Is Bernie Sanders ever satisfied?

More dammit, I want more!

Sanders wrote an op-ed in which he celebrates all of the progressive policies which have now been added to the Democratic Party platform:

The Democratic Party platform drafted in St. Louis is an excellent start in bringing forth policies that will help end the 40-year decline of the American middle class. These initiatives, if implemented, will create millions of good-paying jobs, significantly improve health care, and reverse the dangerous trend in this country toward an oligarchic form of society. 

Do you hear a "but" coming? Because I hear a "but" coming.

But, let us be clear, this is a document that needs to be significantly improved by the full Platform Committee meeting in Orlando on July 8 and 9.

Now here are some of the progressive provisions in the platform as listed by Sanders himself:

At a time when huge Wall Street financial institutions are bigger now than they were before the taxpayers of this country bailed them out, the platform calls for enacting a 21st-century Glass-Steagall Act and for breaking up too-big-to-fail banks. 

The platform calls for a historic expansion of Social Security, closes loopholes that allow corporations to avoid paying taxes, creates millions of jobs rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, makes it easier for workers to join unions, takes on the greed of the pharmaceutical companies, ends disastrous deportation raids, bans private prisons and detention centers, abolishes the death penalty, moves to automatic voter registration and the public financing of elections, eliminates super PACs, and urges passage of a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, among many other initiatives. 

These are all major accomplishments that will begin to move this country in the right direction. I congratulate Rep. Elijah Cummings (D., Md.), chairman of the Platform Drafting Committee, and all 15 members of the panel for their hard work.

Okay by almost ANY standard that is an incredibly progressive agenda, and the part that Sanders' delegates had in drafting it should give them quite a sense of accomplishment.

But to Sanders it is just not goddamn good enough.

The problems? It does not guarantee a $15 dollar an hour minimum wage, and does not condemn the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP if you prefer.

In other words Sanders has achieved virtually every one of his goals in crafting this Democratic platform, but it is not perfect so he remains dissatisfied.

Now first let us not forget that the Democratic party is NOT married to this platform and there is nothing which forces them to pursue these policies.

Secondly let's remember that just because the Democrats might want to get these policies passed into law, there is absolutely no guarantee that such a thing will happen, especially while facing off against an entrenched Republican opposition.

And thirdly the stated reason that the Hillary delegates refused to sign off on an official opposition to TPP, is because our President is for the deal, and they refused to take a stand in direct opposition to his desires.

And lastly Sanders should know that even if the language opposing TPP is not part of the official platform, Hillary Clinton, who has stated her opposition to the plan, will be against it or not depending on what she thinks is right.

She is not bound by the language of the party platform, so it has no real control over her future decisions as President.

So his op-ed reads like nothing more than the thinnest of excuses for not officially dropping out of the race and endorsing Hillary Clinton.

What he is demanding will not happen, so he wields his progressive purity as a shield to deflect criticism as he continues to milk his last remaining supporters for contributions and basks in the media's attention.

Can't even say I'm surprised.

By the way if you want see just how delusional the remaining Bernie Bros have become just take a listen to H.A. Goodman.

And trust me, he's not the only one holding on to those delusions.

Elizabeth Warren talking about Hillary Clinton in 2004 interview is something I think we all should watch.

Now if you will notice Warren really stresses how intelligent and formidable Hillary Clinton was back when she was First Lady. And she also kind of gives Hillary a pass, to some degree, for her vote later which ultimately undid all of the work she did previously.

As grownups of course we understand how politics works.

However we also know that the main criticism against Hillary is that her positions change with the polls, and that she is not a person of substance.

I do not agree with that completely, but I would be lying if I did not admit that it was reason for concern.

Now this does not mean that I will not vote for Hillary.

I will.

It also does not mean that I think she cannot win against any of the Republican choices.

She can. And most likely will.

However it does mean that we need to be aware that Hillary Clinton is a political animal, and that the issues she supports so strongly right now, such as gun control and her stance against the Trans-Pacific Partnership, might not be the issues she supports once she sits behind that desk in the Oval Office.

Which is yet another reason that she would be well served by a Vice President Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren in my opinion.

Sarah Palin thinks that she and SarahPAC still have influence over American politics. Isn't that adorable?

