Dem Race Shake-Up

U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Sanders speaks at a roundtable discussion with veterans at Cornell College in Mount Vernon, IowaPosted by Tina

Things are heating up in the Democrat Party race for a candidate for President. Old Bernie is doing quite well in the polls in New Hampshire(up 14 points). Today MoveOn.org gave him their big endorsement.

Meanwhile Hillary, already under pressure due to pending legal difficulties, has fallen in the polls in Iowa (44% to Sanders 49%) and chosen to attack Sanders…fairly viciously given the virtual love fest in the debate:

Clinton charged that Sanders’s policy proposals were unrealistic, that the Vermont senator would raise taxes on middle-class families and that he could not be trusted to fight special interests and protect President Obama’s achievements, including his signature health-care law.

hillary-clinton-benghazi-600x337

And since her ties to corporate, banking, and Hollywood hot shots is a problem she really laid into him about big business:

“Don’t talk to me about standing up to corporate interests and big powers,” Clinton said. “I’ve got the scars to show for it, and I’m proud of every single one of them.”

She bragged about helping to shape the destructive Dodd-Frank.

Considering tonight’s SOTU too, Has there ever been a larger group of failures smiling and acting like they had nothing to do with the last seven years?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Dem Race Shake-Up

  1. J. Soden says:

    When $hrilLIARy “stands up to corporate interests and big powers” she always has both hands out grasping for ca$h.
    And now that the FBI is looking into corruption linked to her performance at State with $$ going into the Bubba foundation, her platform is crumbling.
    State is going to release Huma Abedin’s emails, which isn’t going to help $hrilLIARy either. $hilLIARy’s chicken$ are coming home to roo$t. And $he de$erve$ it!

  2. Tina says:

    I’m holding my breath on this one J. May turn blue before it’s over. I sure hope you’re right and she will finally get to experience consequences she well deserves.

    Don’t imagine Bubba will ever face his accusers as Bill Cosby is being forced to do, but he should, and would have if it weren’t for the feminists/media that protected him.

  3. dewster says:

    Bernie is earning his votes the old fashion way. really his Policies are aligned to FDR policies which conservatives hate including Social Security.

    Hilliary must be squirming cause she has now outright lied and sent her daughter out to lie. Sad to see the Democrat candidate follow the ways of the GOP.

    The political 2 party system is in shambles. It is my wish I am not forced to vote for HRC just because she is better than anything the GOP offers. I despise Clinton but will defend her against lies.

    As far as sexual conduct… shall I list all the republican sex crimes again? Sex has nothing to do with politics. This is not a church, it is a country.

    To pretend the GOP candidates are some great group of honest individuals is dishonest to yourself and the country.

    We need to get the foreign and domestic corporate money out of our system. HRC is a corporatist just as are all the republican candidates. Only difference is social issues of equality vs dictatorship.

  4. Tina says:

    Go ahead and list the republican sex crimes Dewey. I think you will find that they were mostly failings of character, rather than crimes, and that the price they paid is they lost their jobs.

    The charges against the Clinton’s aren’t about sex or about church. It is about the rule of law applying to all equally, harassment on the job, criminal assault and rape, and the hypocrisy of the feminists.

    Bill Clinton is accused of assault, sexual assault, and rape. Further accusations are of harassment after the fact, through his wife, to silence them. If true these accusations are an example of extreme abuse of power and harassment on the job. Not only did Clinton keep his job after these accusations but he was championed and defended by Democrats, many of them proclaimed feminists. His wife, Hillary, was championed as having courage to stand by Bill after the left made fun of women “standing by their men.”

    I have never taken the position that the GOP candidates are perfect so that fantasy is yours and typical of lefties who don;t care to know the truth about their opponents…too busy labeling and smearing them because they can;t compete in the arena of ideas.

    You are a typical socialist. “The money” will never be out of politics because people will always have money…most of it made by being productive. The socialist want to control all of that money so they can divide it up according to their own agenda. a 90% tax is just short of takeover! That is the very definition of corporatism and it leads, always, to tyranny! Socialism…you complete fool…does not lead to freedom or prosperity for the little people…it leads to shared misery by all.

  5. dewster says:

    Tina I listed some before and there are plenty more. get off the sex stuff.

    There is plenty there you forget so easily.

