Bernie!

[KingOrfeo]

Bernie shocks college student!​

Watch this college student’s perfect ‘Oh shit’ face as Bernie Sanders drops a bombshell about legal pot

Smell the Bern!

 

[Boxlicker101]

Smell the Bern!

"Bern" is a good nickname, but the spelling should be changed to "Burn" and it should be preceded by the words "Crash and" in order to be more realistic.

 

[about_average]

About time a major high visibility politician is talking about doing the right thing when it comes to recreational drugs.

 

[BotanyBoy]

"Bern" is a good nickname, but the spelling should be changed to "Burn" and it should be preceded by the words "Crash and" in order to be more realistic.

Ohhhh he's not any worse than any of the other establishment pol's......in fact he's head and shoulders above the rest just for speaking out against 'too big to fail' as well as ending the war on drugs.

Trump is in a similar 'unelectable whack job' lime light. He says real things and the people LOVE him just for saying something that isn't the typical "Well let me tell you how awesome I am until we can pretend you didn't just ask a real question. " BUUUUUULL shit every fucking one of the rest of the cockroaches running for POTUS tries to push.

About time a major high visibility politician is talking about doing the right thing when it comes to recreational drugs.

Question is will he do the right thing or will he do the Democrat thing and try to 'regulate' it into the elites pockets.....that is the question. I think he would do the right thing, I think so do the elites and that's why I'm almost certain even if not a single fucking person voted for Clinton, we will get Clinton and we will like it.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Are you aware that ice cream is a gateway drug? It's a fact. If you ask all addicts of hard drugs if they ate ice cream as children, virtually all will admit they did.

What's that you say? Most eaters of ice cream do not turn to hard drugs? Maybe not, but most MJ users don't either.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Are you aware that ice cream is a gateway drug? It's a fact. If you ask all addicts of hard drugs if they ate ice cream as children, virtually all will admit they did.

What's that you say? Most eaters of ice cream do not turn to hard drugs? Maybe not, but most MJ users don't either.

A borderline incoherent rant that sounds a lot like "butt...BUTT!....BUTT POT HEAD!!!" is all you have to say?

It's ok....keep bobbing that partisan schlong box lol

 

[KingOrfeo]

"Bern" is a good nickname, but the spelling should be changed to "Burn" and it should be preceded by the words "Crash and" in order to be more realistic.

Oh, of course he's not going to get the nomination, that's not what this is about. Bernie is playing a long game -- a game that does not end in July 2016 and does not end in November 2016. He's starting a movement.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Are you aware that ice cream is a gateway drug?

I started with soft-serve, and before I knew it I was on the hard stuff.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Originally Posted by Boxlicker101 View Post

Are you aware that ice cream is a gateway drug?

I started with soft-serve, and before I knew it I was on the hard stuff.

I did the same thing, and then - and then I needed a bigger thrill, so I started adding hot fudge sauce. And before I knew it, I was including nuts, and once even a maraschino cherry.

 

[JackLuis]

A ‘President Bernie Sanders’ could end the federal marijuana ban without Congress — here’s how

When Vermont senator Bernie Sanders called for an end to federal marijuana prohibition this week before an audience of college students, he went further than any major national presidential candidate before him.

“It’s the first time a presidential candidate has made such a forthright statement on legalization,” said Michael Collins, deputy director at Drug Policy Action. “[It’s a] a fairly big nail in the coffin of prohibition.”

But that’s not the only reason his declaration was significant. While many proposals from Sanders and other candidates may not actually come to fruition under any president because they rely on the cooperation of Congress, ending federal prohibition is something a President Sanders could achieve.

That’s because a process exists that requires only the executive branch of government.

Go Bernie Go!

 

[BoyNextDoor]

A ‘President Bernie Sanders’ could end the federal marijuana ban without Congress — here’s how



Go Bernie Go!

I think that by January the "unelectable" rhetoric will be turning around. There are some states he will never win, but they are the same states Hillary can't win either.

If KO is correct and he is bringing back some of the "Reagan Democrats" that went red that can swing some important states.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I think that by January the "unelectable" rhetoric will be turning around. There are some states he will never win, but they are the same states Hillary can't win either.

If KO is correct and he is bringing back some of the "Reagan Democrats" that went red that can swing some important states.

