Sanders Gets Testy With Press Over ISIS Question

[Cali_Democrat]

by ALEX JAFFE

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders grew visibly irritated with reporters Tuesday when asked why his press secretary told the media not to ask about ISIS, suggesting the press is ignoring the real issues facing Americans.

The Democratic presidential contender spoke to reporters after touring the Baltimore neighborhood where Freddie Gray was arrested and meeting with local pastors to discuss economic and social issues confronting the black community. But before Sanders arrived at a previously scheduled press conference, his national press secretary Symone Sanders told the assembled reporters to stay "on-topic" and not to ask about ISIS.

Sanders took only questions from local media during the presser, all of which focused on the economic issues confronting the African American community. But before he exited the presser, one reporter asked him outright: "Do you not want to talk about ISIS?"

Sanders grew visibly frustrated, laughing bitterly before replying: "Alright, what about ISIS, guys? How often do these people talk about issues that we talked about today? Of course I'll talk about ISIS."

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/sanders-gets-testy-press-over-isis-question-n476251

[MADem]

1. ...his press secretary told the media not to ask about ISIS....?????

What?

His staff seems to be his worst enemy, right ahead of some (not all, but some) of his supposed supporters.

Sanders then stormed out of the room and abruptly left the venue, a community center named in Freddie Gray's honor, in a black van.

Sigh.

He's just not playing it right. He's not growing his base.

[Cheese Sandwich]

4. What a load of horse shit propaganda. Stormed out? Black van.

Watch the video and decide for yourselves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=omtE9XdmEno&t=10m57s

The MSM is carrying water for Clinton BIG time.

[MADem]

9. The video doesn't show him departing or getting into a van, so that's not really proving

(or disproving) anything. There's no outdoor footage in your link (that I sat through, patiently) at all.

What I've "decided for myself" is that your video is missing any scenes of him getting into a vehicle.

He did seem pretty pissed off at the end. Maybe he should instruct his staff to not be so "helpful" and order the press to not talk about stuff?

The easiest way to encourage the press to do something is to tell them to NOT do it.

The fact that your video doesn't show what happened next is not "proof" of anything. If you can find footage of him getting into the black van and kissing babies or glad-handing on the way, that might be helpful....

[Cheese Sandwich]

10. Stormed out? What the fuck does that even mean? Just using those words is propaganda.

[MADem]

14. That would have happened AFTER your video ends. You need more footage.

This footage stops right at the crucial point.

He didn't seem too pleased at the end, and since we can't actually SEE him LEAVING (since your footage does not show that), we have to rely on media reports.

You're calling these media reports "propaganda?" If you can come up with footage that shows him chuckling, laughing and doing grip and grins out the door, you can certainly make that case...but why is the video you put up so ODDLY truncated?

It makes your case appear worse, not better.

I don't know why this writer would lie about this event, either. It's a petty thing to invent, frankly--completely unnecessary-- and would be easily disproven if it were, in fact, false--so where are the reporters saying "That's not how it happened?"

All I see are petty insults, not refutations.

[Bubzer]

92. It's all bullshit. Somone wanted a hit peice and didnt get it. So their twisting it into one.

Or trying anyway. Bernie Smacked em down good! And rightly so!

Bernie: Here are the issues that we need to deal with
Media: Hey, what about the terrorists?
Bernie: What about them? I talk about that too.
Media: but, but, but....

[Armstead]

24. The video shows him saying "I'll take one more question, and then I think that will be it."

He was then asked another question, which he answered. Then, as he was leaving AS PLANNED, someone asked about Isis.

And he smiled and answered politely but forcefully,about how the conditions in poor neighborhoods were still important to talk about.. And the people from the AA community who were on stage were nodding and responding in agreement with his remarks.

One of the reasons I like Bernie. He's straight and has passion about the things that matter.

[MADem]

57. Where's the rest of the footage? That video is OBVIOUSLY truncated. nt

[Ed Suspicious]

82. I think they even applauded him for keeping the focus on their issues.

Propagandists make me sick. People see through their bullshit I think.

[Bubzer]

95. Odd that people would applaud for a "testy" politician.

Stupid propaganda is stupid.

[MADem]

133. Do you mean the propagandists at ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, NPR, CNN, etc? nt

[Ed Suspicious]

138. I mean DU.

[MaggieD]

17. Yes, and then he acted like that was never said

And he was very nasty to the reporters who asked him about it. He should have said, "sorry, I will talk to my staff and tell them to stop saying things like that." But he lashed out at reporters instead.

And his tantrum is a great example of why he should not be president.

[jeff47]

28. "Like a with cloth?" (nt)

[Kentonio]

55. He acted exactly like I'd want from a President.

Sucking up to the media when they are in the wrong is pathetic.

[MaggieD]

58. Well he's got your vote then

To my eyes, they focused on the issue he wanted to focus on for 90% of the press conference. Then he got pissed that they asked him a FP question. At least that is what I saw.

[Kentonio]

70. It was hard to hear the question

But it sounded less like a foreign policy question and more like a 'waa waa why are you trying to control us?!' whine from the reporter. It was also shouted out after questions had been concluded its worth pointing out.

