It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Behind the scenes with Bernie Sanders:

page: 6
14
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: muse7

Muse ?

The largest health care provider there is currently is the US Government.

Medicare/Medicaid/VA.

There is no single 'private' health insurance corporation that has over 100 million people on their sheets.

That is a monopoly already.


Apparently your math is messed up, that would be less than 1/3 of the US population, not sure how you define that as a monopoly.


Feel free to name a single private insurance company with over 100 million people on their sheets.

And gets to create taxes, and regulations.




posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012
l Bernie is although a man of integrity, he too can be easily manipulated if somehow pulls through as the POTUS anyway.



Bernie may not be the man of integrity you believe him to be. In my experience, no candidate is the product they advertised. I have to go with that over the impressions of his supporters. I have to.

Once you see the truth, you cannot unsee it.


If that's you line of thought, then I think, Trump is the alpha wolf of the pack, not Sanders. I think this discussion comes down to equality and / or recovery of the US economy.

There cannot be equal distribution of financial wealth with the current financial system where the actual system itself is manipulated!

This issue is beating a dead horse to the pulp, and why point the fingers at Sanders when Hillary and Trump are neck-on-neck at the polls, laughing their way to the POTUS's seat?
edit on 20-9-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

If that's you line of thought, then I think, Trump is the alpha wolf of the pack, not Sanders. I think this discussion comes down to equality and / or recovery the US economy.

There cannot be equal distribution of financial wealth with the current financial system where the actual system itself is manipulated!

This issue is beating a dead horse to the pulp, and why point the fingers at Sanders when Hillary and Trump are neck-on-neck at the polls, laughing their way to the POTUS's seat?



They all suck. But Sanders is the Establishment's Choice -- from what I see -- so my personal focus is on him. He's the one who will be foisted on us whether the majority like it or not.

Trump isn't Teh One. He's only the one who will fracture the conservative vote so badly, Bernie will win with a mandate to give Congress an 18 trillion dollar check.

[EDIT: Also, Hillary has an anchor around her neck dragging her campaign down to Bernie's benefit -- her email scandal. And Trump plans to break from republicans, that is clear from the shenanigans he pulled with backdating his *ahem* loyalty pledge. And if Joe enters the race it will drag Hillary down and benefit Bernie. THAT is what i see. The nomination and general election will be handed to Bernie.]
edit on 20-9-2015 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963


Maybe his donors sucked because during his 30 years as a Senator he NEVER sponsored a bill? As far as I am aware his biggest accomplishment as an INDEPENDENT, was he caucused with the Democrats.


Bernie Sanders hasn't been a Senator for 30 years. He was a mayor from 81-89, a representative from 91-07 and has been a senator since 2007. I'm guessing you meant to say he's been a congressman for 24 years?

Anyway he's obviously sponsored quite a few bills and cosponsored many more over the years, you can look on Congress.gov yourself. So to say he never sponsored a bill is just not true.

Lindsey Graham has been in Congress almost as long (since '95) and he's had 2 bills he sponsored made into law and 83 cosponsored bills made into law. Compared to 3 and 203 for Sanders. Rand Paul in his 4 years, 0 and 4. Marco Rubio in the same time frame as Paul? 1 and 18. Cruz has only been in office since 2013, he's got 1 and 2.

You want to see a real lemon of a legislator? Ron Paul of course isn't a candidate this year, but he was a Representative for 37 years and quite a few self-described Constitutionalists were quite taken with him. His stats? 1 and 109.

If you take a look at the bills they've all sponsored that have actually been signed into law, none of them are likely to fit your above definition. You're making unreasonable and misleading statements. Name any non-trivial legislation with a single sponsor?

