I have to agree. Bernie's past activities should never be mentioned.

[DanTex]

As we all know, the GOP would never bring up any issues from a candidate's past. And if they did, Bernie would swiftly be able to boat away from any such allegations. We're talking about a guy with extensive experience defeating the GOP at the national stage. It's not like he's only won elections in a tiny blue state and has no credentials in the big leagues.

The best thing to do is to ignore any information about anything in any candidate's past history. Doing this leads to bliss. And bliss is good.

[cali]

1. Mention them to your heart's delight.

[DanTex]

4. That doesn't seem to be what's going on.

[roguevalley]

70. go ahead and do it. I'm sorry they aren't quite as catastrophic as those of HRC

but that's the way it goes sometimes.

[stevenleser]

9. Yeah, because your contributions are always so sweet and pleasant.

[stevenleser]

17. Case in point. Thank you for making my point for me. nt

[HERVEPA]

26. + 10**8

[2pooped2pop]

23. Yep

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Such as?

[panader0]

5. "The best thing to do is ignore any information about anything in any candidate's past history."

Really Dan? Isn't that what Hillarians are doing? Big Time?

[UglyGreed]

6. Well according Hillary

those type of things are artful smears....

[polly7]

7. Like what? nt.

[leftofcool]

11. We'll let the GOP tell ya.

[polly7]

13. I just haven't heard anything negative about his past ... nothing serious, anyway.

I'm curious what you've got on him.

[frylock]

31. So either Hillary's oppo research team is total shite, or there is nothing there.

Your pick.

[DanTex]

15. This message was hidden by jury decision.

[polly7]

18. Don't be coy ........ like what? nt.

[GusBob]

19. L, O, fricking L

not falling for the hide bait

Clever

[sheshe2]

24. Ha.

[roguevalley]

71. god, those ballerinas again. SWOON!

[BlueCaliDem]

27. Hah! Clever, Dan!

[Ken Burch]

43. only lies get hidden.

Everything about Bernie is already out there and you know it.

[JTFrog]

29. You win the thread. n/t

[uponit7771]

32. touche

[Live and Learn]

8. I have to agree that certain posters should be ignored. nt

[calguy]

10. If he should win the nomination

The GOP hate machine would definitely bring up his past and cut him to shreds. The Kochs are waiting to spend their $800 mllion making the "socialist" look like a communist. Bernie has shown weakness on foreign affairs and they would also delite in painting him as a coward who was a conscientious objector during Viet Nam.
Make no mistake, they'll cut his ass up so bad the average voter won't even recognize him as the Messiah many here think of him.

[DanTex]

12. But for now, it's imperative to ignore all of that. Electoral vulnerabilities are off limits.

Don't say you weren't warned!

[calguy]

14. I expect Bernie supporters to jump all over my post like a swarm of flies

But I'm old enough to have seen this go down over and over many times. I'm speaking from my experience.

[roguevalley]

72. Iraq war.

[Bluenorthwest]

85. I've been watching elections since the 60's and what I see is that the GOP hate machine goes after

all Democrats and that their tactics do not tend to work well on persons without actual covered up past nasties. They threw the book at Barack, who then got elected again. They would of course do that to Bernie. Also to Hillary. Why do you think otherwise? It's not a special arrangement for Bernie, it is how they do business in the GOP. Someone once called it a vast right wing conspiracy....

[Admiral Loinpresser]

20. On foreign policy, Bernie has the best judgement of any

candidate in the race on either side. He doesn't believe in regime change. Hillary does. Regime change is against international law and extremely unpragmatic.

There are two reasons why I have never considered supporting Hillary for president. One is her dangerous and irresponsible foreign policy JUDGEMENT, experience and knowledge notwithstanding. The second is her record of institutional racism.

[BlueCaliDem]

36. "He doesn't believe in regime change." Either you're joking or

you don't know your preferred candidate all that well.

Bernie voted for the 1998 Iraqi Liberation Act for crying out loud - the bill that called for regime change in Iraq, and what was included in the language of the 2002 AUMF against Iraq.

Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Declares that it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government.

Read the full bill at the link.

So I wouldn't crow all too loudly that he was against regime change, if I were you.

[Akamai]

40. I believe that Bill specifically denied any military action

against Iraq. However, the U.S. was culpable of the deaths of many, many thousands of Iraqi kids during the Clinton and W Bush years because of our embargo of chlorine into that country (because of the U.S. concerns that the Iraqis might make poison gas from it).

