Very Interesting MO Endorsement: Robert H. Wendt - A higher loyalty

[Nanjeanne]

Robert H. Wendt, who owes a deep personal debt to both of the Clintons (having been pardoned by him in Jan. 2001) endorses Sanders.

I urge my fellow St. Louisans to vote for Bernie Sanders in this week’s primary. I do so in spite of being deeply indebted to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

SNIP

Because of this great personal debt and my deep belief in loyalty, it may seem both curious and disloyal that I urge my fellow citizens to get behind Bernie Sanders. I do so because of my deep belief that Sen. Sanders is leading a political revolution that has the only real chance of restoring democracy to America.

I was privileged to come of age during the civil rights movement. I am thankful that God allowed me to witness the struggle of my African-American fellows culminating in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. What was accomplished was breathtaking. It came only with great sacrifice. But it proved that we could live up to what Lincoln so aptly described as “the better angels of our nature.”

SNIP

Unless and until we remove the big money influence from our political system, we will continue in the direction of a two-class society — the haves and the have-nots. If that happens, America will come apart at the seams. The riots of the ’60s and ’70s will look like minor disturbances if the imbalances within our society remain and gain even more momentum.

The sad fact is that the Clintons are on the wrong side of this issue. They have become part of the Wall Street crowd. It is that group which nearly bankrupted our nation in 2008 with their greed. Hillary Clinton simply will not reform our broken economic system; she is part of it.

I implore my African-American friends to support Sen. Sanders because he, not Clinton, offers the only real chance to address the economic grievances of the black community.

Read whole statement here: http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/bernie-sanders-a-higher-loyalty/article_ca6fa501-eead-5ed9-a9ef-8d6ec640834f.html

[Svafa]

1. I just shared this in the Bernie group. Very powerful article.

K&R

[rhett o rick]

2. This statement really says it all: "I urge my fellow citizens to get behind Bernie Sanders. I do so

because of my deep belief that Sen. Sanders is leading a political revolution that has the only real chance of restoring democracy to America."

So why are some Democrats against our political revolution?

[Nanjeanne]

3. I know that's rhetorical . . . but because "Dems" care more about label than policies!

[rhett o rick]

6. I think it's worse. A lot of Americans have been raised as authoritarians.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/127710250

[Jitter65]

4. And based on what accomplishment and connections does he believe that Bernie and not Hillary will be

able to address the economic grievances of the black community? Sanders talks in broad sound bites about raising the minimum wage but he little or no connections with people who can bring this about. He has alienated Wall Street and the people who control the resources to make these changes so where does this stuff come into the picture. How are the Clintons on the "wrong side of this issue?" What issue are is he talking about? Are they against working men and women, are they against better opportunities for minorities and women, is she against affordable and accessible health care? Who really believes that all the stuff that Bernie is promising for free is going to go anywhere with this or any other Congress? Color me dumbfounded.

[Nanjeanne]

5. You will have to ask him. Obviously, he disagrees with your assessment and he wrote the article.

Who really believes all the stuff that Bernie is promising for free is going to go anywhere?

I'm not African American and so I wouldn't presume to speak for the author of the article you are so dumbfounded over - but I will say that I don't believe Hillary will do anything with this Congress that I would want done. What I'm worried about is what she will do with this Congress that I vehemently don't want done - like continued fracking, signing off on the TPP, endless war, means-testing SS, increasing the age of retirement and Medicare.

I'd rather have a President that has a vision for how great this country COULD be - and work towards getting them a Congress that will help make that vision a reality.

Perhaps the author of this endorsement feels the same.

[TygrBright]

7. I don't believe Bernie's supporters think that "connections" and "accomplishments" work.

Based on how effectively conventional tools and leadership have worked to achieve goals of economic and social equity over the past three and a half decades, I'd have to agree it's a reasonable conclusion to draw.

Democrats have a history of smart, accomplished, well-connected candidates talking a good 'progressive' game during the campaign season, promising hard work and measurable increments of change that will benefit America's working people.