Honestly, I'm surprised that you seem to have a dislike of Sanders given his voting record on some important issues:

- He voted against the first Patriot Act and subsequent reauthorizations
- He co-sponsored and introduced the USA FREEDOM Act of 2014 (that should fit your criteria above as for being in line with the constitution and benefiting Americans) to limit the data collected on cell calls, to increase availability of lawyers for defendants in FISA courts, etc.
- He's against the TPP
- Was one of the most vocal opponents of the Iraq War
- He wants to abolish private prisons
- He voted for Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and against the Brady Bill. Though the NRA gives him an F, he's been fairly pro 2nd Amendment for a guy who caucuses with Democrats.

You can see his voting record on key issues at votesmart.



posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: buster2010

Actually it i thanks to CU( Citizens United) that Bernie is getting funding right now.

From those unions, and corporation he just loves to demagogue.

But Bernie doesn't like CU very much.


Please watch this video, everyone else here as well. The corruption goes back much further than Citizen's United. The Princeton study takes data as far back as 40 years.




posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

It goes back all the way to Mr' Smith goes to Washington.




posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:28 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

'cept Trump isn't going to win...and you know it....



posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:34 PM
link   
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

Why? It should be obvious. There's no shortage of threads pointing out Hillary's and Trump's faults. Why have a problem when the same standards are applied to Sanders??

Seems equitable to me.



posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

If that's you line of thought, then I think, Trump is the alpha wolf of the pack, not Sanders. I think this discussion comes down to equality and / or recovery the US economy.

There cannot be equal distribution of financial wealth with the current financial system where the actual system itself is manipulated!

This issue is beating a dead horse to the pulp, and why point the fingers at Sanders when Hillary and Trump are neck-on-neck at the polls, laughing their way to the POTUS's seat?



They all suck. But Sanders is the Establishment's Choice -- from what I see -- so my personal focus is on him. He's the one who will be foisted on us whether the majority like it or not.



Ok, if I follow your premise, why Sanders when the majority has there eyes on candidates like Hillary and Trump, Hence the majority won't be happy if for some reason the POTUS cap is handed to Sanders by either of those two candidates. It my even create a public outcry or uprising if that is the case.

It sure will not be in the best interest of both the majority, and the Establishment, if going that understanding.
edit on 20-9-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: seeker1963


Maybe his donors sucked because during his 30 years as a Senator he NEVER sponsored a bill? As far as I am aware his biggest accomplishment as an INDEPENDENT, was he caucused with the Democrats.


Bernie Sanders hasn't been a Senator for 30 years. He was a mayor from 81-89, a representative from 91-07 and has been a senator since 2007. I'm guessing you meant to say he's been a congressman for 24 years?

Anyway he's obviously sponsored quite a few bills and cosponsored many more over the years, you can look on Congress.gov yourself. So to say he never sponsored a bill is just not true.

Lindsey Graham has been in Congress almost as long (since '95) and he's had 2 bills he sponsored made into law and 83 cosponsored bills made into law. Compared to 3 and 203 for Sanders. Rand Paul in his 4 years, 0 and 4. Marco Rubio in the same time frame as Paul? 1 and 18. Cruz has only been in office since 2013, he's got 1 and 2.

You want to see a real lemon of a legislator? Ron Paul of course isn't a candidate this year, but he was a Representative for 37 years and quite a few self-described Constitutionalists were quite taken with him. His stats? 1 and 109.

If you take a look at the bills they've all sponsored that have actually been signed into law, none of them are likely to fit your above definition. You're making unreasonable and misleading statements. Name any non-trivial legislation with a single sponsor?

Honestly, I'm surprised that you seem to have a dislike of Sanders given his voting record on some important issues:

- He voted against the first Patriot Act and subsequent reauthorizations
- He co-sponsored and introduced the USA FREEDOM Act of 2014 (that should fit your criteria above as for being in line with the constitution and benefiting Americans) to limit the data collected on cell calls, to increase availability of lawyers for defendants in FISA courts, etc.
- He's against the TPP
- Was one of the most vocal opponents of the Iraq War
- He wants to abolish private prisons
- He voted for Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and against the Brady Bill. Though the NRA gives him an F, he's been fairly pro 2nd Amendment for a guy who caucuses with Democrats.

