle east". In fact, our very absence has left a power vacuum that others have decided to fill.

Your "ratio of 110 innocents to every suspect killed" is laughable bullshit.

Fracking is a practice that can be traced back to 1862. It's hardly new. Oh, and flammable well water is usually mostly a sign of farmers digging wells into coal deposits, that permeate the U.S. It's hardly a new phenomenon. It happens where fracking never has. (Note: some of the effect may come from fracking, and I'm in favor of having tracer chemicals added to their mix to prove that it did - but it is hardly the cut and dried case being presented.)


"This is where the conservatives have brought us:"

No. This is where overpopulation has brought us. Giving food to communities that immediately turn around and have 8 kids because now they have enough food to do so, only pushes the problem on to the next generation. Your attempt to lay all of this at the feet of some boogie man - moderate and conservative democrats - is quite reminiscent of the way teabaggers act.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

More of our resources should go to fighting poverty than making sure the 1% has higher profits. Voting for the 1%'s candidate will continue our slide into more and more poverty. Our defense budget is immoral and yet the conservatives love it.
The incomes for most Americans has flatlined for 40 years because the conservatives started hiding their wealth from their share of taxes.

And are seeking to blame President Obama for his success in turning the economy around, which is now drawing Mexicans in at startlingly large numbers. These people are impoverished, they get jobs Americans don't want to do, find ways to improve their condition, earn better lives, but you call it a failure because these poor Mexicans are not supposed to poor, because now they're here.

Fine Trump-esque logic you got there. Kick them all out, and drastically reduce the US poverty rate (though making everyone worse off, including them).

We disagree about our defense budget, which dramatically lowers the amount of money spent on weaponry worldwide, and has reduced wartime casualties to all time historical lows (Syria not withstanding).

I do actually agree that tax avoidance is an enormous problem in the U.S. Some of the accounting holes are even worse than someone like you can understand. But this is something that is hardly only taken advantage of by conservatives, either.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

drastically reduce the US poverty rate." I never suggested kicking them out. I want them fed and given jobs. How sad you have to do that to make your case. The 1% have been looting the wealth of the 99% for decades. They don't pay taxes and support politicians that cut safety nets. And yet you want to continue the status quo.

Hilarious, as you're the one who is builds strawmen, ascribing noxious views to anyone to the right of your hard-left positions, which you can then knock down.

Oh, and I guess you just don't have the mental capacity to understand that if the impoverished were "fed and given jobs" (which they already have), that would simply encourage more to come, not changing the numbers significantly.

The "1%" do pay taxes, by the way. Nearly half of all federal income taxes paid. Maybe this should be more, but you'd do well to actually acknowledge reality before engaging in any kind of discussion.

The "1%" are not so nearly as uniform in thought as you believe, either.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

(which they already have), that would simply encourage more to come, "

The 1% don't come close to paying their fair share of taxes. The wealth of the 99% hasn't grown in 40 years while the 1%'s wealth has skyrocketed. We are struggling paying for the safety nets, infrastructure, and wars while the wealthy are making greatest profits.

The 1% made out like bandits when the banks had their "crisis". It's about time for another.

"The 1% neither loves us nor hates us, we just have resources they want. It's not personal." Or from an earlier time, "Let them eat cake."

There is a difference between "not paying their fair share of taxes" and "paying nearly nothing", which is what you asserted before. I might actually agree with you on the former statement, but not if you don't acknowledge your shift in rhetoric.

And it isn't the "impoverished" specifically - it's illegal aliens. Mexican and Central American & South American citizens living in the United States.

It's one thing to note how good or bad United States citizens and legal residents have it. Those are fair metrics by which to judge a presidency. It's quite another to bash Obama because the nation keeps being flooded by poor people from other countries, saying that since they had the wherewithal to sneak in, they're now our responsibility to care for, and shame on us for not doing so.

It's not "let them eat cake" to say that it is not the responsibility of US citizens to pay for the welfare of foreign nationals. More like, "there is cake in your own country, if you want to eat cake here, you can earn it".

By the way, just how much of your income do you give to help illegal aliens? Or foreigners? I'm somewhat curious.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

Even here it is unusual to find anything "hard left." Bernie, for instance, is not "hard left." We haven't had anything remotely like a "hard left" in this country since McCarthyism - or probably since Roosevelt took the wind out of the sails with the programs in the '30's - I don't claim to be enough of a historian to get the timeline exactly right.

Where, for instance, do you see even calls for even a guaranteed minimum income or for nationalizing even energy and telecommunications - much less calls to transfer the means of production to the ownership and control of workers?

Anyone who uses that term as if it has any relevance in today's landscape is ... is I don't know what. Deluded, at best.

That's why it there is snark.

How long does it take "fiercely educated and smart" people at the top to see what is happening? Maybe it takes so long because they don't care about the victims with the way the economy has been structured against the common man.

My post isn't snark. It is bitterness.


