From Robert Reich on Facebook;

This past weekend in New Hampshire, Bernie Sanders continued to draw sharp contrasts between himself and Hillary Clinton – saying, for example, that he will expand Social Security by scrapping the cap on income subject to the Social Security payroll tax, while Clinton hasn’t committed to doing that; he will resurrect the Glass-Steagall Act, separating investment from commercial banking, but she won’t; he’ll bust up the biggest banks, but she’ll only regulate them more; he doesn’t have a superPAC and isn’t collecting big bucks from the rich and big corporations, but she does and is; he was against the Defense of Marriage Act and against the Iraqi War, but she was in favor of both. And so on.

He’s being criticized even for mentioning Hillary Clinton, but I think pointing out ways they differ is perfectly legitimate. Voters need and deserve that information.

What do you think?

I think that when it comes down to Clinton vs. Cruz, people who support Bernie now will vote for Clinton.

I've been thinking about John's #51 post since he posted it yesterday ~ I agree with Robert Reich that "... pointing out ways they differ is perfectly legitimate" ~ but I'm not sure that any candidate's evolution and/or lack of evolution should not be noted as well ~

I grew up in a liberal home ~ and I "woke up" politically during the VietNam war ~ I was very liberal, which definitely moderated as I aged and learned the importance of principled compromise and recognized the impotence of wanting everything to be 100% "my way ... or not at all" ~

The gwb cabal pushed me back to the left, and the GOP/TPers have cemented me in place as more liberal/progressive again today ~

Bernie is a giant among men and an anomaly ~ he has held the same beliefs for decades, with no slowing down in sight ~ I give him credit for that ~ his lack of foreign policy experience and focus troubles me ~ but his belief about gun regulation [which is a HUGE issue for me] troubles me the most ~ our world is bigger than Vermont voters, and [thankfully] I see a bit of movement in Bernie's stance on guns ~ will it be enough? ~ I dunno yet ~

Hillary is a lightning rod for many ~ she is a very smart and very strong woman, which seems to intimidate many ~ she is obviously well qualified ~ she has been investigated and cleared on too many issues to count ~ and she seems to have learned from earlier [and now proven] errors ~ owning up to making a mistake, even about critically important issues, is to me a sign of evolution ~ I give her credit for that ~

I've tried to imagine Bernie being grilled by "hostile forces" for 11 hours as Hillary recently was and just can't see him holding his emotions in check to come out of that grilling stronger than when he went in ~

If I sound conflicted it's because I am ~ but I'm grateful to be facing a choice between two very solid candidates vs any of the GOP/TPer loons ~ the only thing I know for sure is that I will definitely vote for whomever is the Dem candidate, up and down the ballot ~

Sooz

John59 wrote:

Jeb always looks like he arrived 15 minutes late and isn't sure what's going on.

George always looked like he was on time but still didn't know what was going on.

He didn't have to know what was going on. He had Darth Cheney to tell him what to do and when to do it. What people seem to forget about Jeb is, under his watch, Florida went into a recession even deeper than that of the rest of the country.

From my Facebook feed ~ round and round we go ... until we fall over from dizziness ~ ~ Sooz

From my Facebook feed ~ THIS is another reason to love/trust Robert Reich ~ ~ Sooz

spot on. goodwill HELPS the US. failure to exercise goodwill HARMS us.

One good thing I remember about GW: after 9:11 he addressed the nation, and emphatically stressed that the United States was NOT going to war against Islam, no crusades. - no holy war. You can find a lot else to condemn him for in that address, but honor him for that part of his message. It has been since forgotten by almost every conservative thought leader (which is pejorative, by the way).

Many citizens have rebelled against taking in the refugees of the moment throughout our history, but when all the dust settles ti seems taking them in is the right choice and benefits us.I remember when I was a kid there were people who did not think it was right to take in Southeast Asian refugees because the veterans of the VN war would see them and they would take jobs that should go to veterans etc. What people failed to realize was that most of them were on our side, we were fighting for them.

From Sooz, re: #56...

"Our nations can welcome refugees who are desperately seeking safety and ensure our own security."

Obama must have watched the Canadian election. I could swear I heard Trudeau say that many times over.

The factoid that "America might really elect a crackpot" terrifies me ~ ~ there are "live links" to more/corroborating information in the original ~ Sooz

Wednesday, Nov 18, 2015 8:30 AM UTC
Robert Reich: America might really elect a crackpot
The former secretary of labor laments the sorry state of our politics and the damage it's wrought on all of us.
Robert Reich, ROBERTREICH.org

This originally appeared on Robert Reich's blog.

The next president of the United States will confront a virulent jihadist threat, mounting effects of climate change, and an economy becoming ever more unequal.

We’re going to need an especially wise and able leader.

Yet our process for choosing that person is a circus, and several leading candidates are clowns.

How have we come to this?

First, anyone with enough ego and money can now run for president.

This wasn’t always the case. Political parties used to sift through possible candidates and winnow the field.

Now the parties play almost no role. Anyone with some very wealthy friends can set up a Super PAC. According to a recent New York Times investigation, half the money to finance the 2016 election so far has come from just 158 families.

Or if you’re a billionaire, you can finance your own campaign.

And if you’re sufficiently outlandish, outrageous, and outspoken, a lot of your publicity will be free. Since he announced his candidacy last June, Trump hasn’t spent any money at all on television advertising.

Second, candidates can now get away with saying just about anything about their qualifications or personal history, even if it’s a boldface lie.

This wasn’t always the case, either. The media used to scrutinize what candidates told the public about themselves.

