Sorry, but I haven’t received any fundraising e-mail from Bernie. If you have a link please feel free to share it and I’ll check it out.
Did it in include any photos with Hillary in African dress? Suggestions that she might be assassinated? Did it name-check Reverend Wright or Bill Ayers? Any mention of a 3 am phone call?
Did it say that “black lives don’t matter to Hillary?” Compare her to murderous dictators? To Dick Cheney? Did it say that Hillary would “strip millions and millions and millions of Americans of their health coverage?”
If it did all of those things, then it would at least be matching the Clinton campaign “tone.”
I read it, rude person. The point again, since you seem to have reading comprehension problems, is that Sanders, when asked by Greenpeace in January, agreed to stop accepting money from that source, whereas Clinton, who had received far more, not even including that received by her superpacs, did not agree. That´s what the Greenpeace activist was referring to when she confronted Hillary, and Hillary knew that, but instead she avoided the question and attacked Sanders. Clever, but dishonest.
Whoa. You’re one angry dude. I was online at the time and never saw any of that, btw. The biggest issue was when she was asked over and over again if he was a Muslim, and she finally said those immortal words…
People went ballistic. I’ve read about Mark Penn, etc. Bad news.
Shit, ProfessorP has been a near saint putting up with innuendo, invective, and intellectual dishonesty coming from some of the HRC-fans. But he´s only human.
Oh I think there are plenty of New Yorkers who haven’t really been paying attention yet. I know some personally. They are just now keying into the race since the NY primary is up. They would watch a debate.
Your unawareness of Hillary’s well-known history of negative campaigning, both in 2008 and this time around, does not make her any less of a hypocrite, it just means you’re less well-informed than you thought you were.
You seem “angry” about an e-mail I haven’t seen, and you haven’t supplied. Can’t really help you with that, other than to offer you some perspective that might help ease you down off your high horse. If not, ride on.
I’ve long ago thought that Martin is not who he pretends to be. How much money are you getting to post here, Martin?
I can’t speak for Professor P, but give me $250,000 for talking to a few old bankers a couple dozen times a year and I’ll write whatever sweet nothings they want me to say. Heck, I’ll even give my approval of whatever it is they have going on the side. All this and we won’t even have to discuss the details. It will just be a given.
So the person who started right off with ad hominem…
[quote="chelsea530, post:40, topic:35849]
You’re not employed by any of them, are you?
[/quote]
…is now complaining about my “tone?”
Perfect.
No wonder you can’t recognize hypocritical tone policing when Hillary does it – you can’t even recognize it when you’re in the middle of doing it yourself!
Sorry if I’m not reading your outrage correctly, about how Sanders and Greenpeace accuse Clinton of not abiding by the pledge she didn’t make.
Btw … what did Sanders do with the $54 grand he got from the oil and gas industry? Keep it, because it was before his pledge not to accept their money? Donate it to Greenpeace? DSCC?
Sanders has a bigger problem with donations – the FEC has cited his campaign repeatedly for not turning in balanced ledgers and for accepting donations from foreign sources.
And I guess I’m cut out of the democratic process since I can’t donate to Clinton OR Sanders now according to Greenpeace – because I work in the energy industry. How revolutionary.
Their analysis ignores the whole reason why the Greenpeace activist which is that Sanders agreed in January not to accept any more Oil and Gas money, whereas Clinton did not. And in their bullshit summary, part of the reason they say that Sanders kinda, sorta, implies that industry money affects politics, but, gosh darn, ya can´t prove it, so we´re gonna call it a lie!
Look, ¨fact-checking¨ is useful when you are checking verifiable facts, but when you start venturing into pooh-poohing political arguments as well, which is what they do in that article in spades, it becomes opinion.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t it Bernie the one begging for a debate before the Ny primary? I just feel beggars can’t be choosey. So if he truly wants to debate her again shouldn’t he more accommodating to her schedule? I know that just makes too much damn sense.