You can see his voting record on key issues at votesmart.


He's the person that claims both sides are the same and that he would never both for either of them...but for some reason he's always supporting Republican and conservative issues.



posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

Why? It should be obvious. There's no shortage of threads pointing out Hillary's and Trump's faults. Why have a problem when the same standards are applied to Sanders??

Seems equitable to me.



The difference, I can't seem to understand the OP's attack on Sanders, when we had the last discussion on this same topic on Sanders when we had a similar discussion on his other Sanders thread.

However, if you say there are equal number of bashing for Trump and Hillary's, that's also good for exposing the lies. We are talking about Politics in general, most politicians play a dirty game to get in power, nothing new.

Maybe it's just pointless arguing with each other, while the system is manipulated.



edit on 20-9-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-9-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:51 PM
link   

- He voted for Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and against the Brady Bill. Though the NRA gives him an F, he's been fairly pro 2nd Amendment for a guy who caucuses with Democrats.


Sanders earned that because he is for tougher background checks that violate gun owners CIVIL LIBERTIES.

www.huffingtonpost.com...



I do not accept the fact that I have been weak on this issue," Sanders said. "In fact, I have been strong on this issue. In fact, coming from a rural state which has almost no gun control, I think I can get beyond the noise and all of these arguments and people shouting at each other and come up with real, constructive gun control legislation which, most significantly, gets guns out of the hands of people who should not have them."


Hey Sanders ?

We already have laws that say 'bad' people can't have guns.

Constructive eh?

Hey people IGNORE that going around shooting, and killing other people is ALREADY against the LAW.

Geez.
edit on 20-9-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 10:55 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

And if he were to propose universal healthcare for all americans that included mental health care you would be opposed to it as well.

I think even the most pro 2nd amendment patriot realizes that we have a violence problem in this country, so I ask you; How would you tackle this issue?



posted on Sep, 20 2015 @ 11:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: muse7
a reply to: neo96

And if he were to propose universal healthcare for all americans that included mental health care you would be opposed to it as well.

I think even the most pro 2nd amendment patriot realizes that we have a violence problem in this country, so I ask you; How would you tackle this issue?


As I already said I am AGAINST monopolies.

Because that IS WHAT IT IS.

No competition.

No where else to shop.

They get to determine services.

They get to call ALL the shots.



posted on Sep, 21 2015 @ 12:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
They all suck. But Sanders is the Establishment's Choice -- from what I see -- so my personal focus is on him. He's the one who will be foisted on us whether the majority like it or not.

Trump isn't Teh One. He's only the one who will fracture the conservative vote so badly, Bernie will win with a mandate to give Congress an 18 trillion dollar check.

[EDIT: Also, Hillary has an anchor around her neck dragging her campaign down to Bernie's benefit -- her email scandal. And Trump plans to break from republicans, that is clear from the shenanigans he pulled with backdating his *ahem* loyalty pledge. And if Joe enters the race it will drag Hillary down and benefit Bernie. THAT is what i see. The nomination and general election will be handed to Bernie.]


If he wins it will be because the majority voted for him. That's the only way he's going to win because so many rich people and yes, even the establishment is against him. Unless you want to show me where the Dem. establishment is backing him now. Because they've been backing Hillary so far that's clear. That also may be why they're throwing Biden in. If Hillary has trouble they'll have another establishment guy to go for.

Bernie isn't going to win with a mandate or an 18 trillion dollar check. That 18 Trillion is over a 10 year period and 15 Trillion of it we were already spending. He's just moving it from one place to another. The last 3 Trillion is supposed to half of what we would have spent anyway but I'll have to get back with the details as I forget how.