He's not going to win the "Reagan Democrats" and to think otherwise is just wishful thinking on the part of some people. These are working citizens who pay their bills and taxes and aspire to buy homes and sent their offspring to college. They don't ask for and don't need government handouts and will not vote for somebody who calls himself a Socialist. They do not want the gov. taking a bigger bite of their paychecks and they don't want the higher prices that would result from raising business taxes.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

You sound like you are on the defensive. You are not even going to vote in the Dem primary.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

I started with soft-serve, and before I knew it I was on the hard stuff.

everyone with intelligence knows that you are a complete fuck up. Of course you pound the ice cream and other stuff, this is why you are 400lbs

 

[Sean Renaud]

I think that by January the "unelectable" rhetoric will be turning around. There are some states he will never win, but they are the same states Hillary can't win either.

If KO is correct and he is bringing back some of the "Reagan Democrats" that went red that can swing some important states.

He's not going to win the "Reagan Democrats" and to think otherwise is just wishful thinking on the part of some people. These are working citizens who pay their bills and taxes and aspire to buy homes and sent their offspring to college. They don't ask for and don't need government handouts and will not vote for somebody who calls himself a Socialist. They do not want the gov. taking a bigger bite of their paychecks and they don't want the higher prices that would result from raising business taxes.

I highly doubt KO is correct that Bernie will get any significant number of Reagan Democrats back. I just don't see it but I could be wrong. Here's the question. What states can Hillary not win? We're not talking about a presidential election where everything in the South East save Florida isn't even worth fighting over because it's lost territory. This is a primary.

Here's the rub Box. These people DO need government handouts, that's why the middle class is shrinking. These people are too stupid to do what's in their own best interests. But I agree with you that they don't want it and won't vote for someone who calls himself a socialist. We've got YEARS and years of data to work with and like raising the minimum wage taxes (within reason) do not seem to significantly effect prices, especially not for sufficiently large companies.

 

[JackLuis]

Sanders pushes back at belief that socialist is a ‘dirty word’ in American politics

ocialist” has long been a dirty word in American politics, a slur thrown at liberals that evokes Cold War-era images of bread lines, government-controlled economies and authoritarian regimes.

But 2016 Democratic White House hopeful Bernie Sanders has not shied away from describing himself as a democratic socialist. In fact, his platform of eradicating income inequality and curbing corporate power is attracting large crowds of liberal activists.

The question though is whether the independent Vermont senator can persuade a broader swath of Democrats to accept his version of socialism, a term he acknowledges makes many people “very, very nervous.”

In the next few weeks, Sanders, who is trailing Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton in polls, will try to take the sting out of the label with a speech aimed at explaining his democratic socialist views.

Selling the “socialist” tag remains a steep hurdle for a presidential candidate in the United States, where polls indicate it is still a negative for many voters and would be a major hindrance in a general election campaign.

He may never be President, but he has effected the terms of the debate. If he wasn't in the race, would O'Malley or Clinton be as strident as they now seem to be?

Also too:

Fiery Bernie Sanders rips ‘old fashioned racism’ of Donald Trump: ‘It’s not American — it’s xenophobia’

It looks like Bernie has gone off the deep end now using words that the republican base can't define. Oops!

 

[JackLuis]

‘It’s very white': Las Vegas audience exposes Bernie Sanders’ Latino problem

Yep, Bernie has a problem trying to gather Latios and Blacks to his campaign who have not paid enough attention to the high jinks in D.C. to know who he is and what he stands for.

A mariachi band, a Latino neighbourhood, Spanish language posters and bold immigration pledges: Bernie Sanders was pulling out the stops for Nevada’s Hispanic vote.

Short of dancing salsa, the Democratic candidate did all he could to woo this crucial constituency at a rally on a soccer field in Las Vegas on Sunday night.

He surrounded himself with Latinos on stage and promised to fight for agricultural workers and to shelter families from deportation. It signalled the start of an effort to narrow Hillary Clinton ’s wide lead with the state’s Latinos.

There was just one problem: the audience at the Cheyenne sports complex was mostly white.

It is interesting that Hillz campaign has a different strategy:

As Sanders supporters gathered on the soccer field, the Clinton campaign was training field teams, including a lesson in phone technique to a group of bilingual high school students. Not all came purely for love for the big H.

“I was told to come,” said one girl. “I’m doing community service.”

 

[JackLuis]

Postal union endorses Sanders, citing efforts to save USPS

The largest union for government postal workers in the United States has endorsed Bernie Sanders for president, giving a boost to the Democratic candidate’s slim labor endorsement list.

The American Postal Workers Union (APWU) announced its endorsement in a Thursday morning statement that applauded Sanders’s efforts to prevent post office budget and service cuts.