Because of embargo, children died there of otherwise preventable diseases as they drank untreated water. Thom Hartmann talks about this issue from time to time.

[BlueCaliDem]

47. It didn't preclude military action. It would otherwise say so. It was a statement by Congress that

"it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government."

How else do you believe they'd accomplish this without military action? Ask Saddam really really nicely?

[beam me up scottie]

61. Read the bill, it expains how.

Authorizes the President, after notifying specified congressional committees, to provide to the Iraqi democratic opposition organizations: (1) grant assistance for radio and television broadcasting to Iraq; (2) Department of Defense (DOD) defense articles and services and military education and training (IMET); and (3) humanitarian assistance, with emphasis on addressing the needs of individuals who have fled from areas under the control of the Hussein regime. Prohibits assistance to any group or organization that is engaged in military cooperation with the Hussein regime. Authorizes appropriations.

Directs the President to designate: (1) one or more Iraqi democratic opposition organizations that meet specified criteria as eligible to receive assistance under this Act; and (2) additional such organizations which satisfy the President's criteria.

Urges the President to call upon the United Nations to establish an international criminal tribunal for the purpose of indicting, prosecuting, and imprisoning Saddam Hussein and other Iraqi officials who are responsible for crimes against humanity, genocide, and other criminal violations of international law.

Expresses the sense of the Congress that once the Saddam Hussein regime is removed from power in Iraq, the United States should support Iraq's transition to democracy by providing humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people and democracy transition assistance to Iraqi parties and movements with democratic goals, including convening Iraq's foreign creditors to develop a multilateral response to the foreign debt incurred by the Hussein regime.

[elias49]

90. Haters don't want to read the truth

haters just want to hate.

[mhatrw]

21. Go ahead. Opposition vet away. Don't hold David Brock back!

Last edited Sat Feb 6, 2016, 07:29 AM - Edit history (1)

Oh, wait. You are not holding anybody or anything back. And all you have is a set of hilariously desperate fartful smears.

Tough being you.

[kath]

67. "Fartful smears"

Love it!
And yes, they are hilariously desperate,

[NurseJackie]

22. Very astute. It would be foolish.

[Warren DeMontague]

25. Shall we list all the things that the GOP will bring up if Hillary is the nominee? We can.

But of course, if anyone was to do that, they would be accused of "repeating right wing attacks".

[beam me up scottie]

28. They really really REALLY don't want to go there.

They want to introduce smears as "educational material" so that we know what's coming but ONLY if it pertains to Bernie.

If they want to open those floodgates they'd better realize there's no turning back.

[uponit7771]

33. 99% of it already done and no one cares what the GOP thinks of her any longer...

... like other extremeist it has turned into noise now

[Ken Burch]

30. We've already heard about everything Bernie ever did, and the voters don't care

Iowa knew everything, and Bernie got 50% there.

New Hampshire know everything, and Bernie is leading there.

The country knows everything and Bernie is only down 2% to HRC now.

There's nothing else there.

If there was, you guys would have hit us with it by now.

[uponit7771]

34. no we havent

[Ken Burch]

35. There is nothing else.

You'd have busted it out by now if there was.

You got nothing.

[BlueCaliDem]

37. There is plenty more, but when anyone tries to post it to edumacate readers, their

posts are alerted on, lied about, and then get a bogus hide.

[Ken Burch]

38. Nothing that was factually correct would be hidden.

Face it, we've heard it all and we've seen it all.

[BlueCaliDem]

39. Hogwash. But you know that even if you'll deny it till you turn blue.

[uponit7771]

44. I was hidden for posting Sanders own words...

... here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1154646

[beam me up scottie]

49. Oh please, you posted more than just his words, you think we can't read your post?

[uponit7771]

50. sup BMUS!! I posted his words and then posted nothing false. I would rather what was false be

... pointed out vs the post be hidden.

It was a bad hide and it was related to Sanders own actions and words

[beam me up scottie]

52. You added a bunch of your OWN words and that's probably why it got hidden.

So no, you didn't get a hide just for posting Bernie's own words.

Nice try though.

[uponit7771]

53. I did not add any words to Sanders quote, this is false on its face. I posted what I thought of

... what he said based on the facts and added no words to Sanders quote.

[beam me up scottie]

57. You must be joking, everyone can read your post. When did Bernie talk about "Bigga"?

Your commentary got hidden, not the quote because that's been posted here countless times.

His own words...

[beam me up scottie]

59. He never called him "Bigga", though did he? Or a "token black guy".

That was you.