[Bubzer]

97. OH, so tantrums matter do they? Good to know!

I guess your right to be concerned that a potential POTUS might have a temper.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clintons-strengths-and-anger-white-house-revealed

It would probably be best to keep any hot-heads out of the oval office.

http://www.progressivestoday.com/report-claims-hillary-is-throwing-temper-tantrums-behind-the-scenes/

We wouldn't want any international incidents due to knee-jerk reactions.

https://pjmedia.com/blog/hillary-meltdown-close-childlike-tantrums-that-leave-staff-in-tears

Also, having cooler heads prevail helps keep us out of war times.

http://nypost.com/2015/10/10/hillary-clintons-camp-she-could-have-a-serious-melt-down/

Helps keep our collective bank accounts from being pilfered by say, war profiteers or prison industries.

[MaggieD]

101. Three right wing nut links in one post - really?

I am sure your fellow Bernie supporters will be along very shortly to chastise you for that. LMAO!

[Bubzer]

102. I noticed a lack of rebuttle on your part... even discounting the three sources you dont like.

[Bubzer]

105. I found tons of sites that talk about her temper. How about these?

I'm sure you'll pass them off as being conservative or some such without any justification... and in spite of ABC supporting Hillary.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=8306291

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/interviews/myers2.html

Her temper is not exactly a well hidden secret.

[Cha]

134. It's unreal.

[jeff47]

2. Didn't like how your previous post on this subject went?

It was all of an hour ago, after all.

[HerbChestnut]

3. Must. Perpetuate. Narrative.

[riversedge]

5. Clinton's 33-point lead over Sanders in Maryland

Poll from about 2 weeks ago.



http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md-sun-poll-president-20151124-story.html


.............On the Democratic side, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continues to hold a big advantage over her next-closest rival, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Clinton's 33-point lead is essentially the same as it was when The Sun polled the Democratic presidential contest early last year.

Also unchanged is the low level of interest in Martin O'Malley, the former Maryland governor who has failed to break out of single digits anywhere, including his home state. Opponents cite O'Malley's lackluster polling in the state he led for eight years to question his viability on the national stage.

[tularetom]

6. If every elected official got "testy" with these fucking morons trying to whip up fear

this country would be a hell of a lot better off. Good for Sanders.

WTF? Are you all of a sudden on the side of the press?

You really need to do a little self examination. Your continuing efforts to make a big deal out of little shit like this says a lot about you. And it isn't good.

[MADem]

11. Maybe Sanders' staff told the reporters not to ask the question, knowing they would, and generating

this little news item?

His staff caused this kerfluffle by trying to limit the press's interactions with the candidate--my question is, was it an "Any news is good news" strategy?

This is an ugly and strange comment:

WTF? Are you all of a sudden on the side of the press?


You really need to do a little self examination. Your continuing efforts to make a big deal out of little shit like this says a lot about you. And it isn't good.

We should ALWAYS--all of us--be on the side of the press. Our nation is built on that freedom--or do you prefer the PRAVDA/ISVESTIA style of news coverage? Propaganda first, last and always?

Good grief!!!!

[jeff47]

29. So...you forget that "the press" includes people like Fox and the WSJ? (nt)

[MADem]

38. So, you're saying we need to "pick" which "press" is good and which press is bad?

LISTEN to yourself!

The shoe on the other foot is those Fauxy WSJ types saying "You forget that 'the press' includes people like 'Democracy Now' and Rachel Maddow?"

Trying to shut up people you don't like is just a horrible thing to propose. The world is not DU. We have LIMITS to speech here, because this is a private website with rules (rules that are selectively interpreted, lately, but still...). This is not the Big Wide World where everyone has a voice in the public square.

I am no fan of the wingnut media, but I wouldn't want some nasty scolds to shut them up; that's how PUTIN handles dissent--let their stupid ideas enjoy full sunlight and an open airing; people with brains will reject their nonsense.

[jeff47]

41. No, I'm saying we should support journalism. That does not include everyone commonly called

"the press". Because it also includes lots of people who are not employed by a "news" organization, and excludes a bunch of coctail-circuit blowhards from "both sides" who haven't practiced actual journalism in decades.

And "support" does not mean "oppress all others", despite your effort to equate the two.

[MADem]

45. Water seeks its own level. Who decides which press is good?

YOU?

You're still not understanding the concept, here. There are going to be partisan entities on both sides, and they will get a reputation for being left or right leaning.

Are you seriously confused when you read something from the Daily Caller or Breitbart? You don't "know" that these sites favor the right?

Surely you know that when you read something from, say, The Nation, that the slant will be to the left?

And surely you can tell the difference between an opinion piece, an editorial, and a straight "just the facts" news article?

It's not your job--nor is it mine--to censor anyone. By their words we shall know them--that's how we play it in this country.

[jeff47]

48. And now you're back to lying about censorship and calling me stupid.

It's pretty sad watching so many posters on DU shrink into hollowed-out shells when they think they can score a point for "their side".

You used to actually make thoughtful posts. You used to bother reading the people you respond to. Now? Not so much.

[MADem]

53. Why are you calling me a LIAR? I'm not "lying" about anything.

I also did not ever call you "stupid" so that's just a shitty charge to make.

You only like the press when it says nice things about your guy.

Your conversation in this thread is all the "proof" of that needed.