APWU is the largest union to announce its support for the Sanders campaign thus far. It counts more than 200,000 current and former U.S. postal service workers among its members, in addition to its roughly 2,000 members from private delivery companies.

Sanders has cultivated close relations with the U.S. labor movement throughout his time in Congress. But as a presidential candidate he has struggled to win major union endorsements.

Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton has gone out of her way to curry favor with some of America’s biggest unions, and the investment has paid off. The National Education Association — with nearly three million members, it ranks as America’s biggest union — endorsed Clinton last month. She has also received big endorsements from the American Federation of Teachers and the public sector union AFSCME.

Nonetheless, Sanders, a Democratic socialist running on a platform of economic egalitarianism, enjoys the fierce allegiance of many rank-and-file labor activists. More than 5,000 of them have signed an open letter from the independent group Labor for Bernie. And a handful of union locals have rushed to endorse him even as their national wings hold off.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Socialism is suddenly hot! The unions show signs of life! Is “class consciousness” coming to America at last?

Fast-food workers walk off the job and indebted college grads flock to Bernie -- and our overlords have noticed

Andrew O'Hehir

A specter is haunting America. Well, OK, not so much “haunting.” More like bugging America a little, disturbing our consumerist slumber from time to time. As specters go, it’s a spindly thing, nearly indiscernible, nowhere close to the Jacob Marley level of gruesomeness and clanking chains. At least not yet. It is, or it might be – let’s lean hard on might be — the return of the most repressed and forbidden concepts in American political life: class consciousness and class struggle.

What lies behind the Bernie Sanders campaign and the unexpected comeback of socialism as a semi-viable political construct is arguably more interesting, and more important, than Sanders’ candidacy in itself. I’m not trying to douse you with the cold, salty water of political reality, Bernie-bros and Bernie-gals (and Bernie-others); despite the unpleasant gender-politics pissing matches, the Sanders campaign is almost entirely a good thing, and whatever discomfort it has caused Hillary Clinton and her fan base has been well worth it. But my point is that Bernie Sanders did not personally cause the Bernie Sanders moment. Conditions had to change on the ground, and in the collective consciousness, to make it possible in the first place.

Almost no one in the middle-aged and Reagan-scarred political commentariat, myself included, saw that coming, but it’s an immensely significant shift with unpredictable long-term consequences. Those altered conditions are both material and ideological, and in my judgment those things are inextricably connected. Worsening economic inequality and its pernicious effects have become unavoidable and nearly ubiquitous. Unless your family owns more than two houses and some of them are in Aspen or Palm Beach or the south of France, you have felt the consequences personally or seen them around you. Combine that with the emergence of a generation that has no memory of the Cold War or the self-inflicted traumas of the American left – a generation that has experienced little or none of capitalism’s alleged bounties, and has been launched into adulthood burdened with unsustainable debt — and ideas or solutions formerly deemed unthinkable and unmentionable start to look pretty damn good.

Those new material conditions, which Karl Marx identified as a situation of “simplified class antagonisms,” when society increasingly splits “into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other,” are galvanizing other phenomena as well, which at first may appear unrelated. On Tuesday, thousands of fast-food workers walked off the job at franchise restaurants in 270 American cities, in a one-day labor action organized by the Service Employees International Union to push its campaign for a $15 minimum wage onto the national radar as a 2016 election issue. While the union and the media have focused on the burger-flippers and chicken-fryers, the one-day strike also encompassed many other low-wage workers at nursing homes, childcare centers, FedEx depots and other service-sector employers.

Important questions have been raised on the activist left about the SEIU’s strategy and tactics. Journalist Arun Gupta (an occasional Salon contributor) has argued, for instance, that the union campaign is undemocratic and aimed more at P.R. impact than at creating meaningful social change. Nonetheless the mobilization of low-wage workers, both as a potential voting bloc and a class of 64 million people who have obvious common interests and little or no political representation, marks the labor movement’s most vibrant and impressive display of power in many years. Local governments in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle and several other cities have already raised the minimum wage well above the national level, and the issue marks a major dividing line between Democrats and Republicans. (Sanders supports the $15 wage while Hillary Clinton, in a classic display of Clintonism, says she favors $12. None of the leading Republicans want to raise it at all, although they’ve largely stopped talking about abolishing it altogether.)