It's not my call, I don't care why the jurors voted to hide but your claim that you had a post hidden just for posting Bernie's "own words" was false.

Your post was hidden for your words, not his.

[uponit7771]

65. LOL!! You don't know who Bigga is... that's funny and if I said something false you would've pointed

... it out already.

and no one said it was your call, just that when someone FACTUALLY points something out negative about Sanders even in his own words its more likely to get hidden.

I posted Sanders own words... nothing else I posted about his words were false... you would've pointed it out by now

[beam me up scottie]

66. "I posted Sanders own words... nothing else" BZZT ! Wrong.

You posted your own opinion too, not just his words and certainly not just the "facts".

Do you think people can't read your post and see your comments? You linked to it, it's still there since you can't delete it now.

[kristopher]

83. Thought you could benefit

Blatantly calling someone a liar has been unacceptable at DU since day 1.
Knowing that, sometimes I admit I do it myself because it just seems worth it, but when I do I expect it will get hidden.

On Sat Feb 6, 2016, 09:02 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

OK, so you bald face lie about what I posted by not posting ALL of my sentence so you can
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1155571

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Personal attack, we can disagree without accusing each other of lying. Over-the-top even for GD P.

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Feb 6, 2016, 09:33 AM, and the Jury voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I wish uponit had the self restraint to be a bit more circumspect with the charge of lying. I understand how frustrating it is - we ALL have those moments of anger - but the tradition here requires at least a modicum of tact. Even if you consider such fig leafs bullshit, most people appreciate the attempt to rein in emotions.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Sometimes a big breathe and counting to 10 is the best response. Gotta vote a rare hide on an opinion. Insulting other members as an opinion will not fly here.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The alerter needs to disprove this factual claim, not censor it. It is legitimate for a poster to challenge what s/he believes is a misrepresentation of his/her words. The alerter is trying to "cut the mic" instead of examining the thinking of contentious posters.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Bluenorthwest]

87. You posted your own editorial characterizations of a Democratic candidate and they were false. Got

hidden. If you can't make your arguments civilly perhaps you need to get new arguments.

[marble falls]

82. You didn't add to Bernies quote by adding your alerted commentary....

explain how that works.

Bernie's quote wasn't alerted on, your editorial to them was. Trust me. I know.

[uponit7771]

42. Yeap, like this one I just got

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1154646

[BlueCaliDem]

45. Unbelievable! When it comes to posts about Bernie, his fans believe:

[uponit7771]

46. yeap, right now we can't even post his own damn words. Is it against TOS to link post a link to

... a hidden post?

I'm thinking I want to keep this as an example...

I can't wait till SC...

I now hope HRC puts as many add buys with Sanders swing with West and foul ass'd words about Obama as she can...

Just read Ron Paul was heaping praise on Sanders...

...

somethin aint right

[BlueCaliDem]

51. Not very open-minded of them, is it?

I'm pretty sure it's not a ToS violation to post a link to a hidden post, but then again, one really can't be sure these days. So many very thin-skinned posters alert-stalking people that it's hard to tell anymore.

I can't wait for SC, either. It can't come soon enough!

If Ron Paul is heaping praise on Sanders, something is definitely not right...

[roguevalley]

73. its kinda awesome that its come to this for HRC supporters. I know it must

be awful/awesome that the majority here don't choose her but it is what it is. Now all we get is raspberries. I hear that Biden is warming up in the dugout and so is Bloomberg. How is that for loyalty? You might try ragging on those two because they don't appear to have any qualms about kicking her to the curb.

[uponit7771]

75. Majority blacks, Hispanics, Women, non white poor and lgbt choose Clinton...

the very this "revolution" is meant to reach is pulling away from its message.

There's not one poll showing Sanders in single digits with these groups

leaves sanders with the young and white males...

Sanders lost PoC by 25% in IA, a state where he spent 3 months campaigning... thats horrible even if he came from - billion down

there's no longer the excuse that we dont know him ... we do...

[marble falls]

86. Its your pathological inablity to separate Bernie's words from your own.

[Bluenorthwest]

88. That poster can no longer respond as they got a post hidden yet again for their own words....

nt

[marble falls]

89. I surely wouldn't want to be seen as rubbing it in. Did I mention his inability ...

to separate his intemperate comments from some out of context words by Bernie Sanders, the next POTUS?

[Bluenorthwest]

93. Flagged for review.

Hopefully that poster will review their own tactics during the interval.