Getting personal with me, calling me a liar, isn't going to change this situation. This is some bad optics, and I'd say, if I had to guess, that Sanders has a Big Bad STAFF problem. He has amateurish staff who think they can bully and cage the national press into prosecuting their agenda--that NEVER works. EVER. They don't know how to play in the big leagues.

Blaming me for their issues isn't a smooth move.

[jeff47]

59. Quote where I called for censorship.

I didn't. You claim I did. Is that being truthful? Not so much.

You only like the press when it says nice things about your guy.

Also not stated by me. In fact, I never mentioned "my guy" in this subthread, nor did I list any criteria that would indicate I only want biased media. Again, is this being truthful?

Blaming me for their issues isn't a smooth move.

I'm blaming you for your posts, and their very large degradation over the last 3 months. Are you not in control of those?

[MADem]

65. Right here, in post 41. It's obvious that you want to define what "the press" is.

No, I'm saying we should support journalism. That does not include everyone commonly called

"the press". Because it also includes lots of people who are not employed by a "news" organization, and excludes a bunch of coctail-circuit blowhards from "both sides" who haven't practiced actual journalism in decades.

And "support" does not mean "oppress all others", despite your effort to equate the two.

"The Press"--and I hate to tell you this--DOES include pundits, editorialists, commentators, and yes, cocktail-circuit blowhards. Not everyone is a Columbia School of Journalism graduate. Not sure why this is news to you--but you do need to come up to speed on that score.

And trying to insist that -- because I do not agree with you -- my posts have "degraded?" Please. You could not be more obvious in your attempt to get all smeary-personal, instead of sticking to the topic. And it shows.

[jeff47]

68. So you decided my explicit statement against "oppressing" proves I want censorship.

And my recognition of people who are not traditionally called "the press" as journalists means I only want Columbia School of Journalism graduates.



Sometimes, it's a good idea to stop digging the hole deeper. You used to know that.

[MADem]

71. No, I decided that your explicit statement about who deserves to be a part of this

news-gathering/reporting community proves you want censorship. And I never said you "only" wanted CSJ grads--but they are the "standard" in terms of quality reporters. But see? You tried to twist my meaning, because you've found yourself, dare I say, in a hole.

You're the one who made the comment about the 4th Estate, not me.

And that whole "dig hole deeper" meme? With the silly little head smacks? That's just a way of running away from the conversation.

You put the shovel in the ground when you started telling us who was "press" and who wasn't. You dug the hole, and now you can't get out.

Here's the bottom line--a lot of less-than-stellar outlets are out there on the circuit. The New Media includes assclowns like RT, bloggers of sketchy provenance, opinion-spouters, those goofy Kos diaries, and all sorts of folks. You can't make qualitative demands anymore. Media, nowadays, is user-filtered. That doesn't mean you get to do the filtering--that happens at the point of sale to each individual. We are our OWN censors.

And Sanders? And his staff? They need to learn how to handle this new gaggle of news-gatherers. The old paradigms don't work anymore.

[jeff47]

74. So you didn't read the post. Even when you quoted it and had your error pointed out to you.

Again, you used to know when to stop digging the hole deeper. But now you're flailing about blaming me for your errors, and your subterranean condition.

And Sanders? And his staff? They need to learn how to handle this new gaggle of news-gatherers. The old paradigms don't work anymore.

"Her speech will be her interview".

[MADem]

85. Listen to yourself!

Why are you trying to change the subject away from this press conference, and how poorly it was handled, so frantically? This isn't a "compare and contrast" exercise, here (your "AH HA" was the way to handle it, IF he didn't want to take questions).

This scenario is a lame press secretary saying "Don't TOUCH" which makes the press want to do just that.

I'm not "blaming" you for my "errors," I'm "blaming" you for your OWN errors. You should just stop making them if you don't want people to notice!

[jeff47]

115. Deflect much?

So you started with lying about censorship to Sanders awful staff to "You're trying to change the subject!!"

Uh-huh. Entirely believable.

Again, you used to make posts worth reading. I am sorry that is no longer the case.

[MADem]

118. Everyone can read this exchange and see just who is doing the deflecting.

They can see who said what when to whom, too.

Your comments aren't secrets!

And how many times do you need to say some version of this:

Again, you used to make posts worth reading. I am sorry that is no longer the case.

before you realize that it's just not resonating with me in any meaningful way? If you think that I'm going to care overmuch about your opinion of me, after you've repeatedly personally insulted me, I think you'd best recalibrate!

[Agschmid]

109. Yes it does, and it's an important freedom.

Even if we think something is total shit.

[jeff47]

116. Well, he went from attacking "right wing media" yesterday to "media is sacred" today.

We're not supposed to notice?

[MADem]

123. You don't have to buy what they're selling, but that's a big

leap between saying "I don't like your coverage" to "Shut up! Don't ask QUESTIONS!" and that is what Sanders press secretary did.

You can play this like it's nothing, but all the major networks have picked it up as have most of the papers. What are they talking about? The fact that Sanders' press secretary tried to tell the press what they were "allowed" to ask about.

Keep fluffing it off if you would like.

[Armstead]

37. Maybe Sanders staff wanted to actually have questions about the subject at hand

Maybe they were too trusting that reporters might actually ask about the issues raised by a tour of a troubled community, instead of rounds of repetitions about the sames questions about Isis over and over.,

[MADem]

40. Well, that strategy worked out well for them, didn't it (not)?

Reporters will ALWAYS go for the thing they're told to avoid--it's a news provider's nature to go where the target tells you to not go.