Bitterness that we have been lead into this present day, happily by politicians who worry about their next cabinet post, election or power play.

Bitterness that the country is but their playground.

If I remember correctly it was followed by Congresswoman Maxine Waters scolding Alan Greenspan that he still had no proof that 'trickle down theory' ever worked. GOP has been running on this lie since a Saint Ronnie without the slightest bit of evidence. She says:

"I see Mr. Greenspan. You've brought no examples again today."

We all knew where this train was headed, those that could stop it, did not care. Greenspan should be ashamed of himself.

Bill Clinton is responsible for the "flawed" economic theories that Greenspan implemented at the Fed.

Bill Clinton is, it could be argued, at least partly responsible for the economic crash of 2008 which was in great part due to Greenspan's policies.

It would be horrible to forget that Bill Clinton is partly responsible for the fall of the middle class.

The "free" trade theories of Greenspan and his ilk DO NOT WORK. They are destroying our economy.

Our country was built on import duties. We now survive on income and property taxes for the most part. The rich do not take their money as income. They are subject mostly to other taxes and buy lots of loopholes in Congress for any money they keep in the US and don't hide in tax havens overseas.

It is the middle class, working people in the US, who are unfairly bearing a disproportionate share of the burden of keeping our country going.

The middle class pays a disproportionate amount of their income in taxes but receives the smallest return on that money. The rich invest large sums in the military industrial sector, the financial sector and in producing products in cheap labor markets.

Meanwhile, middle class Americans lose their industrial and management jobs to that overseas labor.

We are being fooled.

The Clintons are part of the apparatus that is fooling and cheating us as Americans. We need Bernie.

A vote for Hillary is a vote for the kind of bad government, bad economic management that Greenspan represented and that the Third Way or DLC Democrats still represent.

We need Bernie Sanders.

We need to say no to the TPP and other trade agreements and return to tax policies -- import taxes -- that made our country great.

And yet the next several posters have diluted its importance with vapid, idiotic, shallow comments and distracted readers from the POWER of the video.

For God's sake --- stop doing this shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

grr: :

Also.... isn't it kind of hard to be simultaneously "vindictive" and "insincere?"

One would seem to preclude the other.

No?

seeing AND knowing Bernie was right.

for so many people.

insulting to millennials?

that's the way that kind use to talk about VN war protestors too

Or are you a Greenspan fan?

This video is from 2003; has he discussed it lately? Or is he a Greenspan fan?

I may be wrong, but I think you're just not an ally when it comes to taking on powerful interests. We need all the help we can get, whether it comes from Bernie supporters or Hillary supporters.

Must have missed that.

The guy who was the epitome of right wing economics, Milton Friedman and all that....And truly a disciple of Ayn Rand.

http://www.factcheck.org/2007/12/clinton-and-economic-growth-in-the-90s/

Clinton can also be given credit for reappointing Alan Greenspan as head of the Federal Reserve, where the economist was widely credited with a masterly performance in handling interest rates. This was an unusual move for a Democratic president, as Greenspan is a libertarian Republican who had been a close economic adviser to Republican Presidents Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan. Greenspan and Clinton worked closely, and in 2007 Greenspan praised Clinton’s handling of the federal deficit and his support for liberalized trade, calling him "the best Republican president we’ve had in a while."

These guys are smart and tuned in. But keep underestimating them because that will "bring them around" to Hill.

Here we see Bernie speaking truth to power.

It will resonate. It's so rare.

"how many old Hillary supporters are even able to remember Greenspan, let alone yesterday".
That's cute. Ageism much?

So you don't like teachers unions and you think young people are dumb. Hows that ivory tower?

As to your second; I didn't say they were "dumb"; I suggested they were uninformed by circumstance. A new voter (18-25) would have been 10-13 when this occurred. Doesn't mean they might not want to know about it; just unlikely.

Don't play dumb.

And frankly, I'm amazed that you're saying something constructive.

Certainly, it would improve audience awareness and enhance the video's impact to give some background info on Greenspan. But the info could be short enough to fit into one or two sentences. Greenspan's role, philosophy, actions, impact -- summarized.

But even without the background, Bernie's words tell the audience a lot about the country, Greenspan, and Bernie. What has happened to the country, Greenspan's role, Bernie's concerns about it, the values Bernie holds, who and what he defends, and Greenspan's later change of mind/heart.

It speaks volumes.

And there are more Sanders supporters there than the entire active membership of this site.

Greenspan his ass on a platter and Bernie was RIGHT. That's the take away. Greenspan admitted he was wrong!

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

Thanks for the thread, Smarmie Doofus.

Would love to see his next campaign ad include some of this...let's keep this one kicked!

and later on the Fed raised interest rates, thus exploding monthly ARM payments for Americans.

Greenspan says ARMs might be better deal

WASHINGTON — Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said Monday that Americans' preference for long-term, fixed-rate mortgages means many are paying more than necessary for their homes and suggested consumers would benefit if lenders offered more alternatives.