Courtesy of Little Impotent Annie's Facebook page:

Once again the “Great One” (Wayne Gretzky? Is she talking about Wayne Gretzky?) Mark Levin (Oh, how disappointing.) is spot on for calling out the shameful way the House GOP leadership is targeting good conservatives like Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) who courageously voted against the fiasco that is Obamatrade (I think she means the TPP deal here. But you know everything sounds worse for conservatives when you slap the name "Obama" on it.) that others want to pass before they even know what’s in it. Congressman Meadows deserves our praise, not punishment! But, like the Great One says, apparently the GOP establishment hasn’t learned the lesson of Dave Brat’s unprecedented victory over Eric Cantor last year. The conservative grassroots will no longer stomach politicians who talk the talk to get elected without walking the walk on Capitol Hill. Go ask Eric Cantor how well that worked out for him. (Yeah, you wanna get "Cantored?"  Because you could totally get Cantored!) 2016 is just around the corner, and elephants have long memories. My PAC will be supporting the brave conservatives who stood up against Obamatrade  and encouraging good challengers for those who punish them for their courage.

Okay first off calling this idiot the "Great One" is getting really creepy.

Secondly the idea that ANY politician is quaking in their boots at the prospect that SarahPAC may support a challenger against them during their primary is laugh out loud funny. After all she only donated around five percent of her SarahPAC earnings to candidates in 2014.

The funny thing is that I am more or less in agreement with Palin about the TPP deal, however that is because the TRULY great ones like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have educated us on what is wrong with it.

Senate votes no to fast tracking the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP.)

Courtesy of RT:  

Lawmakers in the United States Senate have thrown a wrench in a plan that would have given President Barack Obama “fast track” authority to advance a 12-nation trade deal between the US and Pacific Ring partners. 

In a 52-45 vote on Tuesday afternoon, the Senate opposed moving forward for now on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. A procedural vote required at least 60 “ayes” in order to let the Senate host discussions on whether or not to give the president so-called “fast track” authority on the matter. Failure to reach that threshold puts the future of the trade agreement in jeopardy. 

Had the vote gone the other way, lawmakers would have hosted a debate to decide whether to give President Obama the power to approve the potential deal on his own, before asking Congress to either ratify or reject any agreement. Ahead of Tuesday’s vote, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, told Reuters the possibility of expediting the process as the White House had requested “may be dead” due to lack of support soon after the procedural vote failed.

Well that's Senator Warren-1 and President Obama-0.

That may seem a little unfair as Warren was not alone in her opposition to his proposal, however the fact that she was so vocal with her criticism that the President called her out by name is certainly going to add to her political credibility and power within Democratic circles.

By the way after reading through Salon's "10 biggest lies told about the TPP" I am going to suggest that this vote is a good thing.

Bernie Sanders is pretty sure he can beat Hillary.

Courtesy of CBS News:

 Bernie Sanders, Vermont's independent senator and a self-proclaimed Democratic socialist, says he can beat Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination in 2016. 

On CBS' "Face the Nation" on Sunday, Sanders said he thinks he can oust the former secretary of state because, "there is, in my view, massive dissatisfaction in this country today with corporate establishment and the greed of corporate America and the incredibly unequal distribution of wealth and income, which currently exists." 

And Sanders said his record on that issue over the past 25 years shows that he has led the way in standing up for working families and taking on "the billionaire class," Wall Street, private insurance companies and drug companies. 

Sanders is hesitant to criticize Clinton, saying that he respects and admires her. But pressed on the question of why he would make a better Democratic nominee, he points to three things: his opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership, a massive Asia-Pacific trade agreement being negotiated, his vote against the war in Iraq and leadership fighting against it, and the work he has done opposing the Keystone XL pipeline. 

"I'm not quite sure Hillary Clinton has come out with a position on that," he said.

Well he's not wrong about that last part.

Sanders also had this to say:

“We won’t outspend Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush, but we will raise the kind of money needed to run a strong campaign,” he predicted. Sanders promised on Sunday that he would not have a super PAC to raise money for his campaign. 

According to Sanders, he has received nearly 90,000 contributions, averaging about $43, since announcing his candidacy a week and a half ago. Sanders, who described himself as “the most progressive member of the U.S. Senate,” vowed that if elected, he would work to overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision and rein in campaign spending allowances. 

There he goes again with that sweet talk.

And God it's working.

Still, I think it is unrealistic to suggest that a little known liberal socialist Senator from Vermont could really take on the Clinton machine and emerge victorious.

I mean that's as crazy as suggesting that a first term black Senator from Illinois, whose middle name was Hussein, would have a chance against Clinton.

Crazy I tell you.

President Obama's response to Senator Elizabeth Warren's attack over TPP: "She's absolutely wrong."

Courtesy of Yahoo News: 

“She’s absolutely wrong,” Barack Obama said, before I could even get the question out of my mouth. 

He was talking about Elizabeth Warren, the Massachusetts senator and populist crusader whom Obama helped elevate to national prominence. Warren generally reserves her more acid critiques for Republicans and Wall Street, but in recent weeks she’s been leading a vocal coalition of leftist groups and lawmakers who oppose the president’s free-trade pact with 12 Asian countries.

