Bernie's In

If speaking the truth is an attack then we may be seeing things from different points of view.

What do you see as an attack on Hillary?

I find many people disagreeing with me but when I see many on the other side of the pond agreeing with me I do wonder if I may have a point.

My God. You are Reasoning Logic.

Bernie hasn't attacked Hillary.

If he knows he is going to lose to her, tell me what the reasoning would be behind the losing Dem continuing to delineate the Dem nominee's negatives?

what makes Hillary Clinton the Dick Cheney of the Democrats is Libya. You heard that right — Clinton is to Obama in Libya what Cheney was to President Bush in Iraq. Against other voices urging caution, they both strongly advocated the invasion of a country that, lacking a follow-up plan to restore stability, fell into complete chaos.

Everyone knows of Cheney’s role as an unapologetic interventionist in Iraq. For that, he has been pilloried on the left. Neither has he escaped criticism on the right. No less an authority than former President George H.W. Bush has chastised Cheney for his bellicose views. As vice president, the hawkish Cheney “marched to his own drummer” and was “very hard-line” in ways that ill served his son’s administration, the elder Bush told biographer Jon Meacham.

What about Clinton? She, too, was hard-line and marched to her own drummer in arguing for US intervention in Libya. She was able to convince Obama that it was the right policy to pursue, against the advice of Defense Secretary Robert Gates, National Security Adviser Tom Donilon, and Director of Counterterrorism John Brennan. Clinton helped assemble the international coalition against the dictator Moammar Khadafy and told reluctant Arab nations that it was important to her personally.

The United States ousted Khadafy, but since there was no effective plan to manage the transition to a better future, the country fell into anarchy. As then-Secretary Gates explained it: “We were playing it by ear.” Today, Libya is an ISIS romper room, where they carry out beheadings, export terror, and massacre civilians indiscriminately.

Of Cheney, Democrats like to point out that, after all these years, he is still unable to admit the failure of the foreign policy he championed. Obama admitted last year that intervening in Libya without an adequate post-conflict plan was his biggest foreign policy regret. But not Clinton.

Before Libya descended into lawlessness and disorder, Clinton touted her record there. “We set into motion a policy that was on the right side of history, on the right side of our values, on the right side of our strategic interests in the region,” she said in 2011.

Yet, now that history is no longer on her side, Clinton shifts blame for Libya to an “arc of instability” that stretches from Afghanistan to North Africa. The truth is that this frightening crescent of terror and the growth of ISIS are at least partly the result of her failed attempt at regime change in Libya.

Eric Fehrnstrom is a Republican political analyst and media strategist, and was a senior adviser to Governor Mitt Romney

Very intellectual, Thank you for sharing.

You plan on answering my question?

Is the truth too much for you. I have been claiming since day one Bernie has to know he cant get any of his propositons passed with this congress but he continues to tell the gullible voters who havent heard this "I'm going to get you free education, free health care and free food with a car thrown for good measure." shyt for the last 40 years. So in my mind Bernie is a liar that puts Hillary to shame. When someone tells something he knows is untrue its a lie. And after 30 years in politics he has to know he is lying his ass off.

No, but being you are persistent I will.



You seem to be speaking hypothetical. Does he know that he is going to lose?

If he were to lose I do not think he will tell the truth about her unless he is asked. Maybe Hillary should reestablish the don't ask don't tell polices of the past?



http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/04/03/judge-jeanine-hillary-you-cant-tell-difference-between-truth-and-lie?hl=1&noRedirect=1

*snort*

Yeah I was being hypothetical, hence the frequent use of the word 'if'.
But you're obviously being an obtuse ass, and if Bernie (even if asked) continues to run down Hillary after she's the nominee, he's a dishonorable ass.

You do realize that that the US never invaded Libya, right?

oh, wait, Hillary was all for nailing him by ugly means, and rejoiced after.

I happen to think of this as horrible.

http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/01/06/new-hillary-emails-reveal-true-motive-for-libya-intervention/

GWB has nothing on Hillary, Obama, and crew.

Quote edgarblythe's article:

Up to now, you've tried to maintain that you won't vote for Hillary because she isn't liberal enough. So what do you do? Post an article critical of Hillary by Eric Fehrnstrom, the Romney Republican strategist who became famous by saying that the things a candidate says during the primary season can be forgotten because the candidate is free to say completely different things when the election is underway, just like shaking up an Etch-A-Sketch.

How is anyone going to believe this guy's analysis after he comes out and says that? Here's the short interview:

I hope you are not implying we had nothing to do with it.

Do you bother to read that crap before you post links?

That is not a news site. The about page actually says it is not edited and is solely the opinion and work of the authors.

Doesn't matter. The purpose is not to enlighten, but to smear.

The US didn't help create no fly zone until after the UN had voted on it. To claim Hillary is as bad as Cheny with Iraq is nonsense.

I see no evidence that the US had anything to do with the initial uprising in Libya. It was only after the killing of civilians that the UN stepped in to enforce a no fly zone to protect those civilians.

When an author states Hillary has Qadaffi killed to prevent him from starting a currency to compete with the Euro and the US dollar, you have to wonder if the Lash is sane for even citing such nonsense.

Quote Lash:

Congratulations. You actually found a source for your anti-Hillary criticism that's even worse than Edgar's Romney campaign manager. You chose a Russian propaganda troll site.

Aside from getting their economics all wrong, (typical of Russian propaganda), and attacking NATO, (who hates NATO more than Russia?), your article also showed it's allegiance to the idea that a country's currency is backed by gold. Nobody believes that anymore, but it's an idea the Russkies are pushing because they have purchased gold reserves lately, ostensibly to protect Russia when the dollar collapses, (hah!).

Of course, if any currency is going to collapse, it will be the Ruble, which has lost over half its value in the last two years. And going down.

But lest their be any doubt that Lash's quoted source, Foreign Policy Journal, is a Russian propaganda site, I give you this article and quote from another of their articles, entitled "Russia's False Hopes":

http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2015/09/25/russias-false-hopes/

Anybody out there think the West is "disreputable" and "collapsing"? Apparently Lash does, because this is the online mag she quotes to attack Hillary. Couple this with the Russian military propaganda Lash was pushing a couple of months back, (about how powerful Russia is military hardware-wise), and add in that her first A2K name was Sonya(!), and a rather stark picture emerges. Which is: for many years now, we've been reading the posts of a Russian spy.

It all adds up. Russia sends over these moles to blend in with Americans and push the Kremlin line. We know they do this, for at least one of these mole rings has been busted. Remember Anna Chapman?



A2K has its very own Russian mole: Lash