There now comes a Senator from Vermont, one Bernard Sanders, an Independent, so he says.
In reality, Senator Bernie Sanders is not really an Independent but actually a self-proclaimed SOCIALIST. I wonder if the citizens of Vermont actually knew that when Sanders was elected. In any event, Senator Sanders wants to be President of the United States. We wants to challenge former First Lady Hillary Clinton who would be the first woman elected President. Sanders, should he be elected, would be the first avowed socialist as President of the United States. What a world, is it not my fellow Americans, what a world.
In any event, Sanders’ socialistic and even radically progressive political ideas seem somewhat popular to at least some Democrats in the State of Iowa. The more popularity grows for those ideas, the more concerned become Clinton and her supporters and in fact, so much so that many think that the popularity of Sanders among Democrats and his socialistic ideas in fact are “pushing Clinton to the left.” If nothing else, that is really little chance to be elected President so many think, Sanders will have accomplished a certain objective by forcing Clinton and any other Democrat candidate to move left, even to the extreme in some cases. No matter how uncomfortable or personally or politically distasteful, at the bottom line it is all about getting elected, the power and as one pundit said:
WHATEVER IT TAKES!
The liberal agenda that Senator Sanders puts forth as he runs for President has proved popular with Democratic voters even in the old farm towns of Iowa. Democrat Party officials seem delighted, especially as Sanders puts pressure on Clinton to move left and perhaps adopt some of Sanders’ socialistic ideas. A major tenet of Sanders’ liberal activist thinking is the expansion of social security benefits. That of course is a major socialistic mantra, the expansion of the so-called safety net, allowing individuals not only more benefits including economic, but for longer periods of time. In short, a capitalistic nation we now enjoy would turn into a socialistic one. Taxes would of course rise dramatically and there would be yet be another and even larger redistribution of wealth under the Sanders plan. Clinton has yet to comment on such a philosophy.
Then, says Sanders, it would be critically important to:
BREAK UP WALL STREET BANKS
That of course means investment banks, like Goldman Sachs, deconstruct the financial structure of America, tighten even further banking rules and regulations, provide for far greater control of federal entities such as the Federal Reserve, control interest rates with an even more aggressive, proactive federal philosophy, and of course protect and even increase the death tax, the so-called inheritance tax. A flat, level, often opportunity-less society, socialistic in every way would be the objective of Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont. How, I wonder, could a man with these philosophies and political objectives ever be elected Senator of the great State of Vermont? In any event, his voice is being heard, especially by Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Sanders goes on. It is absolutely essential, he says that money invested in political campaigns have much more extreme limitations. Sanders recalls the recent Supreme Court decision in January 2010 in the case of CITIZENS UNITED. The ruling by the Supreme Court allowed unlimited political spending by corporations and unions, or anyone for that matter as an essential freedom or right. Sanders believes that with all of this unlimited political spending, there is a real disenfranchising of many voters. He doesn’t really bother to explain what he means but such is liberal rhetoric in a critical election year to come. Sanders conveniently leaves out of his diatribes the fact that his Democrat opponent Hillary Rodham Clinton intends to raise:
In her attempt to become President of the United States. Talk about unlimited political spending disenfranchising voters. The Clinton campaign seems the epitome of that.
More from Sanders. The federal government and the states should provide:
FREE COLLEGE TUITION
Sounds good, does it not, especially with the rising costs of college education. Sanders however never explains who would pay for that. But then again, he really doesn’t have to, for Democrat-liberal would simply vote the funds, spend the money and further tax the people, the doers, the money-makers. If Sanders, or any like him is elected President, batten down the hatches my fellow Americans for the taxman cometh yet again. Why would any individual, young or old, have the right to free college tuition? Nothing is ever free for if someone gets something for nothing, someone else pays.
And, says Sanders, raise the minimum wage to $15, in his view a “living wage.” Walmart with its thousands of hourly wage employees just raised the pay rate to $10 per hour. That, at the time, was the highest hourly wage (minimum) in America. The Sanders proposal would increase that wage by 50% and would result in the unemployment of millions of unskilled hourly workers everywhere.
And of course green energy, of course. Anything but fossil fuels no matter the cost or feasibility. No more Alaskan pipelines, fracking or the development of natural energy resources which now power the world. Green good to go no matter the cost. Hillary Rodham Clinton is listening, Mr. Sanders, and Bernie Sanders knows that as Clinton day by day moves farther Sanders-left. Americans have the perceptions that rural islands, especially farmers are conservative in thinking. But the so-called popularity of Sanders indicates there is liberal even socialistic thinking in the soil and the hearts of many islands.
