Tuesday Open Thread

“You have to be able to tolerate what you don’t necessarily like so you can be free.”

–Larry Flynt

14 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Zappatero says:

    Hillary's Hitwoman – Sen.Claire McCaskill:

    Last week on Morning Joe, Sen. Claire McCaskill tried to dismiss Bernie Sanders and the response he is getting.  Among her words we read that Bernie “is too liberal to gather enough votes in this country to become president.”  Further, she explained the response to his candidacy like this: “It’s not unusual for someone who has an extreme message to have a following.”

    Were you to go to BillMoyers.Com you would be able to read this remarkable piece by Harvey Kaye that will explain how wrong McCaskill is.  The thrust of the piece is this:  the kind of Social Democracy that Sanders advocates has a very strong tradition in America, and can clearly be seen both in the New Deal and elsewhere.

    McCaskill's mission is to keep telling us Bernie can't get elected and is a "socialist". This is her second outing that I know of, and is as sad as the first.

    “Too liberal” and an “extreme message” – when Bernie veers quite near some of the most effective and principled (and smart) Dems in history.

    Bernie ain’t that extreme. McCaskill ain’t that effective. Hillary ain’t that smart to keep attacking someone who is right in line with most Americans on many issues.

    • Zappatero says:

      And I can't help but wonder if they asked our Dear Michael to go and attack Bernie.

      • Conserv. Head Banger says:

        The 538 blog reports today that the Bernie surge is over. Sorry 'bout that, for all you ultra-liberals who can't understand the similarity between McGovern in 1972 and Sanders in 2016.

        • mamajama55 says:

          The 538 blog wrote:

          None of this is to say that Sanders won’t rise further or even win one or both of these states. It’s just that, for now, the Sanders surge has slowed (or stopped), and gaining more support will be harder for him than it has been. To win in Iowa or New Hampshire, Sanders will have to appeal to voters less predisposed to him than his current supporters.

          So after performing their best statistical analysis, all they can really predict is that Sanders will have to reach out to voters he hasn't already won over. Ummmm, isn't that what the pre-primary election season is supposed to be about? Reports of his demise are premature, CHB.

          • BlueCat says:

            Very nice but remember that probably no state looks less like America than N. H.  Next to no minorities for starters. 

            • FrankUnderwood says:

              That's kind of why BlackLivesMatters went after Bernie Sanders. He represents a state (much like NH is demographically) which means he's never had to deal with racial/ethnic issues. ("Ethnic issues" in VT and NH means French Canadians). 

              Same thing with Bernie's position on gun control. He represents a rural state where gun control is defined as hitting your target. He's never has to jump when Michael Bloomberg tells him to.

              OTOH, You-Know-Who is probably livid with this newest poll coming out. She's have PTSD re-living that night in January '08 when she finished third in Iowa.

          • DawnPatrol says:

            Keep in mind though, the pollster here is considered suspect by those in the know, NH is thought to be Bernie's very best chance to rack up some good numbers in terms of individual states, and the poll includes the undeclared Joe Biden, drawing heavily from Clinton. Therefore, I wouldn't infer too much based upon this poll's results.

            Bernie's still in it, to be sure, but I'd say his prospects aren't particularly good long term.

        • FrankUnderwood says:

          McGovern probably had a broader base of support in the Democratic Party compared to Bernie.

          • BlueCat says:

            And he got creamed. But I 'm not happy at all about HRC. I never understood her as a feminist icon. Take away her married name and where would she be?

             A Margaret Thatcher from the other side of the spectrum, she's not. Thatcher's husband was a political nobody. She got to be Prime Minister entirely under her own power.  If HRC gets to be President it will be by the old fashioned Eva Peron route. I don't care how many times Bill, the Rhodes Scholar, says she's the smart one. She's parlayed sticking with the right guy and trading tolerance of serial infidelity humiliations for power into a run for first woman President and I resent the hell out of it.

            Bill may owe her something for all she went through. I don't. He may have promised her if she stuck with him she'd be Co-President, not just First Lady, and her turn at the real thing would be soon enough. I didn't. She was never elected anything until she became the Senator of a state she'd never lived in as her very first elected position. Tell me how that would work if she'd been Hillary Smith. Her sense of entitlement is stunning.

  2. BlueCat says:

    Read the entire open letter supporting the Iran deal and parade of  retired General and Admiral signatories here.The letter is concise enough and the signatories more than impressive.  Also hardly likely to be soft squishy libruls:

    http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/read-an-open-letter-from-retired-generals-and-admirals-on-the-iran-nuclear-deal/1689/

  3. BlueCat says:

    Let's hope Bennet likes facty stuff better than Schumer does.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.