Sunday, September 14, 2014

Run, Bernie, Run

>




I haven't watched Meet the Press since I was in high school. Today they had Bernie Sanders on, who, coincidentally, went to that same high school, James Madison in Brooklyn. He'd never been on Meet the Press before, which helps explain why I stopped watching that program. I suspect a political toadie who also went to Madison, Chuck Schumer, has been on Meet the Press plenty of times. But Schumer, thank the Lord, will never run for President. Bernie, it appears will, presumably as a Democrat-- so a party switch-- so that he can debate Hillary and, push her in a moire populist, less corporate direction.

About a year ago, Blue America started an ActBlue page, Why Settle?. You can click that link and contribute to Bernie's campaign (or his PAC, Progressive Voters of America). This is what we wrote when we started the page:
There are all sorts of characters gearing up to run for president in 2016. Conventional wisdom says that if Hillary Clinton runs, it's game-over for the Democrats and she walks away with it while everyone else cheers. That's a shame because… well, if you want to judge how she's likely to rule based on who she's surrounded herself with, we're looking at another corporate-oriented presidency akin the her husband's and the Bush père et fils, probably worse than Obama's. If she doesn't run, the gates open on a careerist cavalcade of mediocrity, from Biden, Cuomo, and O'Malley to Mark Warner and, believe it or not, Claire McCaskill! Of course, in Republicanville, it's an even sadder-- and more ominous-- sight, ranging from proto fascists like Ted Cruz, Scott Walker and Rick Santorum to garden variety conservative careerists like Chris Christie, Marco Rubio and Rick Perry.

But why settle for another lesser-of-two evils contest? Aren't we entitled to a really extraordinary president, literally the best among us? Why not a brilliant and dedicated civil servant instead of a power-hungery sociopath for a change? Here are three we have in mind. Let us know if you have any suggestions.
Blue America has never endorsed anyone running for president before; no one has been even nearly good enough. If Bernie runs, I suspect that will change. Sad enough, today's news coverage focused more on a Hillary Clinton will she or won't she story than a Bernie appearance on Meet the Press. This was big news:
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stoked speculation on Sunday that she was moving closer to announcing a bid for the White House in 2016 as she visited the early-voting state of Iowa to take part in the state's annual "steak fry," a gathering of Democratic activists that often attracts presidential hopefuls.

…[S]he was coy as she parried questions about her intentions in 2016.

"Too many people only get excited about presidential campaigns," she said. "Look, I get excited about presidential campaigns."

“We’re just here to support Democrats,” Clinton added.
Someone named Phil Bump, or writing under that name, had a little thing about Bernie in the Washington Post. In an interview with NBC's Chuck Todd on Meet the Press," wrote Bump, "Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) was noncommittal about almost everything. He might run for president, he might not. He might run as a Democrat, he might not. But if he were to run for president, his opponent would be clear: America's wealthy, whether they're spending that money on themselves or on political campaigns. If Sanders does run, of course, he won't win. A poll from CNN this month put his support at 5 percent, less than it is for Hillary Clinton (by far), Vice President Biden (by a large amount) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). He's one of the few elected officials in American history to embrace the word 'socialist' to describe his policies. But even though his campaign is clearly an attempt to draw attention to the issues he cares about-- wealth inequality, the Citizens United decision-- he wasn't willing to strongly criticize either Clinton or President Obama in doing so."

Imagine having a real choice-- not a choice between the lesser of two evils but a choice between corporate governance and actual democratic governance. It boggles the mind. Run, Bernie, run.


Labels: ,

2 Comments:

At 11:04 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Have we learned nothing in the last eight years?

Sanders may well push Clinton to use "more populist, less corporate" WORDS in debates.

But in the immortal words of Dick Cheney (the closest thing to the anti-Christ those concerned with such things will ever witness): "So what?"

What will compel Clinton to follow through on campaign verbiage any more consistently than has our current "disappointing" serial abuser of "the professional left"?

http://tinyurl.com/2eho2vw

John Puma

 
At 6:29 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

People must not understand the Roller Derby strategy of politics.

Instead of shooting for the moon, certain members need to act as blockers, keeping the opposition from breaking through and passing the front runner.

It is vital that Sanders and Warren remain in the Senate where they can expose GOP strategies, while in the House, Alan Grayson serves a similar role. These rear guards need to be reinforced with others of similar quality rather than be wasted in a campaign for President.

A stronger progressive component in the Congress means that we won't be as likely to risk another Obama being owned by the Republicans. The nation cannot survive another such political roster intact.

neoconned

 

Post a Comment

<< Home