James Berge, Iowa Democratic Party chairman for Worth County, a rural community of fading farm towns on the state’s border with Minnesota, was asked whether he thought the Democrats he represents in that county would vote for Sanders over Clinton in the caucuses. To which Berge said:
Berge went onto say that the only way so many rural Iowa Democrats would not vote for Sanders is if Elizabeth Warren ran for President. Apparently, those Democrats have little interest in Hillary Clinton. Liberal activists everywhere, he says continue to call for Mrs. Warren, Democrat Senator from Massachusetts and liberal firebrand to challenge Mrs. Clinton for the nomination. Warren said she is not running, at least for now but there are many liberal-progressive Democrats, including socialists like Sanders who want very much to see her challenge Clinton and run for President. The liberal Democrat Party base finds much of the political philosophy of candidate Clinton, centrist for the most part, anathema and do not trust her political positions. Senators Sanders and Warren criticize Clinton for her support of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and her vote for the Iraq war. Yet it still seems that Hillary Clinton is the overwhelming favorite to win the Democrat nomination. Even as Clinton moves left and begins to embrace the demands of the party’s left-progressive-liberal extreme, she hesitates to embrace all such demands. Even as the Clinton van SCOOBY DOO worked its way through Iowa on a listening tour for Hillary Clinton, she began to broaden her political philosophy, adopting much of the rhetoric of the left but of course without any specific policy proposals. Talk is easy and of course always general at this early stage of the political campaign.
Clinton talked broadly about income inequality and the need for more opportunities for job training, or even access to college, all again without any specific proposals. Sanders is blunt, straightforward, aggressive with regard to his political positions and socialistic philosophy and the Clinton campaign has the advantage of monitoring and evaluating the effect of all such politicizing on Iowans so that she can react accordingly. It is disconcerting indeed to see a candidate of such popularity and potentiality so uncommitted, influenceable, willing to change political conviction or belief at virtually any time all for the sake of being elected. Change now for the sake of being elected but change back when elected. Surely our great country deserves better candidates than those who now seek to be our President.
Anyway, you should know more about Democrat candidate for President Senator Bernard Bernie Sanders, independent-socialist from Vermont. Many of his ideas are aggressive, progressive and radical. We should all be aware of those ideas and the influence upon Hillary Clinton, especially if she begins to adopt and articulate the Sanders philosophy. Very people are considering Mr. Sanders a real threat to Mrs. Clinton, or a candidate with any real possibility to become the Democrat Party Standard-Bearer. Clinton remains the undisputed front-runner for the Democrat presidential nomination, no matter the loud voice of Bernie Sanders. In a poll conducted by Real Clear Politics, Hillary Clinton captured 60% of the vote of the recent polls taken in IOWA. 6 out of 10 Democrats would vote for Hillary Clinton over any other Democrat candidate for President, declared now or potentially so. Then comes Senator Elizabeth Warren from Massachusetts who would garner 17% of the vote. Interestingly, the real clear politics poll showed that Vice President Joseph R. Biden would get 8% of the vote, even though Mr. Biden has not declared as a candidate. And then comes Senator Bernie Sanders who garners 7% of the vote. 7% as compared to 60%. That is a most interesting political fact, that the views of a man with such little voter appeal can command the ear of top candidate Clinton. Clinton, Warren, Biden and then Sanders. And then there is declared candidate former Senator Jim Webb of Virginia and former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley each garnering at or about 2% of the vote. It should be an interesting 18 months for the Democrats, should it not? Hopefully, there will be even more candidates, voices to be heard. It seems not good for America for one major political party to be dominated by one woman.
It is interesting that different political voices wish to lead us 18 months from now. There is Republican Rand Paul. Republican Jeb Bush. Republican Donald Trump, yes that very egocentric businessman Donald Trump. And Chris Christie, New Jersey Governor who will soon be heard from. And Mike Huckabee. And finally declaring himself candidate, Dr. Ben Carson. Wouldn’t it be fascinating if an African American, full-blooded so, were to garner the Republican nomination for President and America would have a right-thinking, conservative African American as President.
Some of the political possibilities for 2016 are genuinely intriguing, don’t you think?
Well, back to the socialist Bernie Sanders. Mr. Sanders probably has little or no chance to get the party’s nomination. But all indications are that his socialistic-even radical philosophies will be heard and at least to some extent adopted by and eventually implemented by the ultimate Democrat candidate. It is good to see the old guard challenged, especially candidates like Hillary Clinton. Sanders and others can do that. It will be equally good to see the old guard in the Republican camp challenged. Candidates like Trump, Carson, Christie, Walker, Perry and the like can provide fresh blood, fresh ideas and new political thinking. All of that is good for America, very good for it is the essence of democracy.
The left, the liberal, the progressive, the radical is powerful, very powerful. Its voice is heard everywhere, even as it essentially controls the mainstream media. That voice moves candidates, Republican and Democrat to the left, at least to some extent. What is your thinking on the left and the right? It is so critically important that every thinking American begin even now to wrestle with the issues, study and learn all things about the candidates, and begin even now to be ready to exercise an informed vote in 2016. The future of America demands that.
Speaking of left or right, never forget the words of wisdom in Ecclesiastes 10:2:
“THE HEART OF THE WISE INCLINES TO THE RIGHT, BUT THE HEART OF THE FOOL TO THE LEFT.”
Thus sayeth the Lord and thus sayeth I. What sayeth you?