[marble falls]

94. Its a good thing. Time for reflection is a valuable asset.

[treestar]

84. This ^^^^^^^

Lucky Bernie won't be the nominee, because if he were, the Republicans would actually campaign against him.

[uponit7771]

41. This is false

[elias49]

92. Ooooo. Now I'm worried.

[AgingAmerican]

48. Those scary Republicans and their FOX and Friends talking points!

Shudder at the thought of their mightyness!

[CBGLuthier]

54. You stack hers up against his and lets see which one stacks higher

When you consider she is disliked for her actions by a sizable percentage of BOTH parties I think it is obvious who is actually electable.

Republicans hate the Clintons. Sure they will smear Bernie, but they haven't spent 20 years hating him.

Quite a few democrats have disliked her since 2008 and before.

Yep this whole argument really supports Bernie. Thanks for making our point.

[cherokeeprogressive]

55. "As we all know, the GOP would never bring up any issues from a candidate's past."

Fuck me to tears if there were never words to live by; these would be those.

[Tortmaster]

56. The reason Karl Rove has already bought negative ads ...

... against Secretary Clinton, the reason every Republican in the country has been filling the sails of Senator Sanders, including Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, much of the AM radio dial, all of the right wing blogosphere, Jennifer Rubin, and especially Trey Gowdy and Darrell Issa, is because they fear her.

They would smash Senator Sanders with two billion-plus dollars in advertising if he happened to win. That would be their dream come true. Imagine sweating election night out because the GOP had dropped a billion solid on the airwaves and internet in Florida and Ohio and the Senator from Vermont was painted as the next McGovern (or worse).

[mikehiggins]

69. Everytime people take a slap at Battling Bernie

his campaign coffers get a bump. He has a million (approximately) people donating to the campaign. If all of them go the the well and scrape up the maximum amount allowed that'd be about two and a half billion dollars. If only half do it'd only amount to one and a quarter billion.

Of course, that is a fantasy (probably) but the point is there is nothing new about this fear of the omnipotent GOPukes. Look at their candidates. The only one who really has a chance to stand against the Democratic candidate is TRUMP for pete's sake. Kasich isn't going to beat him. Rubio (too bad you got raped but you gotta have the baby) doesn't have a chance. Cruz only looks good if you've got Jesus on hold on the other line. Jeb! is pathetic! Christie is a clown. And Fiorina? The I did such a good job as CEO that HP fired me?

So, in a matchup with TRUMP Sanders comes up ahead.

THen there's the other "he can't get things done with Congress" argument that suggests that another Clinton doing her best to keep a third Obama administration going will find much more acceptance from the GOPukes who've spent a couple of decades hating her and everything she does.

So you think a billion dollars is going to make the difference on election night? Give Jeb! a call and ask him how much good all those millions in ads are doing for him.

[silvershadow]

60. I know he was arrested once. He was progressive when progressive wasn't cool. nt

[stonecutter357]

62. K&R!

[stonecutter357]

63. K&R!

[Aerows]

64. The *irony*

"The best thing to do is to ignore any information about anything in any candidate's past history. Doing this leads to bliss. And bliss is good."

This just speaks for itself.

[kath]

68. Wow. My irony meter just blew up into smithereens reading that !

Yikes - I just barely dodged the shrapnel.

[tecelote]

76. I think you absolutely should dredge up as much as you can as long as it's truthful.

Let's get it on the table so we can understand what those big bad Republicans and Fox are going to throw at us.

It's so nice of Hillary supporters to keep mum but, really, let's have it so we can be prepared.

[Vinca]

77. Bernie's past is nothing compared to the Clintons.

I'd leave well enough alone if I was a Hillary supporter.

[DanTex]

78. In terms of charitable work and all the good that Hillary has done for the world, no.

But if we're talking things that the GOP could use to crush him.... like I said, it's best to just ignore all that.

[Armstead]

79. Since he's been saying the same basic things for 60 years....

I don't think dredging up his past is very fruitful.

He's matured become slightly more "moderate" and "political" as he's gone along. Anyone offended by the fact that he visited Nicargua in the 80's isnlt going to vote for any Democrat most likely.

[DanTex]

80. Fruitful or not, it's apparently verboten. Which I think is great. Like I said, ignorance is bliss

[Kalidurga]

81. You owe me a new irony meter

This one broke shortly after hitting the red zone.

[mcar]

91. K&R

[Bluenorthwest]

95. Who do you imagine you are agreeing with? Your title is constructed as if you are responding to

something said to you. 'I have to agree'. Agree with what or with whom? Your conjoined twin?