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/Franklin/FranklinCoverup/franklin.htm

    Now I am a socialist Tina you name call with nothing to go on. BTW Democratic socialist is not what you think it is to which I am not.

    —————
    The socialist want to control all of that money so they can divide it up according to their own agenda. a 90% tax is just short of takeover!
    ——————

    That is pure Crazy talk! You are so programmed there is no talking to you

    One thing is certain the International corporations who are buying out democracy do not care about the people. They see us as compliant work force.

    You like your candidate? Then compare Policy, facts, ect

    Hilliary’s Campaign Manager is a Monsanto Lobbyist she is bred from the same cloth as many GOP are. She was a Goldwater Girl a Republican and still is today in my book. Social issues is where the divide is. Hilliary is like an old school republican before the GOP sold out to the religious zealots.

    The Godfather of conservatism said once:

    “I am a conservative Republican, but I believe in democracy and the separation of church and state. The conservative movement is founded on the simple tenet that people have the right to live life as they please as long as they don’t hurt anyone else in the process.”
    (in a 1994 Washington Post essay)
    “The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others,”
    “I don’t have any respect for the Religious Right.”
    “Every good Christian should line up and kick Jerry Falwell’s ass.”
    “A woman has a right to an abortion.”

    Barry Goldwater

    Sounds a bit like Hilliary to me

    Tina sorry but your thoughts are so far from reality it is hard to even want to respond.

    • Tina says:

      Surprise surprise! The hard left NYT rag takes a pot shot at Reagan, prints a sensational headline about an “inquiry” and you fantasize that it represents a big scandal. There was no right media back then so they got away with a lot of crap like this. Now show me the headlines with witnesses and indictments.

      Dewey I know exactly what you are by the things you say you want and the things you criticize, often wrongly. I’ll say it again, you are one confused dude. You can’t have big socialist government without corporatism and/or control of corporations through regulations, which amounts to the same thing. Its called fascism…the thing you say you hate. A 90% tax would take a huge amount of money out of the job creators pockets. soon there will be no job creators. Who wants to work hard when 90% of what you earn is stolen by government?

      You can’t tell me how taking 90% of what job creators make amounts to the government being in control of companies. All you can say is that it’s crazy talk. So you tell me. What would the government do with that money? And how would companies continue to function when all of the excess capital is being redistributed through government? Now you can argue that not all of the people paying 90% are job creators and that’s true…but they work for job creators, so when the job creators decide it ain’t worth it those people will be out of a job too.

      Dewey you ARE a compliant worker! Also a good little comrade spouting the party line!

      Steve Wozniak just came out in support of old Bernie. It’s fine for him; he’s already got his millions. A 90% tax wouldn’t touch his millions. Who will it hurt? Anyone who works hard and makes a good salary that would like to climb that ladder like Wozniak did and put some of his earnings aside as a nest egg for himself/family. Instead the government will take it and his dreams will be shattered.

      Between you and I, I’m the only one that has “compared policy.” You have yet to explain how higher taxation works to create jobs and a thriving economy. Explain the mechanism…how does it work? (We’ve seen how socialist policy works in the last seven years!)

      This nation was created on concepts that came from the Bible…get over it!

      The Christians are not the ones that have been imposing their views over the last sixty years…the atheists, feminists, and gays have. So what IS your problem.

      By the way, I am a woman. In my opinion any woman who has so little respect for herself and her baby that she would callously or casually have that child ripped from her body has been morally corrupted. She created that child through her own conscious choices. She should take responsibility, bear the child, and put it’s life and well being before her own. Our society is slowly slipping into true degradation because we have not taught and do not support our children in having a humble, healthy respect for life….not their own and certainly not the children they produce without wanting them in the millions!

      Barry Goldwater lived in a world where abortion was illegal, long before the feminists got a law created in the courts with promises that abortions would be RARE! That world was filled with women concerned about rape and severe mental or physical abnormalities. Neither Goldwater nor those women ever dreamed abortion would become a multi-million dollar industry or be used as a means of birth control. So don’t think you can bring up what he thought then and imagine he would feel the same today. Neither you nor I know what he would think about abortion today; it’s a completely different world.

      “…sorry but your thoughts are so far from reality it is hard to even want to respond. ”

      Then by all means don’t bother!