Earlier this week Warren made this dire prediction about giving the President the ability to "fast track" trade negotiations: 

U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren warned that granting President Barack Obama trade-negotiating authority will help Wall Street in its long campaign to roll back rules imposed on banks after the 2008 financial crisis. 

“This is hardly a hypothetical possibility: We are already deep into negotiations with the European Union on a trade agreement and big banks on both sides of the Atlantic are gearing up to use that agreement to water down financial regulations,” Warren, a staunch opponent of granting the president “fast-track” trade powers, said in a speech in Washington Tuesday.

That is what Obama is responding to in the above quote. And he had even more to say:  

“Think about the logic of that, right?” he went on. “The notion that I had this massive fight with Wall Street to make sure that we don’t repeat what happened in 2007, 2008. And then I sign a provision that would unravel it? 

“I’d have to be pretty stupid,” Obama said, laughing. “This is pure speculation. She and I both taught law school, and you know, one of the things you do as a law professor is you spin out hypotheticals. And this is all hypothetical, speculative.” 

“The truth of the matter is that Elizabeth is, you know, a politician like everybody else,” he said. “And you know, she’s got a voice that she wants to get out there. And I understand that. And on most issues, she and I deeply agree. On this one, though, her arguments don’t stand the test of fact and scrutiny.”

Okay well I certainly don't think the President is "pretty stupid" in fact I have often been amazed at how he has outmaneuvered this critics on issue after issue, sometimes purposefully leaving bread crumbs for them to follow in seemingly one direction, before doubling back and surprising them in another.

However my respect for Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders knows no bounds, so how is it that they can be so diametrically opposed on this deal?

From what I have read about the deal, and what has been explained by Robert Reich, it seems abundantly clear that this is a bad idea for the American people.

So I am left, like many people I imagine, to either believe that perhaps the best President in my lifetime is trying to screw the American worker, or that some of the smartest people I know are dead wrong on this issue.

They should rename this trade deal "Liberal Migraine" because that is what it is giving me.

Elizabeth Warren responds to accusations that she does not understand TPP trade deal. Spoiler alert: She does.

I am going to simply put the whole response here for you to read, without adding my thoughts, and link to her petition as well.

I'm pretty sure that Warren wants as many people to read it as possible.

Courtesy of Elizabeth Warren.com:  

Have you seen what’s in the new TPP trade deal? 

Most likely, you haven’t – and don’t bother trying to Google it. The government doesn’t want you to read this massive new trade agreement. It’s top secret. 

Why? Here’s the real answer people have given me: “We can’t make this deal public because if the American people saw what was in it, they would be opposed to it.” 

If the American people would be opposed to a trade agreement if they saw it, then that agreement should not become the law of the United States. 

Let’s send a loud message to our trade officials: No vote on a fast-track for trade agreements until the American people can see what’s in this TPP deal. Sign this petition right now to make the TPP agreement public. 

The Administration says I’m wrong – that there’s nothing to worry about. They say the deal is nearly done, and they are making a lot of promises about how the deal will affect workers, the environment, and human rights. Promises – but people like you can’t see the actual deal. 

For more than two years now, giant corporations have had an enormous amount of access to see the parts of the deal that might affect them and to give their views as negotiations progressed. But the doors stayed locked for the regular people whose jobs are on the line. 

If most of the trade deal is good for the American economy, but there’s a provision hidden in the fine print that could help multinational corporations ship American jobs overseas or allow for watering down of environmental or labor rules, fast track would mean that Congress couldn’t write an amendment to fix it. It’s all or nothing. 

Before we sign on to rush through a deal like that – no amendments, no delays, no ability to block a bad bill – the American people should get to see what’s in it. 

Sherrod Brown has been leading this fight, and he points out that TPP isn’t classified military intelligence – it’s a trade agreement among 12 countries that control 40% of the world’s economy. A trade agreement that affects jobs, environmental regulations, and whether workers around the globe are treated humanely. It might even affect the new financial rules we put in place after the 2008 crisis. This trade agreement doesn’t matter to just the biggest corporations – it matters to all of us. 

When giant corporations get to see the details and the American people don’t, we all lose. Let’s level the playing field: No vote on fast-tracking trade until the public can read the TPP deal. 

We’ve all seen the tricks and traps that corporations hide in the fine print of contracts. We’ve all seen the provisions they slip into legislation to rig the game in their favor. Now just imagine what they have done working behind closed doors with TPP. 

We can’t keep the American people in the dark.

Yeah, it's pretty impossible to argue with any of that.

Thoughts?