@imkmu3 - enjoy 
1 Like
If this is what it takes to keep Bernie Sanders cooperating and working to unify most of his folks, this is a necessary step. Furthermore, their involvement in the offending emails made them toxic- even if the organization didn’t act on any of their recommendations.
5 Likes
Nope. Those were DWS/Obama’s people.
3 Likes
I’m looking forward to the soothing sounds of crickets.
3 Likes
Sorry about your “soothing sounds.”
http://usuncut.com/politics/debbie-wasserman-schultz-hillary-clinton/
1 Like
You never stop whining, do you?
None of that is true as presented by a website devoted to promoting Bernie.
1 Like
The emails were a huge gaffe, but were any of these people responsible for the convention? Because that was one helluva convention.
3 Likes
And you never stop being pathetic.
How 'bout I get it off the NYT’s site? Will you read it then?
1 Like
I read the link.
It’s asinine and largely false—just like almost everything you have ever posted.
2 Likes
“largely false”?
Could you please provide some context?
1 Like
I could.
But I won’t, because that idiocy was last December and isn’t relevant to the election.
3 Likes
The emails themselves were a tempest in a teapot. DWS was not, she was divisive, incompetent, and hurting the party. If those three were her capo’s it’s best that they went too.
4 Likes
Even before the email debacle, I’d been calling for the resignation of DWS (Payday Loan Debbie), mainly because she did not implement a 50-state strategy before and since the off year election. To rebuild the party, Dems need to take a lesson from the GOP and start from the bottom by supporting Democrats in state and local elections as well as party members running for the top positions. The emails were the icing on the cake, and it’s right that staffers involved are gone.
2 Likes
I seriously doubt you could. You remind me of Trump. That’s would be his response as well. Go back in your hole.
1 Like
AS always, you’re wrong.
GFY.
3 Likes
They did not suggest they use Bernie’s faith against him, but thanks for repeating the Repub talking point. The question was whether that could be an issue in certain areas. And it could.
4 Likes
Good. Clean house. The DNC has been incompetent for a while.
1 Like
Bernie’s reputed atheism could be an issue in certain areas, particularly conservative Christian ones. It could be a problem that the party would have to deal with. No attack on Bernie in this, just dealing with reality, and bigots.
Corrected for spelling
2 Likes
Why do you believe that Bernie’s faith is that of an atheist? Bernie first said that he was Jewish and later stated he believed in God.
Brad Marshall ( the DNC CFO) believed that Bernie was lying about his faith and should be pushed to elucidate what he believed. – whether he as a Jew believed in God or whether he was an atheist. That would have been an inappropriate thing for the DNC to do it but the basic question is legitimate. Marshall should not have been discussing partisan tactics on DNC time but there would be no problem with Marshall suggesting that Bernie be asked to elucidate his faith as a partisan tactic on his own time. Bernice’s brother had said that Bernie was very secular and Bernie had been answering questions about his Jewish faith in ways that were consistent both with a belief in God and with atheism: we should be good to people here on earth. Both Hillary and Bernie were asked what their faith was, which is a totally appropriate question which usually arises in the course of a campaign. Not sure if this question was asked before or after this email exchange.
What a candidate does actually believe does matter. If the politico says he is going to Mass but can be shown to be going to the Moonies at the relevant time slots I’d want to know both for which faith the politico held and for the fact the politico was lying.
‘What do you believe?’ Is a totally legitimate question. However that does not give the DNC the right to put someone up to asking it if it does not arise naturally. But the individuals at the DNC do not, to my knowledge, take a pledge to be politically neutral on their own time.
‘Are you an atheist?’ is politically toxic but is not a smear if the questioner knows that you are an atheist. Such a question was never asked to my knowledge.
As an atheist I regret that toxicity and I recognize that politicians have been trying to appear more religious than they are since we first had politicians. Nonetheless the voters have a right to ask and a right to the truth if the answer is patently false. Beyond that, what the voters make of the answer is up to them.
My god, a Democratic official actually did something politically smart. I am amazed!
2 Likes