Candidates should not be "trusting" of the press--any of them. The job of the press is not to cheerlead; it's to dig up all the facts, to show the public a FULL picture, warts and all.

Sanders has not been vetted at all up to this point. He's got some rough spots, and they're going to be covered. The disadvantage of more exposure in the news media is, well, more exposure. Especially if the candidate isn't prepared to handle the scrutiny. Sanders has trouble pivoting and shrugging off these little zings. He will have to get better or it will be a continuing problem.

[Armstead]

44. I know a little bit about reporters...

And good reporters actually show some judgement and have ethics beyond the conventional wisdom of the day. ASnd they actually don't always succumb to empty scoop fever.

That means if a candidate visits a troubled neighborhood and wants to talk about it and the issues involved, a good reporter would respect their wishes and ask about that.

That is NOT the same as ignoring issues, or letting politicians get away with bullshit. It's not like Sanders has never discussed Isis or his views on what to do about it. Just that there are also otehr issues.

It didn't t work out so well for Sanders because there aren't enough good reporters. at least not in the MSM cesspool.

[MaggieD]

63. 90% of the press conference was focused on his issue

And then he got pissed when they asked him an ISIS question at the end. 70% of the public, according to polling, shows Americans are concerned about ISIS. Should they not ask a presidential candidate about an issue that concerns 70% of the public has?

[MADem]

69. Way back when, everyone allowed Ari Fleischer to determine what questions were allowed to be asked

and of course NO ONE complained! Come on--the gripes here are purely partisan.

Good reporters--and bad ones, too--go after the story.

When a press secretary says "NOOOOOOOO....DON'T ASK ABOUT XXXX!!!!" a good reporter would make that his or her PRIORITY.

Sanders suffers from Amateur Staff Syndrome. He needs a better press secretary.

FWIW, he had plenty of opportunity to air his issues. The problem came when his press secretary tried to cage the gaggle and put some topics off limits.

[Armstead]

112. Suppose they'd said...

Please don't waste our time asking about the chances of the new York Yankees next year?" does that mean the reporters should suddenly swarm Sanders asking about the Yankees, just to "go after the story?

There's a difference between having something to hide, and trying to keep a focus on an issue on a particular day. This is a tiny molehioll mader into an irrelevant mountain.

I guess he doesn't have access to the tons of corporte cash that Clinton has to hire the most ":efficient" and expensive staff money can buy.

But then Clinton';s staff have screwed up on her on occasion too. Remember the reporters being penned in behiond a moving rope cage while following her during a parade?

[MADem]

119. If every candidate in the race had been mouthing off about the Yankees, and "The Yankees"

was an issue where voters were coming down on one side or another as regards what "ought to be done" with them, then your example would have merit.

You are trying to compare a baseball team in the off season with a group of fucking maniacs who are slaughtering people left and right, robbing nations of resources and territory, and attempting to establish a kalifa based on fundamentalist Islamic principles.

Do you see why your example doesn't resonate?

We aren't talking about marching in a parade, either. We're talking about a presser.

Again, his press secretary fucked up. No nice way to play this. Cillizza isn't the only one who noticed, either.

https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN/status/674254369462820865?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

[Armstead]

126. Yeah whatever. Clinton can do no wring and Sanders can do no right, I get it.

[MADem]

127. No, you don't get it. The problem here is with STAFF.

Senator Sanders did a media availability that was supposed to highlight an 'issue area' that he wanted to push. That's all well and good.

The problem arose when his STAFFER tried to tell the press what they were "allowed" to talk about.

Because she is not seasoned, she committed a fatal error--she made HERSELF the story.

This is about Sanders to the extent that he has an unseasoned, inexperienced staff who don't know how to play in the big leagues, and he gets angry easily if people don't feel the same way he does about the importance of an issue of interest to him--that's a failing, sure, but his press secretary made it worse. It was almost as though she was saying "Now, don't go poking the bear...he'll get MAD if you talk about Isis...so don't talk about ISIS!!!"

So of course, what's the press going to do? Exactly what they did--ask "Why does your press secretary tell us not to ask you about ISIS?"

Now, the story isn't about anything but Sanders, ISIS, and the press secretary.

His staff--and a few (not all, but a very loud minority) of his supporters are his biggest problems, IMO.

I think he needs to fire his wife, frankly. I think a lot of these missteps are due to the fact that she and a bunch of pretty clueless white men are making most of the decisions as far as the trajectory of his campaign goes. He needs a "professional" female voice in the upper strata of his campaign, someone experienced with national politics, and she ain't it. Neither is that wet-behind-the-ears press secretary he borrowed from Nader. Mrs. Sanders needs to be assigned a handler, given a simple stump speech, told to stick to the script, and they should throw her out on the trail as a surrogate, if she can handle it without getting him in trouble. She's managing him into a hole he can't get out of, IMO.

He's not going to grow primary votes this way--in fact, he'll start losing them if he keeps on with this scattershot approach. He always comes off as being on the wrong page of the music while the rest of the choir is singing along. The "single issue" thing isn't resonating when there are serious national security issues at the fore right now. You don't keep dusting the furniture if the house is burning down. It makes it appear that he's unable to 'pivot' and react to emerging issues.