      • Chris says:

        Tina: “Who wants to work hard when 90% of what you earn is stolen by government?”

        1) No one of importance, not even Bernie, has proposed a 90% tax. (It’s possible Dewey has, and I missed it.)

        http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2015/oct/20/donald-trump/trump-bernie-sanders-wants-tax-everyone-90-percent/

        2) I don’t understand how it’s possible that you run a business and don’t know how taxes work. Are you pretending not to know? The government would not take “90% of what you earn” under a 90% tax. They would take 90% of what you earn after a certain amount.

        3) We have had a 90% tax on the highest earners before. People continued working hard. Of course, there were many factors contributing to that at the time, many of which could not–and should not–be replicated today. But it’s not impossible, the way you make it sound.

        4) Again, this is pretty much a moot point, because no one is suggesting it. I personally think 90% is way too high. I also think we should focus less on income tax, which applies to everyone, and raise the capital gains tax to make it equivalent with the income tax. I would love a compromise in which we lowered the income tax while raising capital gains, like Reagan did. But unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be a lot of clamor for such a compromise on either side.

        • Tina says:

          Examiner:

          Sen. Bernie Samders, the socialist from Vermont is, by all appearances, running for president. But, one might be forgiven if one were to conclude that his real job is to make Hillary Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner, seem sane. A case in point is found in a Tuesday interview on CNBC when the venerable Sanders rolled out an oldy but goody from the far left. He proposed that the top marginal tax rate be jacked up to 90 percent, just as it was under Eisenhower. The theory is that, contrary to supply siders like Ronald Reagan, we did pretty well in the 1950s and no one complained about his taxes.

          Of course, things were different seventy years ago. Two world wars had wiped out America’s competition. Government spending, which did not include Medicare, Medicaid, or Obamacare, was far less that it is currently. Finally, Peter Schiff pretty much nukes Sanders proposal with some details about the tax system in the era of rock and roll and racial segregation.

          “The tax code of the 1950s allowed upper-income Americans to take exemptions and deductions that are unheard of today. Tax shelters were widespread, and not just for the superrich. The working wealthy—including doctors, lawyers, business owners and executives—were versed in the art of creating losses to lower their tax exposure.”

          In other words, no one paid 90 percent or anywhere near that percentage in income taxes. The tradeoff was that a lot of money was wasted in uneconomical shelters whose sole purpose was to shield income from taxation. President Reagan realized that, which is why he greatly lowered tax rates, got rid of a lot of shelters and deductions, and saw the economy take off in the 1980s. The current economic malaise has been caused, in large part, by President Obama’s socking the rich with high taxes, so that they might “pay their fair share,” to pay for his social programs and business subsidies, siphoning off money from more productive, private sector enterprises.

  6. dewster says:

    I sure hope you do not cash that socialist social security check or use that socialist medicare cause that would be hypocrisy

    • Tina says:

      Your memory is as bad as your understanding. I explained my reasons for accepting SS and MC. I paid into the SS system for many years. I had a business so I paid the employer portion too for me and for my workers. Being part of the program was not a choice. I was compelled to do this. Until the system is changed, I will participate in what was forced upon me by a socialist who thought he was doing a good and never imagined it would cost the employee and the employer so dearly down the road.

      Here’s the kettle of lies served up to the people in 1936 about what employees and employers would be required to pay into SS:

      …during the next 3 years, beginning January 1, 1937, you will pay 1 cent for every dollar you earn, and at the same time your employer will pay 1 cent for every dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year. Twenty-six million other workers and their employers will be paying at the same time.

      After the first 3 year–that is to say, beginning in 1940–you will pay, and your employer will pay, 1.5 cents for each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year. This will be the tax for 3 years, and then, beginning in 1943, you will pay 2 cents, and so will your employer, for every dollar you earn for the next 3 years. After that, you and your employer will each pay half a cent more for 3 years, and finally, beginning in 1949, twelve years from now, you and your employer will each pay 3 cents on each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year. That is the most you will ever pay.

      HA!

      Dewey you’re a real dolt if you think I’m enamored with the poor return on my money SS. I could have done better investing that money myself. Or, I could have used some of it for things my kids needed while they were growing up.

      I’d change the failing program in a heart beat to give my kids and grand kids a better choice. At the very least workers today deserve a choice in the matter.

