Recent Comments

1. about 10 hours ago on Jeff Danziger

   @Hellcat — with few exceptions, most of the (establishment) Clinton personnel is behind moderates Biden or Klobuchar, not Warren. Warren has not walked back anything, certainly not her position on comprehensive universal health care (Medicare with the coverage gaps closed and premiums, deductibles and co-pays eliminated, for all).

   You are either intentionally misrepresenting her position or have not actually read either her initial detailed plan of what her objective is, which is far more detailed than Bernie’s as to both structure, cost and financing, or the additional clarifying details on how it would be rolled out and how it would be financed (which Bernie has not offered), which was not at all a walk-back.

   Universal comprehensive healthcare for all (Medicare for all) is a BIG, STRUCTURAL CHANGE.

   Big structures are not built in one day, and neither are big structural changes like healthcare reform.

   Elizabeth Warren is the only one calling for UNIVERSAL COMPREHENSIVE HEALTHCARE FOR ALL who also provides a specific BLUEPRINT and TIMELINE for how to get from here to there with no compromise as to the ultimate policy objective and without raising any taxes on the middle class (not merely taxes that are offset, but offsets without any increases).

   Read the actual plan — an aggressive strategy, starting on DAY ONE with the things a president can do with executive authority, and moving towards UNIVERSAL COMPREHENSIVE HEALTHCARE FOR ALL with the fastest possible strategy for actually getting it done.

   Elizabeth Warren is not the only candidate with a universal comprehensive health care for all plan, but she IS the only candidate with a specific blueprint and timeline for how to make universal comprehensive health care for all a reality.

   Here are the actual details on Warren’s official site:

   https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/paying-for-m4a

2. about 17 hours ago on Jeff Danziger

   — to further elaborate on the differences between Warren and both Hillary and Sanders that are inaccurately glossed over in the talking points…

   Elizabeth Warren has a far stronger record in directly confronting and standing up to the bullies than Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, or anyone else.

   It was Warren, not Sanders (or Clinton), who went head-to-head in the famous exchange with Joe Biden who was seeking to enact financial industry bankruptcy limitations that hurt consumers.

   It was Warren, not Sanders (or Clinton), who went head-to-head with Jamie Dimon of Chase or the CEO of Wells Fargo (who she said should be fired and jailed and, while not jailed, he was fired less than a week later).

   It was Warren, not Sanders (or Clinton), who defied #MoscowMitch, got removed from the Senate floor and of whom #MoscowMitch said, “Nevertheless, she persisted,” earning Warren a new trademark.

   It was Warren, not Sanders (or Clinton), who stood up to all Republicans and some Democrats to get the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau enacted despite being warned that such a task would be impossible.

   Bernie Sanders is a good guy. He would be a good president. I supported him in the 2016 primary (after Warren, my first choice, backed out because she needed to develop her foreign policy cred, which she has since done) and I could absolutely support him again if he comes out on top.

   I supported Bernie in the 2016 primary because he was the best option in the 2016 field. He is not the best option in the 2020 field — Warren is.

3. about 17 hours ago on Jeff Danziger

   — you’re the one who brought up the indigenous American thing about Warren, not me. As for objectivity, just saying she lies without examples means nothing. I have well-informed admiration for a political superstar. You simply don’t like her because she is the best representative of policy objectives you disagree with.

4. about 17 hours ago on Jeff Danziger

   — the context in which the Sanders campaign script was used was not as innocent nor as demographically accurate as you portray or Bernie would not have disavowed it and the top staffers would not have denied it before admitting it. (And that intro about liking Warren and her being a second choice was flagged as being “optional” depending on what was needed to establish a comfortable rapport.)

   The idea is to paint Warren as the new Hillary Clinton, which is absurd. The 2020 version of Hillary Clinton is a mashup of Joe Biden and perhaps Amy Klobuchar. Warren has gone head-to-head with Biden (video available from Warren, not Sanders) as well as Hillary. The Hillary demographic, including the elite donor base, is mostly behind Biden, not Warren. Warren does not have the baggage nor the corporate ties and, in fact, opposite of Hillary has stood up to Wall $treet special interests and the corporate bank$ters in a way that Sanders, who speaks well in generalities but has virtually no real accomplishments of his goals in his long career, never has.

   Further, Bernie admitted to having the discussion with Warren, and admits they discussed sexism vis à vis Trump weaponizing it in the campaign. It seems he is trying to spin his comments to soften them while acknowledging that Warren is essentially accurate.

5. about 17 hours ago on Michael Ramirez

   Hate to break it to ya, @Oakstone, but your comment reveals a disconnect from the reality faced by those who are actually in the middle class.

   I don’t know you, don’t know the details of your financial situation, but I am plenty familiar with how retirements are structured and the Trump tax giveaways to the rich and how the latter affected the former.

   There is no way a person in retirement is middle class if the effect of Trump tax cuts is to increase their retirement income by $20,000. Such a person may not be close to the top 1% of the top 1% who benefitted the most, but they are nowhere close to the middle class, and certainly out of touch with the struggles of those who work two or three jobs and still struggle to stay afloat in today’s reality.