[Armstead]

131. I don't care

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

7. Oh, No!! Not TESTY!!

[pacalo]

18. "Testy" is ... (gasp) ... HARSH!1!!

[pacalo]

121. So does "chafe"!1!

[winter is coming]

8. I guess Freddie Gray is imaginary now. n/t

[MisterP]

84. guess what they're saying is that protest should only be listened to if it's polite, eh?

shouldn't have expected better from the Rahm Emanuel wing of the party

[Sancho]

12. Bernie has a temper..

It shows from time to time.

Those who have worked with him in the past have reported difficulties.

Since ISIS is a current topic, it seems logical to ask candidates about it.

[jeff47]

15. And he's answered plenty of questions about it. But the black pastors he was meeting with

wanted to talk about their issues instead of ISIL.

How dare those pastors think black lives matter.

[Sancho]

26. Then he should have been smarter!!!

Who would be dumb enough to tell a bunch of reporters NOT to talk about anything current?!?!
We've never seen a politicians interrupted by a question off topic because it was current before - that's something new?

The issue is that he loses his temper - and he's done that before and has a reputation for bad behavior. He needs to control it or take a pill or something. Losing in in front of black pastors might be harmful to his campaign, except that at this point it likely won't matter.

[jeff47]

27. Watch the video. "Testy" is the press spin. (nt)

[Sancho]

31. I saw it...I think he's emotional. Actually, he's been that way for years.

There are a bunch of us who think Bernie is grating. I would have said that years ago; long before his run for President.

Use whatever adjective you'd like.

[MADem]

94. The WP piece has been updated to reflect that this is not a one-off....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/07/the-one-dimensionality-of-bernie-sanders-campaign-is-killing-it/?postshare=1941449508760876&tid=ss_tw

Update: Right on cue, a Sanders spokeswoman on Tuesday morning informed reporters that they shouldn't even ask questions about the Islamic State. We are re-upping this post from Monday, as it is now even more apropos.

Dan MericaVerified account
?@danmericaCNN
Sanders Press Secretary Symone Sanders tells reporters before his press conference: "Don’t ask about ISIS today." Yeah, ok.

7:14 PM - 8 Dec 2015

Why didn't they learn from their error the FIRST time around?

[Sancho]

107. Testy AND one dimensional! He never even gave an answer anyway.

If we had a $15 minimum wage and expanded SS and passed GS...how would that deal with ISSI?

[winter is coming]

106. Yup. They were butt-hurt about being shown up for the squirrel-chasing

idjits they are.

[MeNMyVolt]

16. Had it been Clinton, this place would be at DEFCON 1

[frylock]

146. "Her speech will be her interview"

You're new here. Do a DU search for that phrase.

[Politicalboi]

49. Oh please

We've heard horror stories about the Queen and her temper. I hope we get to see that temper boil before too long.

Some have refereed to her with the B word.

[frylock]

147. Shame on You, Barack Obama.

She's just being assertive here, and not at all abrasive. Very Presidential.

[99th_Monkey]

13. Bernie stands with AA's in Baltimore, stays on message. Clinton Smear Machine freaks out! n/t

[JaneyVee]

19. The Clinton smear machine???

Seems like a news report to me.

[99th_Monkey]

60. I refer to the CSM on DU, touting this news report as something 'problematic' for Bernie.

Bernie has no problem talking about ISIS. He does have a justifiable problem
with reporters who try to push him off-message, to badger him into some kind
of "Dean-scream" gotcha moment, to distract from accomplishing what he was
in Baltimore to talk about, to push him into "slighting" the AA community by
spending all his time talking about Terrah, instead of issues directly effecting
AA's in Baltimore.

Thankfully, Bernie has no problem telling such reporters to fuck off, not taking
the bait, and staying on message to stand with AA's in Baltimore.

During Bernie's Nov. 19th speech at Georgetown Univ -- just a few days after
the terrorist attacks in Paris -- Bernie expounded on what Democratic Socialism
means to him; but he ALSO spent well-over 15 minutes, near the end of his talk,
laying out his detailed foreign policy position regarding "dealing with ISIS" (starting
at 51:30 and ending at 106:30); which was completely ignored by the M$M, and
in particular by NBC.

I know it was ignored because I tuned into MSNBC to see what kind of coverage
Bernie's speech would get. His speech was obliquely mentioned for 3-4 seconds
showing a brief (silent) video clip of him at the Georgetown podium. That was it.
That day, the news was ALL about ISIS's attacks in Paris, which is understandable;
yet they didn't let viewers know that Bernie had said ANY thing about ISIS, only
referencing his talk as being about what 'democratic socialism means'.

To add injury to insult, Rachael had Martin O'Malley on her show to tell viewers
what HIS position on ISIS was, how he would deal with the 'terrorist threat' etc.
Not only was Bernie's address on ISIS completely ignored, it was replaced by an
also-ran candidate's pontifications.

But, that's life on the Bernie for President trail; and he deals with it very gracefully
and honorably, in a no-nonsense way that cuts to the chase. I like that.

[cascadiance]

108. PLUS INFINITY!

[MADem]

42. Bernie's behavior is Bernie's problem--not Clinton's. nt

[99th_Monkey]

67. Bernie's behavior is no body's problem, except those trying to push him off-message.

Bernie tells it like it is, stays focused and on-message, is unapologetic about it, and won't
be badgered with red herrings and distractions.