A media expose could bring a candidacy to a sudden halt (as it did in 1988 for Gary Hart, who had urged reporters to follow him if they didn’t believe his claims of monogamy).

But when today’s media expose a candidates lies, there seems to be no consequence. Carson’s poll numbers didn’t budge after revelations he had made up his admission to West Point.

The media also used to evaluate candidates’ policy proposals, and those evaluations influenced voters.

Now the media’s judgments are largely shrugged off. Trump says he’d “bomb the shit” out of ISIS, round up all undocumented immigrants in the United States and send them home, and erect a wall along the entire U.S.-Mexican border.

Editors and columnists find these proposals ludicrous but that doesn’t seem to matter.

Fiorina says she’ll stop Planned Parenthood from “harvesting” the brains of fully formed fetuses. She insists she saw an undercover video of the organization about to do so.

The media haven’t found any such video but no one seems to care.

Third and finally, candidates can now use hatred and bigotry to gain support.

Years ago respected opinion leaders stood up to this sort of demagoguery and brought down the bigots.

In the 1950s, the eminent commentator Edward R. Murrow revealed Wisconsin Senator Joe McCarthy to be a dangerous incendiary, thereby helping put an end to McCarthy’s communist witch hunts.

In the 1960s, religious leaders and university presidents condemned Alabama Governor George C. Wallace and other segregationist zealots – thereby moving the rest of America toward integration, civil rights, and voting rights.

But when today’s presidential candidates say Muslim refugees shouldn’t be allowed into America, no Muslim should ever be president, and undocumented workers from Mexico are murderers, they get away with it.

Paradoxically, at a time when the stakes are especially high for who becomes the next president, we have a free-for-all politics in which anyone can become a candidate, put together as much funding as they need, claim anything about themselves no matter how truthful, advance any proposal no matter how absurd, and get away bigotry without being held accountable.

Why? Americans have stopped trusting the mediating institutions that used to filter and scrutinize potential leaders on behalf of the rest of us.

Political parties are now widely disdained.

Many Americans now consider the “mainstream media” biased.

And no opinion leader any longer commands enough broad-based respect to influence a majority of the public.

A growing number of Americans have become convinced the entire system is rigged – including the major parties, the media, and anyone honored by the establishment.

So now it’s just the candidates and the public, without anything in between.

Which means electoral success depends mainly on showmanship and self-promotion.

Telling the truth and advancing sound policies are less important than trending on social media.

Being reasonable is less useful than gaining attention.

Offering rational argument is less advantageous than racking up ratings.

Such circus politics may be fun to watch, but it’s profoundly dangerous for America and the world.

We might, after all, elect one of the clowns.

Salon

i think it is quite doubtful.

It is because candidates are now products, sold to us like brands of toothpaste.

From my Facebook feed ~ this is one of the very few times that I don't agree fully with Robert Reich ~ for me, some of the GOP/TPer presidential candidates ARE "... directly to blame for the hate crimes erupting across America" ~ ~ Sooz

this one, to me, seems DIRECTLY attributable to Carly Fiorina.

"I’m not suggesting Trump, Fiorina, or any other presidential candidates are directly to blame for the hate crimes erupting across America. But they have fanned the flames of hate. And that is despicable.

What do you think?"

Hitler wasn't directly to blame for the holocaust either. He didn't pull the lever to expel the gas. He didn't shoot or hang anyone. The point is, the people who fan the flames are responsible for the fire they spread.

Flame fanning for profit should not be one of our nation's major industries, as it is now.

From my Facebook feed ~ Robert Reich, a very knowledgeable truth-teller, nails this short commentary ~ Sooz

I'm imagining RNC bigwigs doing another post mortem a year from now, trying to figure out what went wrong...again. They will finally conclude that they need a new base.

From my Facebook feed ~ I agree whole-heartedly! ~ Sooz

Another one off Facebook...

Now in Florida with Ed Reich who, if he makes it to February 25, will be 102. Dad doesn’t talk much now and he cant’ walk, but he said this morning he “wants to have more fun,” so we’re about to take him to the mall.

I haven’t told him about what’s happening in American politics – about the hate mongering of Trump and other Republicans – because it would only upset him. When I was a boy he told me about Father Charles Coughlin, the 1930s radio host and Nazi sympathizer who spewed anti-Semitism over the airwaves, and about how America refused entry to Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany. He told me how the college he attended maintained a strict quota on the number of Jews it admitted, and how the community he moved into when I was an infant had property covenants banning Jews (when some of the elders told him he and his family weren’t welcome he told them to go to hell). Ed Reich hated bigotry in all its forms – he detested Senator Joe McCarthy and Governor George Wallace. He hated the know-nothings, segregationists, homophobes, and anti-Semites who sullied America. Now that he’s approaching 102 and wants to have more fun, I don’t want to tell him how little progress we’ve made.

Coughlin was the Limbaugh of his time. The more things change, the more they stay the same, goes the saying.

Robert Reich should be declared "a national treasure" ~ ~ Sooz

Robert Reich: How to Deal With Your Right-Wing Uncle Bob This Christmas
Here's a helpful holiday guide.
By Robert Reich / RobertReich.org / December 19, 2015

In preparation for the holidays, here’s a survival guide for dealing with your right-wing relatives.


http://www.alternet.org/economy/robert-reich-how-deal-your-right-wing-uncle-bob-christmas

From my Facebook feed ~ I only know a few words of Yiddish ~ one is "mensch", which translates roughly to someone with integrity and honor ~ that is an apt description of Robert Reich ~ Sooz

I think he's going to have a tough time with women voters from both parties, no matter what else he says after this.