6. about 18 hours ago on Mike Luckovich

   — and most ironically, Donald Trump (by any measure) WAS afforded full due process corresponding to (imperfectly) analogous elements in the criminal justice system, including the right to call and cross-examine witnesses RELEVANT to his crimes (not irrelevant accusations about political opponents), and he chose not to avail of those opportunities. His choice.

   The other choice he made was the unprecedented blanket obstruction of all witnesses, documents and other evidence, which is clearly both an abuse of power and obstruction of congress, and by itself justifies conviction under the two impeachment charges.

   The fake (as you note) whining about “due process” originated when Trump was not allowed to cross-examine witnesses in preliminary closed-door investigative hearings, which are analogous to the questioning of suspects and potential witnesses by the police (since the Democrats had to conduct their own preliminary investigation in light of the Justice Dept’s refusal to do so), in which case potential defendants never participate.

7. about 19 hours ago on Jeff Danziger

   — we know about how long Warren stewed over the comment. It was sometime in late 2018, so it has been more than a year. If you recall, in late 2014 there was a groundswell of support encouraging Warren to run in the 2016 cycle. Even Bernie, as he acknowledged in the most recent debate, was in on it and deferred running until she ruled out her candidacy.

   So in 2018, after developing her foreign policy chops, Warren was ready to run. She announced her exploratory committee months before Bernie got in, and her actual official announcement weeks before Bernie. Bernie was hedging and waffling and on several late night shows said he was trying to decide whether or not to run and at least twice mentioned that Warren would be a good candidate.

   It was reasonable for Warren to go to him and seek his support. I’m sure when he made his comment, whatever the exact statement was, it was not well received, but she kept it under wraps and honored their common interests and shared values and policy goals. It seems that the rather awkward talking points making rather silly statements about elitism and education (that sound almost Trumpian), then denying, then admitting, were the spark that moved Warren to reveal Bernie’s earlier comments.

   Again, I do not believe the reference was to women in general. It was specific to Warren vs Trump and was more about Bernie claiming ownership of “turf” that he felt entitled to because of having run in 2016 after Warren declined to.

8. about 19 hours ago on Jeff Danziger

   — Bernie is a good guy with good policies, but Warren has greater depth of knowledge and technical skills, as well as greater strategic flexibility and communication skills. Bernie was the best option among the choices in the 2016 primary, but not in 2020.

   We need the strongest candidate who can speak with a strong PROgressive voice and still unify the party.

   Joe Biden is a remake of Hillary Clinton.

   Bernie Sanders is a remake of George McGovern.

   Elizabeth Warren is a remake of FDR.

   If Biden gets the nomination, I fear that we will again see the PROgressive (Bernie) voters sitting out and others simply not energized to turn out, plus we will see Burisma / Ukraine become the “Hillary e-mail server” of 2020. A replay of the nomination becomes a replay of the outcome — just change the names.

   On the other hand, Bernie Sanders is too doctrinaire and unwilling to build coalitions and, while well-intended and a decent, sincere, consistent PROgressive, would not be able to actually get his policies enacted and, more seriously, while he would absolutely energize a group of usual non-voters, would lose moderates who fear the word “socialist” (which isn’t even accurate, more FDR than Norman Thomas).

   In contrast, Elizabeth Warren is a TRUE PROGRESSIVE, has the same long-range policy goals as Bernie, but does not scare people by (inaccurately) calling it “socialism” (more “New Deal” than “Five Year Plans”) and, while she does not compromise unless or until she absolutely has to, if it comes down to a matter of getting nothing at all or at least getting as much as is possible in the situation, will negotiate most skillfully and most aggressively and at least get as much as she can.

9. about 19 hours ago on Jeff Danziger

   — well, if your comment was in reference to Elizabeth Warren then it is complete gibberish; makes no sense. No, Warren does not lie. Trumpers like to distort statements, misrepresent facts, etc., but when you scratch below the surface, the facts check out and the numbers do add up.

   Not impressed that Warren is your senator. A lot of people are uninformed or misinformed about the elected officials who represent them. I have been following Warren’s career, her writings, since long before she was yours or anyone else’s senator, have bought (and read, and shared) her books, and examined in detail her many plans, in which (unlike other candidates) she spells out details and pencils in costs of her proposed objectives.

   Again, read my actual comment. I admire both Warren and Bernie, have supported each at different times, and don’t accuse either of outright lying. I do believe Bernie made a statement specific to Warren and a race against Trump (because he wanted the space for himself), is now getting defensive, and stretching the extent to which Warren’s more generalized recollection might be off target.

   The whole dust-up starts with dishonesty in the Bernie camp that elicited the response from Warren. Top Bernie officials released talking points asserting that Warren appeals to elitists and the more educated (shades of Trump, celebrating the uneducated?). When pressed, they denied it came from the campaign, and then admitted it did. (I’ll give Bernie the benefit of the doubt that he personally approved of it rather than an over-eager staffer.) So they are already giving us the double-speak. Like when Bernie was pushing for a $15 minimum wage and it turned out he was paying his own staff less than that. Or Bernie’s own failure to adequate monitor his own 2016 campaign when sexual harassment charges arose.

10. about 24 hours ago on Jeff Danziger

    — agreed that Liz Cheney cannot be trusted any more than her father who lied us into a war with Iraq that “earned” him billions of dollars in profits for his energy company.