I actually respect that in a candidate.

[MADem]

120. It's his problem--his press secretary is an amateur. And it shows.

CNN noticed, too:

https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN/status/674254369462820865?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

[99th_Monkey]

130. Snap! That's right. This is how "real pros" do it. My bad.

[MADem]

132. Here's the difference--she got her way. Sanders didn't.

Was the press able to crowd her during that (not a press availability, BTW) parade?

No.

Was she able to interact with the crowd because the press wasn't allowed to swarm her?

Yes.

She "won" that one. You may think otherwise (and that's entirely your right) but she wasn't harangued about any topic she didn't want to discuss on that day.

She prosecuted HER agenda.

That's the difference between professional staff and amateur hour. Rule Number One: PROTECT THE PRINCIPAL.

Sanders' press secretary failed to PROTECT THE PRINCIPAL. She basically threw a piece of raw meat to the press when she tried to tell them what they could not do, and got them all primed. And they swarmed her principal, so she failed at her task.

Amateur hour....

[99th_Monkey]

135. Yes, I think otherwise. Hillary roping off the press was a disaster, which even her supporters admit

On Tuesday's edition of CNN's New Day, Clinton confidant Paul Begala criticized presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for the "terrible optic" of roping off reporters from her during a July 4th parade appearance. Begala called it "horrible."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/07/07/paul_begala_hillary_roping_off_press_was_horrible.html

[MADem]

140. She didn't care, and it didn't kill her. Her focus was on

the people with whom she was interacting. She wanted to be able to grip and grin without having to trip over pushy reporters. She got her wish.

That's the way she always rolls--she does small group dynamics, and it drives some people nuts. They want her to have big Beer Hall rallies and that's not her style. She can see the same number of people by going from point to point and LISTENING and answering questions, rather than yelling the same stump speech over and over and not having any personal interaction with anyone.

She wasn't talking to the press that day, and they didn't like it. Too bad for them!

If you think that her optics were horrible on that day, well, why aren't you leaping with joy? Why are you getting all huffy and shoving that at me like I should cry about it or something?

See, I love the fact that she did her thing, didn't let the press bigfoot her, regardless of what PB had to say.

If you think this was bad, well, go on and HUG yourself with the thrill of it all, then pat yourself on the back! Take your little joys where you can find them, hmmm?

It just doesn't phase me like I get the feeling I think you want it to...! Sorry to disappoint, but I'm just not feeling the agita you seem to want me to feel. Oh, well!

[99th_Monkey]

141. Context: Hillary was NOT wanting to be badgered by the press about her "damned emails"

And I don't blame her actually. The email thing was a GOP witch-hunt I've never
given much credence.

Bernie did her a huge favor at the first debate, basically refusing to make emails an
issue in the primary. And I'm glad he did that, as I never felt the email issue was a
big deal either, and was only serving as a distraction from real issues directly effecting
voters' lives.

[MADem]

142. More context: She was walking in a parade. Not holding a press availability!

The press wanted to crowd her and badger her, and her security detail wasn't having it.

Many people don't realize that she and Sanders like one another. She wouldn't have donated to his campaign. sent some of her donors his way, and welcomed him to the Senate had she not had some affection for him.

I think they get along a lot better than some of the people here at DU.

[Armstead]

20. One thread about this wasn't enough for you guys?

And, sparing myself from retyping on the otehr thread about the exact same thing -- Good for Bernie,. The OCD press should be criticized.

[jeff47]

25. Three threads wasn't enough for the Clinton fans. (nt)

[Capt. Obvious]

32. Let me help you out

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=myaccount&sub=ignore&newblockposts=216638

[Armstead]

35. I don't do that. What fun would that be?

I just wish people would have a little more imagination and creativity.

[workinclasszero]

22. Bernies not ready

to be POTUS

[NYCButterfinger]

33. Exactly. Putin would ring circles around him.

[jeff47]

43. Yeah, need someone who would say "The speech will be her interview". (nt)

[Vattel]

23. No end to the stupidity of the haters

[MrMickeysMom]

30. Anyone viewing that press event on poverty / misrepresentation of the black community knows better..

"Sanders grew visibly frustrated"? What were YOU watching? You must have heard some little voices say, "bitter!" "BITTER!"... "He MUST be BITTER!!!!" What a plop of imaginative horse poop.

NBC's news moment... couldn't seem to match their subject lines very well. Get it straight... Was he "testy"? Or, did he just shoot back when the press was insistent he talk about ISIS as well? They said both of those things. One above in bold letters, then "shot back" under the actual video.

You're gonna have to take the ear wax out of your ears to decide. Watch the video... It doesn't take a village idiot to hear and see how he shot back to clarify the reporter shouting the question over and over. It may have been a hopeful moment for the insistent questioner to get something out of Sanders, but instead, it was pretty clear evidence of how an intelligent answer and confuse the most insistent reporter who hoped it would be about something frustration and bitterness, other than economic issues confronting the AA community.

Too bad... It will fail unless you have somebody like Trump being shouted at. Is that what you're trying to equate?

Epic failure on that...

[UglyGreed]

34. add this to the OP

and you will be all set!!!

