What will Clinton do to stop this man?
It’s after Christmas and we’ve had enough food. There are leftovers for weeks to come. No food for a few weeks, there’s no need, and not much appetite. Enough food already! Instead, I’m going to work for Bernie – the best contender I’ve seen in decades and one of those rare candidates who refuses to criticize his principal Democratic opponent. So I’ll have a stab at it.
“Balance liberty and security…”
In the third debate last Saturday in New Hampshire, Hillary launched this unnerving little bombshell during the ISIS discussion – which both Bernie and Martin O’Malley could have jumped on, but didn’t:
Hillary: So we always have to balance liberty and security, privacy and safety, but I know that law enforcement needs the tools to keep us safe.
When I heard that, my skin went cold. “Balancing” liberty and security really means, of course, sacrificing some freedoms to gain more security. Where, throughout history, have we heard this before? Too many places, too many times.
Hillary: “Jump!” DNC: “How high?”
Ryan Cooper writes in THE WEEK, Dec. 22:
Why the Democratic Party can’t beat Bernie Sanders’ democratic socialist army
It’s been obvious from the start of the 2016 presidential race that just about the entire Democratic Party establishment is in the tank for Hillary Clinton. The head of the Democratic National Committee [Debbie Wasserman-Schultz] is one of her 2008 campaign co-chairs, and the DNC has refused to allow more than six debates, deliberately scheduled them at comically bad times to prevent Clinton challengers from getting much attention, and most recently briefly cut off Bernie Sanders’ campaign from its own data.
The DNC’s obvious bias is bad. It’s also utterly predictable. Clinton has deep ties to party elites thanks to her husband being a former president and her serving as secretary of state for the current president. It’s something less than shocking that the party’s elites are putting their thumbs on the scales against an avowed socialist primary competitor… (emphasis mine)
For more on how the DNC seems to be rotting from the top down, including the latest on Bernie’s suit against it over how it handled the data breach, check out Reno Berkeley’s Dec. 26 article in The Inquisitr. Also take a look at Hunter Walker’s Dec. 26 Yahoo News piece reporting “explosive allegations” by a Sanders advisor of conspiracy and “dirty tricks” by DNC and the data software company (NGP VAN) against Bernie’s campaign. Was Bernie’s fired data guru Josh Uretsky, highly recommended to the campaign last summer by the DNC, a Clinton mole? Some in the campaign are wondering this aloud.
Bernie gets slimed…
Eliza Webb writes in SALON Dec. 20:
Hillary Clinton just slimed Bernie Sanders with a discredited Rupert Murdoch attack on single-payer health care
While debating Bernie Sanders last night in New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton made an egregiously dishonest claim.
During the candidates’ discussion on college education, Clinton stated that Senator Sanders’ proposals would cost trillions of dollars, saying, “Free college, a single payer system for health, and it’s been estimated we’re looking at 18 to $20 trillion, about a 40 percent [dent] in the federal budget.”
This is flat wrong. The $18 trillion price tag comes from an article published in the Wall Street Journal. Authored by Laura Meckler, the piece attributes the vast majority— $15 trillion— of this exorbitant amount to Bernie Sanders’ plan to expand Medicare and guarantee care for all sick or injured Americans…. according to an analysis of the plan by Gerald Friedman, an economist at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
Only problem? Gerald Friedman himself disagrees.
He wrote a response article, published in The Huffington Post, entitled, “An Open Letter to the Wall Street Journal on Its Bernie Sanders Hit Piece,” in which he clarified that, “…by spending these vast sums, we would, as a country, save nearly $5 trillion over ten years in reduced administrative waste, lower pharmaceutical and device prices, and by lowering the rate of medical inflation. (emphasis mine).
She just keeps stepping in it.
Hispanics and Latinx to Hillary: “You’re not my abuela!”
Well, I learned a new word this week – Hispandering. Which is what Hillary tried to pull off last week on her website (“7 things Hillary Clinton has in common with your abuela”), only to unleash a firestorm of scorn and derision from Hispanics and Latinx (another word I learned this week – the gender neutral plural for latino and latina) via Twitter, Facebook, and everywhere else. Salon has a good piece on it. Obviously her campaign thinks Hispanics and Latinx are too stupid to recognize blatant condescension.
Next week, Bernie, Episode 2: The Empire Bites Back!