In a standing-room-only speech to the Credit Union National Association meeting here, Greenspan also said U.S. household finances appeared generally sound, despite rising debt levels and bankruptcy filings. Low interest rates and surging home prices have given consumers flexibility to manage debt, he said.

"Overall, the household sector seems to be in good shape," Greenspan said.

"American consumers might benefit if lenders provided greater mortgage product alternatives to the traditional fixed-rate mortgage," Greenspan said.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/economy/fed/2004-02-23-greenspan-debt_x.htm

taking down real estate markets and the economy with it.

I believe this is the reason interest rates remain at historic lows

we can see the light. Most Americans are stumbling around in the Kardashian dark.

are my age. They can cite any sports stat you want, but anything that really affects their lives? Meh. And that's what the mass media has groomed them to care about. Anything but politics or real history.

repulsive vultures like Greenspan, speaking for people like me and showing loud and clear whose side he's on, without any hedging, triangulating, or obfuscation whatsoever is why I'm voting for Bernie.

though.

for putting him in the WH, where his cabinet appointments can deal with Wall Street banksters.

this is a revolution we are talking about..we will not be able to get any of this done until we are all involved..have you not been listening?

Just taking a wild guess.

and... to be continued.

all of the other bullshit is just talking points.get more of this out there,you will have people,from all sides
with Bernie.------Hell yes!!!!!!!

And anyone trying to argue this video needs to be answered with laughter.

I like the new campaign ad. I've seen some other clips that are as good or better.

Show it far and wide!

Friend sent this link: http://gawker.com/isnt-bernie-sanders-a-little-old-to-trick-or-treat-1739896570

Which was typically Bernie, obviously feeling a little weird about trying to act natural while being photographed doing something normal, but the comments! It's like they'd been reading DU! It's hilarious!

Bernie fighting the good fight. This one is one of my favorites.

I couldn't listen to him after that. Those who think we have the highest standard of living are living in the past. Our standard of living has been declining for over 30 years. I think the real problem is that people like Greenspan see our standard of living as too high. That is why they support globalization and outsourcing of jobs. They want to see our wages go down so that we can compete in the global market place. Well, I think the American worker would disagree with that strategy.

Are directly tied to American ingenuity from the making of things. You move the making of things to China. Funny, then China becomes a source for ingenuity.

Americans are a creative, hard working force, when given the opportunity. We are not blots on Greenspan's spreadsheets.

Youth Minority unemployment rates are absurdly high due to Greenspan's short sightedness, and our future is imperiled as a result. Imagine our capacity if this young force had the training and opportunity to grow our economy.

can't suppress his smile, as Bernie tears strips off the oleaginous Mr Greenspan.

The body lingo of the other committee members is also interesting. Is that Maxine Waters to Sanders' left? She appears to have a shit-eating ( excuse the vulgarity) grin that she just can't shed.

Whereas on the other side... I'd say that's NY's Carolyn Maloney.... now an aging career Clinton groupie who looks for all the world like she's about to go into cardiac arrest. ( "Who the funk IS this crazy MFer and dpesn't he realize he's going to spoil it for *ALL* OF US!!!!????


Sorry. I had to break my silence on the question of body lingo. I can't resist it.

As you were.

I'll get back in my crypt now.

instead of electing him we should clone him

As head of the Federal Reserve, he used that banker and Wall Street controlled institution as a weapon in the war against the middle class.

He knew exactly what he was doing.

K and R.

Greenspan was wrong.

Trickle-down theory is failed policy.

Most every republican still embraces it. And too many democrats either still embrace it or don't do enough to reject it.

Hillary marched right over to Wall Street and basically said "Cut it out"

















just in case

That dude behind Bernie is kinda unforgettable.

He's been right for decades on nearly everything.

Gotta love Women For Bernie and New Mexico for Bernie!

#FeelTheBern #Bernie2016

So far this morning before running off to my inadequately paid job, I've seen two posts on the Reagan era debacle that caused most of the misery BY DESIGN.

Then, you could see the Reagan era policies were nothing more than lip service, then hearing loss as to what policies eventually drove the American people's chance of having any hope, while the rich got richer.

Now, Reagan's dead, but the false memories about him live on in any right wing nut who is clueless as to what happened to "trickle down economics".

Greenspan is still alive, but was SHOCKED! (Shocked, I tell you!!!) of what has happened in the real world.

Take Home Message - Bernie Sanders was aware, beginning at the local government level of what was going on and what STILL is going on.

Take this message to everyone by kicking this thread!

the ever left shifting Hillary, How?

... and that fact alone should have disqualified him from ANY position of power and authority. We'll be flushing the poison of Rand's bumper-sticker "philosophy" out of America's body politic for the next hundred years. Assuming, of course, that this country survives the infection at all, which, given the popularity of a vicious bully like The Donald, is in doubt.

Bernie is our last best hope.