RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14330/bernie-sanders-iran

The important point is what war one talks about, when, where and against which adversaries. The bland assertion “I oppose war against X or Y” is a sign of intellectual laziness if not of moral bankruptcy.

Senator Bernie Sanders never tells us which side he would have supported: Saddam Hussein or a majority of the Iraqi people? One may justly infer that he is opposed to wars only where the US is fighting real or imagined enemies.

Sanders is wrong in pretending that Iraq was a “disaster”. Since 2003, Iraq has gone through many ordeals, paying a heavy price. And yet, today no one could deny that most Iraqis enjoy freedoms they never thought possible under the dictatorship.

“No war with Iran!” The shop-worn slogan, in circulation for four decades, is back in vogue as self-styled peaceniks in the West seek a fig-leaf to hide their shameless support for a regime rejected by its people. In Britain, the neo-Marxists who control the Labour Party bandy the slogan around on airwaves and meetings of militants. In France, the pro-Putin “France Unbowed” outfit led by Jean-Luc Mélenchon makes similar noises. And in the US, we have Senator Bernie Sanders, currently the front-runner to become the Democrat Party’s nominee in the next presidential election, donning the mantle of supreme peacemaker, in effect offering himself as a human shield for the Islamic Republic.

“Recently I’ve been criticized … because of my opposition to war,” Sanders says in a video message. “So let me be very clear: I make no apologies to anybody, that when I was a young man before I was elected to anything, I opposed the war in Vietnam. And I know what that war did to my generation.”

He adds “I’m going to do everything that I can to prevent a war with Iran because if you think the war in Iraq was a disaster, my guess is that war in Iran would be even worse.”

https://amgreatness.com/2019/03/13/how-do-you-solve

“The left has forged an alliance of convenience with the more respectable elements of Islamic activists in the West in order to attack their common enemy, Western Civilization.”

Upon her accession to the U.S. House of Representatives last fall, practically the first words out of Rashida Tlaib’s mouth were: “We’re going to go in there and we’re going to impeach the motherf—er.” The object of the freshman Michigan Democrat’s derision was, of course, President Trump. This sentiment naturally got whoops and cheers from the guests at a MoveOn.org reception, who were there to celebrate the election of the Muslima from Dearbornistan, one of two female followers of Mohammed—the other is Ilhan Omar—now occupying chairs in the Capitol.

The triumphalism was multi-layered: not only had the Democrats—thanks, Paul Ryan!—retaken the House by both hook (free stuff for everybody except old toxic-male white guys, served up piping hot by the media) and crook (ballot harvesting in California that delivered once solidly Republican Orange County over to the Democrats) but, in the guise of “diversity,” they had also put two more co-religionists of the 9/11 hijackers into the Congress. Tlaib and Omar have wasted no time in getting to work against American norms and the republic itself.

Omar, born in Mogadishu, has been getting most of the attention lately; her unfiltered mouth can’t help but spout anti-Semitic drivel, and a recent attempt by a flailing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to rein her via a resolution against Jew hatred wound up as a boilerplate denunciation of “bigotry”—thus handing Omar a propaganda victory. As Britain’s hard-left Guardian put it in a headline: “Everyone’s against bigotry, right? Not 23 House Republicans, apparently.” Well played.

But Tlaib may be the more dangerous of the pair, cannily redoubling efforts to blame some (Jewish) Democrats’ antipathy to Omar’s casual slurs on . . . you guessed it: “I think Islamophobia is very much among the Democratic Party as well as the Republican Party. And I know that’s hard for people to hear, but there’s only been four members of Congress that are of Muslim faith. Three of them currently serve in this institution. More of us need to get elected, but more of us need to understand as we come into this institution that I have a lot of work to do with my colleagues.”

http://thefederalist.com/2019/03/12/bernie-sanders-now-moderate-democratic-presidential-candidate/

In 2016, it seemed unlikely that Sen. Bernie Sanders—technically not a Democrat—would become one of the most important figures in Democratic politics and arguably the moderate candidate in the 2020 presidential field. Many may not believe it now. After all, he’s a self-described socialist. But it’s a true story that says as much about the Democratic Party as it does Sanders.

Campaigning in Iowa, Sanders bragged that the major planks of his 2016 campaign—Medicare-for-all, “free” college tuition, and a $15 minimum wage—were considered “radical “ then but are Democratic Party dogma now. He is not wrong (Sanders might have added that he was the godfather of the Green New Deal). Bernie has gone from persona non grata to acceptable presidential nominee among his Democratic Senate colleagues.

Democrats’ leftward lurch was not due solely to Sanders’ 2016 campaign. President Obama’s misgovernance reduced his party to its bedrock supporters, who leaned heavily left. Once the supposed “centrist” Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump based on blue-collar states, progressives pounced on the chance to argue Sanders could have won and his issues were the future of the party. (Conservatives often make the mirror argument when Republicans lose, which is how we got the Tea Party in 2009.)

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/02/is_she_running_hillary_and_bernie_now_attacking_each_other.html

What is more entertaining and revealing than a fight between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton over money and the use of private jets? Even better, both will likely run for the 2020 Democratic nomination for president for the chance to be beaten by President Trump.

Bernie Sanders, the socialist who like private jets, and Hillary Clinton, the pretend socialist who is a multi-millionaire, are arguing over Bernie’s use of a private Gulfstream jet that cost Hillary over $100,000 during the 2016 campaign. Hillary is upset about the cost of Bernie’s travels even though Bernie was using the private jet to campaign for Hillary.

Hillary spokesperson Zac Petkanas, in full Hillary mode, said:

I’m not shocked that while thousands of volunteers braved the heat and cold to knock on doors until their fingers bled in a desperate effort to stop Donald Trump, his Royal Majesty King Bernie Sanders would only deign to leave his plush D.C. office or his brand new second home on the lake if he was flown around on a cushy private jet like a billionaire master of the universe.