Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Bernie Sanders’

It is always amusing when a Socialist objects to central control — a rare thing indeed.

And yet here is Bernie on the proposed Puerto Rico debt bailout bill currently up for a vote in Congress:

In a letter to Senate colleagues released Monday, Sanders rips the agreement to restructure the island’s $70 billion in debt…

In particular, Sanders takes issue with a new oversight board created under the legislation to oversee Puerto Rico’s finances because the majority of the seven-member panel…The board will have expansive power over Puerto Rico’s economy. <Politico.com, link>

And now for Bernie’s strong statement against central control:

In my view, we must never give an unelected control board the power to make life and death decisions for the people of Puerto Rico without any meaningful input from them at all.

That’s right, Bernie! Welcome to the side of liberty, where have you been?

It is refreshing to see a candidate for president vigorously opposing a powerful, unelected Board whose members are appointed by Washington officials (Democrats and Republicans each get Board seats that would control Puerto Rico).

But, Bernie, I ask you: did you oppose the IPAB inside of Obamacare?

Do you remember Barack Obama’s IPAB?

As I wrote in 2012, the Affordable Care Act includes something called the Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB, a 15-member board that is appointed by the president. Its stated goal is to control Medicare spending. How will it do that? From Cato.org, my emphasis added:

When the unelected government officials on this board submit a legislative proposal to Congress, it automatically becomes law: PPACA requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to implement it. Blocking an IPAB “proposal” requires at a minimum that the Houseand the Senate and the president agree on a substitute. The Board’s edicts therefore can become law without congressional action, congressional approval, meaningful congressional oversight, or being subject to a presidential veto. Citizens will have no power to challenge IPAB’s edicts in court<Cato.org, link >

This is fascism (or socialism, if you prefer): a 15-member panel, unelected, makes decisions that automatically become law and control the amount of care Americans will receive.

IPAB’s unelected members will have effectively unfettered power to impose taxes and ration care for all Americans, whether the government pays their medical bills or not. In some circumstances, just one political party or even one individual would have full command of IPAB’s lawmaking powers. IPAB truly is independent, but in the worst sense of the word. It wields power independent of Congress, independent of the president, independent of the judiciary, and independent of the will of the people.

As of this writing, the IPAB remains a part of Obamacare. It’s still in there, though some Democrats have since come to their senses and urged for repeal of it (link).

So I ask you, Bern baby Bern, where do you stand on the draconian, Barack Obama IPAB?

IPAB-obamacare

 

Read Full Post »

I was shocked, for just a brief moment, when I read that the Koch brothers were possibly intending to vote for Hillary Clinton, a Democrat, over Donald Trump, in the general election assuming both of them win the nomination of their respective parties.

Oil tycoon and conservative mega-donor Charles Koch had kind words for both Bill and Hillary Clinton in an interview Sunday, saying there was an outside chance he could support her in November. <CNN, link>

But then I quickly realized that mega-wealthy donors to national politicians need candidates whom they can influence, and Donald Trump does not fit the bill (nor does Bernie Sanders on the Democrat side).

Hillary Clinton, however, does fit the bill.  Oh, how she has been bought by powerful interests, hundreds of times over, and the Koch brothers prefer someone like her to Trump, who does not appear to be “Buy-able”.

First, there are Hillary’s Wall Street and other speaking fees, which total $153 million (emphasis added:)

Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, combined to earn more than $153 million in paid speeches from 2001 until Hillary Clinton launched her presidential campaign last spring, a CNN analysis shows.

In total, the two gave 729 speeches from February 2001 until May, receiving an average payday of $210,795 for each address. The two also reported at least $7.7 million for at least 39 speeches to big banks, including Goldman Sachs and UBS, with Hillary Clinton, the Democratic 2016 front-runner, collecting at least $1.8 million for at least eight speeches to big banks. <CNN, link>

When Bernie Sanders and his supporters call her out for being in the pocket of the big banks, he has good reason to do so.

She is owned by them, and everybody knows it.

Check out this amazing photo from 2014 of Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman, Sachs, and his candidate, Hillary Clinton.  I was going to add some fun labels to this photo, but then I thought “Why ruin such a perfect indictment of who Hillary Clinton is?”.

That smile. That smirk.

Blankfein and Hillary

Here is a nice quote from Bernie, who tells it like it is and is beloved my millions of Democrats as a result (CNN, link):

What being part of the establishment is, is in the last quarter, having a super PAC that raised $15 million from Wall Street, that throughout one’s life raised a whole lot of money from the drug companies and other special interests

Bernie knows what we all know — that Hillary Clinton is a big liar when she claims to be “fighting for the people”.Clintonocchio

Second, we have more millions — actually, BILLIONS, of dollars donated by foreigners to the Clinton Global Initiative, her private “good works” entity that cynics might say serves a dual purpose: it allows foreigners to contribute to a presidential candidate, something that is illegal in the United States.

The Washington Post reported last week that foreign sources, including governments, made up a third of those who have given the foundation more than $1 million over time. The Post found that the foundation, begun by former president Bill Clinton, has raised nearly $2 billion since its creation in 2001. <Washington Post, link>

How much was that?

Two Billion dollars.

Is Hillary above accepting millions from foreign governments while serving as Secretary of State — a clear conflict of interest?

No, not at all:

The Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration, foundation officials disclosed Wednesday.

She is owned by them, and everybody knows it.