[MADem]

46. Wow--what an ugly thing to say. Way to raise the discourse! /sarcasm nt

[UglyGreed]

50. If you are going to go

go all the way....... Never mind the neglected communities in Baltimore what about ISIS!!!!!!

[MADem]

52. That was just an ugly post you made. It doesn't add to the conversation at all.

And trying to deflect back to the fact that the reporters didn't do what the press secretary demanded
(if the press secretary was Ari Fleischer, and the principal George Bush, you'd be cheering that) with the "Waah ISIS" comment just doesn't fly.

Where you stand depends on where you sit. The Press Secretary's ham-handed "Don't ask about ISIS" comment was stupid. Even if she had said "The focus today is on X, Y, and Z. If you have questions on other topics, Senator Sanders will take them AFTER the presser by the van" or something, that would have solved the problem.

His staff is amateurish, and it shows.

[UglyGreed]

56. Why is it ugly?

Many here say Bernie is too old, too grumpy and does not care about minorities. Perhaps you should chastise those on your side before you try to go after me again.

[MADem]

61. Because mocking a candidate like that--even if you are pretending it is in support of them--

is a nasty, shitty thing to do. The "Many here" tactic is lame, too.

I've seen that kind of game rolled out at sites that we don't use as sources, here.

You're playing a victim card, while simultaneously insulting your own candidate.

Bring the insult yourself, then raise the hue and cry about it. That's ugly shit.

It speaks ill of you when you do that sort of thing. And I won't stop pointing it out, either--you're the one bringing the mocking Sanders imagery to this thread, and then in the same breath whining about it with a "Some People Say" tactic.

ICK.

[UglyGreed]

64. I'm just

a lame sexist who is also an ageist and any other label that comes to mind. Thanks for the replies

[MADem]

72. Not sure why you're even flinging "sexist" in there. I'll buy ageist, though. nt

[UglyGreed]

76. I guess you don't remember

calling me one post after post? Never mind carry on......

[MADem]

79. There's a thing called CONTEXT. I speak to you in the context of this thread.

If you're a grudge-carrier, though, I'll probably eschew conversing with you in future.

I don't play that game, you see.

[UglyGreed]

78. BTW an Ageist who supports

Bernie Sanders

[MADem]

80. You'd do well to stop posting the mocking pictures, then.

It sends a mixed message when you bring up an issue to debunk it.

It doesn't quite rise to the level of a "concern" post in this context, but in other contexts it certainly could.

[UglyGreed]

83. I hate babies also

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=884696

[MADem]

86. Why am I not surprised? nt

[UglyGreed]

87. and mustard

[MADem]

89. They have updated the OP link--now the CNN reporter is saying the same thing.

That press secretary is not a varsity player:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/07/the-one-dimensionality-of-bernie-sanders-campaign-is-killing-it/?postshare=1941449508760876&tid=ss_tw

[UglyGreed]

93. did Bernie rope anyone up?

[MADem]

96. Why do you keep trying to divert from the issue at hand?

If you really want to gripe about how Clinton handled the press months ago, and didn't want to be crowded while she's marching in a parade, you go on and start a thread on it. That's not the topic, here.

This thread is about how Sanders' ham handed press secretary is a junior varsity player in a varsity game.

https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN/status/674254369462820865?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

This thread is about press availabilities--not parades.

[UglyGreed]

90. But I love Bedlington Terriers!!!

[MADem]

124. Of course you do.

http://www.wbaltv.com/politics/sanders-aide-dont-ask-about-isis-today/36856382

http://national.suntimes.com/national-world-news/7/72/2253612/sanders-campaign-tells-reporters-ask-isis/


http://www.npr.org/2015/12/08/458926818/sanders-campaign-to-reporters-dont-ask-about-isis


http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/08/politics/sanders-spokeswoman-isis-ask-baltimore-press/index.html

Press aides regularly outline the topic of meetings, but it is unusual for them to outline what questions reporters can and can't ask.

The refrain came at an inopportune time for Sanders, too. After inspiring the terrorist attacks abroad and more recently in the U.S. in San Bernardino, ISIS has dramatically altered the 2016 campaign to be more focused on foreign policy and terror.

And Sanders has been forced to defend the fact that his campaign routinely focuses solely on economic issues, including framing questions about foreign policy, terrorism and other issues as a by-product of economic inequality.

Sanders did just that during the press conference when reporters were asked not to ask about ISIS.

[PowerToThePeople]

73. ..

[TM99]

36. Ah, more Sanders Derangement Syndrome

from the usual hypocritical suspects.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026775414

*cough,cough*

Seems Clinton supporters didn't have a problem with Hillary controlling the press and limiting it to NO questions whatsoever.

But you see, that is shrewdness, that is presidential behavior, that is....oh fuck, it is just a double standard from the usual folks who love to find anything they can to yammer on about with Sanders and his campaign.

First it is not good enough Sanders with PoC and now when he says, let's focus on PoC in this country for a moment instead of ISIL yet again today, its is not good enough Sanders.

If it wasn't so fucking ridiculous, it would be quite funny!

[Kalidurga]

54. End thread

That was exactly what I was thinking. They keep trying to have it both ways. If Bernie talks economics they are like well what about social justice. He talks social justice well what about Daesh. If he talks about expanding medicare they talk about the 50 cent increase in the payroll tax a week. If he talks about free college they want to talk about some paper he wrote a bazillion years ago.