      It’s not hypocrisy to get back your own money on an investment you didn’t choose! And it’s a crying shame that it costs the younger generations so much more when they could be using that money NOW!

  7. Chris says:

    Vox–typically a liberal site–has posted a surprisingly balanced take on the Clinton rape accusations. They point out that out of the three women who have accused Clinton of rape or sexual assault, Juanita Broaddrick’s are the most credible.

    http://www.vox.com/2016/1/6/10722580/bill-clinton-juanita-broaddrick

  8. Tina says:

    Lisa Meyers of NBC did a fantastic job in an interview she did with Broderick in 1999. That kind of reporting was very unusual at the time. The network originally shelved the story but finally released it I believe, a few years later.

    In my opinion her story adds credibility to the others that were non-consensual. Whether by consent, or aggressive force, there is a long pattern in which abuse seems to play a significant part in Bills sexual exploits. A list was posted in 1999 at a site called Capitol Hill Blue”.

    Hillary’s bimbo eruption tactics were reportedly very aggressive, and are apparently part of her character.

    She should never be president.

  9. Peggy says:

    I’m shaking my head because I actually agree with Hillary.

    “Clinton charged that Sanders’s policy proposals were unrealistic, that the Vermont senator would raise taxes on middle-class families …”

    Is she actually moving right on another issue to pander to voters away from Bernie?

    I hate it when Democrats promise all of their “free” stuff like, a college education for everyone. Parents used to help their kids pay for their education. Bernie is proposing to change that to have the kids pay for their parent’s education with future taxes.

    Now, that’s something to be really proud of and only the selfish entitled progressive/socialist and those with no critical thinking skills would vote for.

    I can only imagine how upset those kids will be when they realize what their parents did to their financial solvency and tax burdens.

    • Chris says:

      Peggy: “Parents used to help their kids pay for their education.”

      You have to realize that this just isn’t feasible for many parents these days, and it’s through no fault of their own. It’s the skyrocketing cost of college along with the declining value of wages since the 70s.

      I don’t think Sanders would be able to deliver on this promise, though.

      • Peggy says:

        You have to realize that college students managed to get an education back in the 1950s-1980s when their parents were earning much less than they are today and students held part-time jobs to help support themselves. No one expected the gov’t to provide them a “free” education expecting future generations to pay for it.

        I understand since you weren’t alive then you can’t have an understanding of how the culture was or the guiding values people lived by. I was and I can tell you people worked and saved for what they wanted and that included a college education. Credit was limited to the local grocery store, cars and houses. Credit cards didn’t exist and the thought of running up a credit card debt that exceed ones mortgage wasn’t dreamed of.

        I realize you believe you are an expert on everything even though at your young age you have very limited real life experience. Your opinions come from reading those who support your views and refuse to read those who differ by either discrediting them or the information source.

        I also realize that having a discussion with someone who believes they are an expert on everything is a waste of time.

        Of course Sanders won’t be able to deliver on his promise. Do the math. There aren’t enough mega rich people to pick up the whole bill for 99% of the population, which means the next level down will have to pay a portion. And that opens the door all of the way down to the middle class after everyone jumps in the “free” education wagon.

    • Tina says:

      I heard yesterday that Texas has ten colleges that offer a 4 year college education for 10K, proving it can be done…good on em!

      Don’t worry Peggy, Hillary is just doing the politics thang. She will find a way to raise taxes on the middle class too…she’ll have to, her agenda will require it.

      • Peggy says:

        That’s wonderful news about Texas. I’ll have to look up how they did it. I expect they did it with on-line courses and accelerated degree programs cutting down on the high facility, administrative and faculty cost.

        I don’t expect Hillary is going to be a factor in this election at all. Her past is catching up to her. It will be interesting to see if the DNC allows Bernie to be their candidate or if they bring in Biden and/or Warren during their convention.

        Anyone hear if the DNC came up with the $20 million they’re asking taxpayers to fund for their convention?

  10. Libby says:

    Tina, I can top that. You could get a degree from a California State University for about $2,000. But that was back before Reagonomics decimated the public sector.

  11. Tina says:

    Holy cow Libby, the lengths you will go to!

    The private sector was not “decimated” under Reagan. So, right off the bat you’re blowing smoke.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.