Last one who delivered anything really substantial was LBJ. In basic economic terms, the well-being of working families peaked in the early 1970s and has been going downhill ever since.

If you want to make an argument that will convince Sanders supporters that he can't deliver on his rhetoric, be aware they've already fully accepted that the establishment will do everything they can to prevent President Sanders from upsetting the applecart.

They seem to believe Bernie's willing to play outside the establishment rules, though, and given how well playing within the rules (hasn't) worked to reverse the long downward slide under the last 3 Democratic Presidents, I can understand the potency of that belief.

analytically,
Bright

[Ken Burch]

8. Wall Street CAN'T be part of the solution on economic issues.

That sector of life has made it clear that it doesn't want a decent society for all.

[R. P. McMurphy]

10. Maybe he's a misogynist?

I read a post here earlier which stated that's the reason people support Bernie instead of Hillary.

[JDPriestly]

12. "He (Sanders) has alienated Wall Street

and the people who control the resources to make these changes so where does this stuff come into the picture."

A false premise underlies that sentence. It is that "Wall Street and the people who control the resources" want or ever will want to make changes to a system that is serving to make them, the oligarchy, ever more powerful and making the rest of us every less powerful.

If Wall Street had wanted to or was willing to empower our democracy, then it would have done so in the years following Citizens United and the bail-out.

But the fact is that Wall Street has taken more power, not just more of the money and increased wealth, but much, much more of the political power.

The trade agreements, NAFTA, even the WTO and all of the subsequent trade agreements have been used by the corporations, were written by the corporations to diminish the power of the people and the authority of democracies.

It is, at this point, unrealistic, to think that the current powers, Wall Street and the oligarchs, are going to do a thing to strengthen our democracy, help our economy, raise the minimum wage or do any other thing, even one thing, that will require sacrifice in the short term from them in order to help the mass of people here or in the world.

Completely unrealistic.

That's one of the issues that this election is about.

The Clintons still believe the myth that Wall Street and the oligarchs will work for the good of the entire world and all its people.

Bernie Sanders knows they won't. None of them. They do not have the spiritual inspiration or sense of moderation or willingness to do for others that is required to change things for the better.

Hillary is part of that group of people who cannot, because of self-interest or the inability to see and recognize the reality, end Citizens United or raise wages or give the people governance over their own countries.

Hillary is a big part of this problem.

When you hear a slogan like the one repeated in the post I am responding to with the title that begins with "And based on what accomplishment and connections does he believe. . . ." ask what are the assumptions the author makes? What are the premises on which the post or argument is based? Are they true? Can they be true?

And then judge the ideas expressed by whether the assumptions and premise are true.

Enough is enough. Nobody begrudges people their wealth. The problem is what is done with the wealth to disenfranchise and impoverish others.

[noiretextatique]

14. Dear Dumbfounded

A big part of your confusion is that you are biased towards Clinton. That bias makes you unable to think about Sanders in any way other than to reinforce your bias. I hope this clears thing up.

[zentrum]

9. Wow.

[Enthusiast]

11. K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations!

[PatrynXX]

13. I have a feeiling the Bill Clinton of 2001 and 2016

would have a fight right about now thats how much they've changed

Me? oddly while I'm going back to my Independendent roots that doesn't mean I'm pro R. Locally sometimes State wide very rarely. I did it once notoriously in MN for someone called Alan Quist who I later voted against or changed my opinion . only R I can actually name mostly because it was a vote against someone. As I've said only where my faith is concerned is where I'm Conservative. Up until 2014 I was anti Gay. Had no where else to go when even Jesus as a pastor pointed out did not say a thing about it. Who am I to judge. So Robert can remain loyal to someont as long as they don't change. But the loyalty is broken if that person changes. Not sure what my former pastor thinks of Trump. I can't imagine him voting for him because trump is for PP.. Nevermind the violence the idiot is causing. Yet he has endorsed 2 candidates that was on the roster of Cult. Mormon and 7th Day. Never could see him voting for them either so who knows. But right now we don't need someone like Hillary who people run away from and we end up with Trump (yikes)