[MADem]

122. Hillary was able to do it--Sanders has an amateurish, not-ready-for-prime-time, press secretary.

She was a staffer in Nader's office before this. She has never run a national campaign.

She is WAY over her head, and stuff like this is what happens when you hire someone who doesn't have the background to do the job. The national press is a truculent bunch, and telling them to NOT do something is a way to guarantee that they WILL do something.

As we've seen in this example.

If it's "so fucking ridiculous," why is it continuing to gather traction?

https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN/status/674254369462820865?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

The Baltimore NBC outlet had it, too:

http://www.wbaltv.com/politics/sanders-aide-dont-ask-about-isis-today/36856382


NPR has picked it up, too:

http://www.npr.org/2015/12/08/458926818/sanders-campaign-to-reporters-dont-ask-about-isis


CNN got to the NUB of the issue with this one sentence: http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/08/politics/sanders-spokeswoman-isis-ask-baltimore-press/index.html

Press aides regularly outline the topic of meetings, but it is unusual for them to outline what questions reporters can and can't ask.

So, I guess NPR, CNN, NBC, the Washington Post, and a host of other media outlets are all suffering from this "Derangement Syndrome" that you're sneering about?

Or maybe, just maybe, Sanders needs a better, more experienced Press Secretary?

[frylock]

149. That was called "message management" a few short months ago.

[Gamecock Lefty]

39. Poor Bernie . . .

Starting to feel the heat and not handling it very well. Imagine how he'll handle ISIS! Or BLM when they take his microphone from him!

Step aside, Bernie. Sometimes the best man for the job is a woman!!!

[workinclasszero]

51. True story!

Step aside, Bernie. Sometimes the best man for the job is a woman!!!

[cascadiance]

111. I think he'll wait for that event in either 2020 or 2024 when a better woman will fill that role...

... and Elizabeth Warren as his VP will step in to it and be a better initial woman president to set the template of future women presidents to represent the people and get more of them elected down the road.

[Politicalboi]

47. Let's make ISIS bigger than they are

ISIS is a few crazy assholes inflicting terror on people. Better to make them second story news than make them think the world is scared of them. Again, Hillary people think Bernie can't answer questions about ISIS because he's uninformed and Hillary has ALL the answers.

Wrong again!

[bobbobbins01]

62. Spin all you want, he said what needed to be said.

I hope everyone sees this video, because this is who should be leading our country.

[PowerToThePeople]

66. Fail.

[ljm2002]

75. I watched the video...

...and I LOVED his response. I'm watching it by myself and I clapped loudly.

I don't think this is going to hurt him. JMNSHO

[Cali_Democrat]

77. "I'm watching it by myself and I clapped loudly"

LOL....that's funny.

[ljm2002]

81. Glad I could add a little mirth to your day. n/t

[azmom]

88. Minority communities demand as much attention

As ISIS. I applaud Bernie in keeping the media focused on what is a priority for many of us.

[AzDar]

91. Kick ass, Bernie!!

[retrowire]

98. And rightfully so.

The media is trying to strong arm him into playing along with their fear mongering agenda.

Bernie: "You want to know my plan with ISIS? Check out all the other times I answered this question, now we have other problems too."

media: "Bernie you'd better talk about Isis front and center right now! That's our narrative of the day!"

Bernie: "But I've already talked about that before, I'll talk about it again sometime but let's not forget all our big domestic issues."

media: "That's not scary enough! play along damn you!"

[Broward]

99. Great job by Bernie.

[ljm2002]

104. "and, like his followers, not ready to lead the country"...

...unlike Hillary's followers, each and every one of whom IS ready to lead the country! Even if they ARE followers!! That's how good she is!!!

[frylock]

150. How many times have you used the term "one trick pony"?

You have any other tricks?

[leftofcool]

103. Bernie's just not ready for the Oval Office

[cascadiance]

110. And it seems like many voters are not ready for democratic rule by the 99% again...

... and for some reason want to continue to have our government run by corporate sycophants!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

113. Bernie can see through CNN's crap

[okasha]

129. Sanders had an opportunity here to strut his stuff.

What he was actually being asked to do is think on his feet, pivot from one topic to another without effort, and demonstrate his knowledge of the subject without notes or hesitation.

He blew it.

[workinclasszero]

137. Totally not ready

And he keeps proving it over and over.

[Roy Ellefson]

114. bullshit

as I read comments on DU I become more disgusted with the right wing leanings of most HRC supporters...not interested in your candidate anymore...will not vote for her.

[JaneyVee]

136. NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!!

[MaggieD]

139. LOL!

[Bread and Circus]

143. Good for him. It was a great exchange. We need more leadership like this in the Democratic Party.

If we had this kind of leadership all along we might have avoided the Iraq War.

[SidDithers]

144. DU rec...nt

Sid

[AgingAmerican]

145. He refuses to smoke the right wing perpetual war crack

And it has Hillary supporters flummoxed.

[MohRokTah]

148. This shows he is unfit for the presidency.

No way does he have the temperament to be president of the United States if this is how he acts.

[R B Garr]

151. Exactly, it just signaled his weakness and

unpreparedness. He gets flustered too easily. What a.major gaffe to tell the press.not to ask about something!