So the Koch brothers, those very same Republican rich guys whom Liberals love to hate, are now on record supporting Hillary Clinton, and why shouldn’t they when Donald Trump as president would scare them to their very bones by being a president who doesn’t need and doesn’t want their money.

Which is why many Bernie supporters will either sit out the election if Hillary gets the nomination, or will vote for Trump (and not tell anyone for fear of being shamed).

In either case, the Republican wins.

Read Full Post »

Go Bernie Go: the crazy Vermont senator with the New Yawk accent scored the same number of votes in Iowa last night, proving, if nothing else, that Hillary’s own party despises her and does not trust her.

I am heartened by the result because in this era of “King is wearing no clothing” UN-reality, a woman who trafficked in top secret government information on an insecure home computer that is believed to have been hacked by the Russians and Chinese should be disqualified to be president or even run for president.

The Obama administration announced Friday that 22 emails making up seven email chains that passed through Clinton’s private server had been classified “top secret” and would not be made public along with Clinton’s other emails. It was the first disclosure that top secret material had been on the unsecured server. <USA Today, link>

It’s not just her actions with the emails, it’s her wanton refusal to acknowledge what we all know, on both sides of the political aisle: her actions were reckless, and if she has no contrition, what crimes and errors in judgment might she commit — ON PURPOSE no less — while serving as president?

Barry and Hillary rules don't apply

She can’t be trusted to safeguard our nation and its laws, and Democratic voters know it just as much as Ms. Clinton’s ‘political enemies’.

Furthermore, Republicans seem to prefer indicting only Hillary in the court of public opinion for her devastating email scandal, but she worked at the State Department for Barack Hussein Obama, meaning that his administration is implicated in all of her security breaches.

GO BERNIE GO.

Read Full Post »

I don’t know who should be more insulted by the Democrat party charade known as the 2016 nomination process: all Americans, or fellow Democrats who are being told that they have a choice of candidates.

Bernie Sanders, who not that long ago was leading the Iowa and New Hampshire polls over Hillary Clinton, has become nothing more than a shill for Hillary Clinton and the continuation of her purely selfish career.

First he gave Ms. Clinton a pass on her devastating email scandal, in which she has committed more potential crimes than General David Petraeus did and yet Petraeus was prosecuted and made to pay for sharing classified material with his own biographer.

In January 2015, officials reported the FBI and Justice Department prosecutors had recommended bringing felony charges against Petraeus for allegedly providing classified information to his biographer, Paula Broadwell… <Wikipedia>

That’s right, Petraeus shared classified information with his biographer and was prosecuted with a penalty that included possible jail time. In the eventual plea deal reached with Petraeus,

Prosecutors agreed to not send Petraeus to jail because the classified information was never released to the public or published in the biography of him that Broadwell wrote. <CNN.com, link>

Now let’s contrast this with Hillary Clinton’s security breaches:

An intelligence community review has re-affirmed that two classified emails were indeed “top secret” when they hit Hillary Clinton’s unsecured personal server despite a challenge to that designation by the State Department, according to two sources familiar with the review. The subject matter of the messages is widely reported to be the movement of North Korean missiles and a drone strike. <Foxnews.com, link>

At this point we all know that Ms. Clinton’s willful violation of protocols concerning the handling of classified documents is of far greater threat to our nation than the far-lesser breaches that have led to successful prosecutions. And yet here is what Bernie said in the first Democrat “debate”:

For him to let her off the hook in this manner, on something as deadly serious as her “rules and laws don’t apply to me” reckless conduct, established clearly that Bernie is in the bag for Clinton.

And now there is this latest Bernie sell-out of the Democrat party: he just gave the weekend morning shows some sound bites about his belief that Bill Clinton’s sex life should not be brought up by Donald Trump because it is not relevant to the presidential race (link). Put aside whether you believe Bill Clinton’s tyrannical abuse of women is worthy of being discussed: if you are Bernie Sanders, and you want to win the nomination, why are your rushing in to save Hillary Clinton from this toxic subject?

Hey, Bernie, what did Hillary Clinton or people close to her say to you to get you to surrender the nomination like this?

Was it the same thing she told Joe Biden to get him to not run at all? You know, the Vice President of the United States for seven years now, a man whose career ambition is to become president, and whose wife thinks he should run, and who does not have failed savings and loans and Benghazi in his background, but who is NOT RUNNING?

Finally, if you are a registered Democrat, how can you stand this charade, this hijacking of your party by the Clinton machine?

 

 

Read Full Post »

I saw this headline on the Huffington Post and rejoiced that not all Liberals have drunken the toxic koolaid that seems to have infected the media when it comes to Hillary Clinton’s bankrupt campaign <link>:

Favorability Ratings Show Hillary Clinton Is Unelectable and Bernie Sanders Wins a General Election

How’s that for some Bernie love?

Go Bernie Go!!

Read Full Post »

Hillary Clinton is a disaster for the country (obviously), but also for the Democrat party (also obvious to most people, except a few lunatic celebrities).

Bernie Socialist Sanders, on the heels of his 9-point lead over Mrs. Clinton in New Hampshire, is now LEADING IN IOWA also.

A new Quinnipiac University poll out Thursday morning shows Bernie Sanders at 41 percent and Hillary Clinton at 40 percent in Iowa – a virtual tie. <Yahoo News, link>

Priceless.

I am beginning to wonder if we might have a Trump versus Bernie general election matchup…

And then I wonder if we might see this again:

1984 Election Map Result

Yes, we can dare to dream.

Read Full Post »