Trump also corrected the Loyalty Pledge thing after they complained about it. Although that still doesn't bind him to follow it if he doesn't want to. It's not legally binding or anything.



posted on Sep, 21 2015 @ 12:39 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96


Doesn't matter special interest money is SPECIAL INTEREST money. .


BTW, How much have each of those unions contributed to Sanders' Presidential campaign? Looks like none from Machinists/Aerospace Workers Union and none for the Teamsters. Furthermore, You continue to ignore this part:


This table lists the top donors to this candidate in 1989-2016. The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organizations' PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.


You can click the donors tab and see the top individual contributions and who made them. Meanwhile, while you drag out "special interest money" in your allegations against Sanders, you've been actively defending hundreds of millions of dollars in dark money pouring into elections from corporations who you actually do believe are people.


Doesn't matter if it's $1 dollar or $1 billion 'bad' money is still 'bad' money.

So it's ok because he just took a 'lil' bit of it.

What ever


What? You're talking about 100k from an unknown amount of people with some involvement with those companies. It could be 1,000 donations of $100 or 10,000 donations of $10. None of what you're saying is remotely relevant to anything. Are these people not allowed to make individual donations because of where they work? GTFO. Any money that Sanders' campaign receives would be cause for you to attack him despite the fact that what the information really shows is that he's the least beholden of the bunch. Check out the summary, 91% of his Presidential campaign's contributions have been from individual donors with 69% of those donation being < $200 ("small" contributions). Jeb Bush? 96% with 93% from LARGE contributions. What's that tell you? That Bernie isn't nearly establishment enough to make it to the White House but I think it's hilarious that you're obviously scared that he could.



posted on Sep, 21 2015 @ 01:05 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I understand why you attack his policies. That is when you actually get the information correct and aren't just making it up. You don't like that he's a socialist. Therefore you insist on finding any possible flaw and if you can't find a legitimate one you'll just skew anything to make it fit.

But trying to attack him as being one of the insiders out to screw everyone over or only to make himself rich or whatever I just don't see happening. The fact is he's a genuine guy and he really wants to help. That's what he's spent his whole time doing. In Vermont he didn't get elected the first time but ran again and won, barely. Over the years he's built up the respect of everyone who have voted him in with larger and larger numbers. They did that because they saw first hand what he was doing.

I realize this must shatter your total rejection of Gov. but not everyone is there to bring in the new order of things. Even other politicians from both sides will tell you that he's an honest guy and he truly believes in what he's doing and does it. It's no wonder they also find him to be a kind of rouge black sheep of the bunch since he's not like them. Being honest and actually trying to do the right thing and all.

Doesn't mean that all his ideas will work. The guy is only human and his ideas are different than what's been tried here. But they can work and do work elsewhere just fine. Plus I trust him far more than I'd trust you as far as figuring out what would and wouldn't work. He's been doing it for 30 years and done a good job at it. So if you want to attack his policies that's fine but trying to attack his person or credibility only makes you look silly.



posted on Sep, 21 2015 @ 02:09 AM
link   
Dallas Cowboys vs. Houston Texans.
How bad is your butt going to hurt in the end.
How much does it really matter?



posted on Sep, 21 2015 @ 02:57 AM
link   
Just vote for the person you like. I mean Bernie is hardly going to appeal to the right wing anyway. They can vote for a republican so people on the left can vote sanders. I certainly wouldn't have people on the opposite side of the aisle effect my decision. At least there is a clear choice between left and right this time. So you can't complain too much whatever side your on



posted on Sep, 21 2015 @ 05:17 AM
link   
a reply to: pl3bscheese

bernie sanders screwed the american public when he revised the audit the fed bill! outshine my arse lol funny thing is he cosigned the damn thing with ron paul then when he could of had it passed he revised it and passed his revision which has worse over sight on the fed then before. No wonder hes running for pres he was bought out. hes a liar and a fraud. lol you might as well vote for obama a 3rd term it will be the same outcome




top topics



 
14
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join