On a much less significant scale – although it’s plenty important to me and my colleagues in the online media – there has been a recent union boomlet on the Internet, which for most of its existence has been a free-market Wild West environment dominated by Silicon Valley libertarianism. Over the past six months or so, employees at Gawker, Vice, the Guardian U.S. and Al Jazeera America have all voted to unionize, and an organizing campaign at the Huffington Post is reportedly nearing the finish line. (Somewhere in there, the writers and editors at Salon signed up with the Writers Guild of America and are currently negotiating a union contract. Or so I hear.)

Do these disparate stirrings of discontent and solidarity and political awakening among Taco Bell line workers and indebted college grads and underpaid Internet drones really add up to the grandiose label of “class consciousness”? Do they mean that we’re drawing near the moment when the owners of capital have pushed the systemic contradictions too far, and without meaning to have empowered an opposing class that will destroy them? Are we finally reaching the point (endlessly and tediously theorized in 20th-century Marxism) when a “genuine” or fully disillusioned version of class consciousness can come to grips with itself and its society, casting aside the alienation and reification that has led so many workers to identify with the cause of capitalism?

Oh, hell no. I am making no such argument. I’m saying this is an unexpected political moment, pregnant with all kinds of possibilities. But other people are clearly thinking about that. Why do you suppose the Koch brothers, the Dark Side puppeteers behind Citizens United and the deep-pockets funders of every Republican presidential candidate not named Trump or Carson, have started talking about economic inequality and corporate welfare — as if they were actually bad things? Because Chuck and Dave are working out some wry, sardonic-but-true comedy act along the lines of King Lear’s Fool? Or maybe, just at a wild guess, because they are shrewd political operators who have consistently been two steps ahead of their opponents? And because they now perceive those issues as incredibly dangerous to their project of destroying democracy and instituting permanent oligarchic rule, and they want their minions in the Republican Party to defuse them somehow?

Please attend to what Charles de Ganahl Koch, the slightly more Vader-like of the Kansas bazillionaire brothers, said in August to a select audience of 450 Republican donors and political operatives, among whom were seated Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina, Marco Rubio and Scott Walker (who had not yet been relegated to GOP unpersonhood). “We’re headed toward a two-tiered society, a society that’s destroying opportunities for the disadvantaged and creating welfare for the rich. Misguided policies are creating a permanent underclass, crippling our economy and corrupting the business community — present company excepted, of course.”

That’s a pretty weak and nervous-sounding laugh line, isn’t it? I hope Lord Charles had his speechwriter promptly executed. Then again, I can’t imagine the whole speech was terribly comfortable for anyone present. Once we stop gasping at the sheer, outrageous balls-out temerity of that person talking about that stuff, we may notice that Koch did not say that sooner or later that “permanent underclass” was going to come tear down the castles of the rich with its bare hands and string them all up in the public square – or at least in the food court at the mall, right next to Sunglass Hut, since the public square was sold to developers long ago. That’s because he didn’t have to. I’m pretty sure they got the point.

 

[JackLuis]

Poll Shocker: Bernie Sanders Leads Trump and Bush by Double Digits

In the latest McClatchy-Marist poll, Sanders outpolls GOP frontrunner Donald Trump and establishment candidate Jeb Bush. Against Trump, Sanders leads 53 to 41. Against Bush, Sanders leads by 10 points, 51 to 41.

The Vermont senator's lead is particularly large among voters 18 to 29; there, he leads Bush 57 to 38. Even among some of the most conservative voters in the country, in the South, he leads Bush 46 to 45.

Many of Sanders' supporters have long theorized that his most difficult challenge is toppling Hillary Clinton, not winning the general election. This latest set of polling lends credibility to this theory.

If you look at the poll results, Hillary does as well against Repub's. However the edge Hillz and Bernie have is mighty slim, probably with in the margin of error.

It's a long long way to November.

 

[JackLuis]

Sanders introduces bill to legalize pot

I'm not sure how I missed this, must have been the debates and stuff.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has introduced legislation to legalize the recreational use of marijuana.

The bill, which would remove cannabis from the federal list of dangerous drugs such as heroin, would allow states to prohibit marijuana but would remove federal barriers for ones that want to legalize it for medical and recreational use.

The introduction of the bill follows remarks Sanders made last week, when he said if elected president he would seek to remove marijuana from a list of drugs deemed illegal by the federal government, freeing up states to regulate pot like alcohol or tobacco.

The Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act (PDF) is the first Senate bill to propose legalizing recreational marijuana, The Hill reported.

Sanders’ bill would allow the marijuana industry access to banks, which was the subject of legislation proposed in July by Sen. Michael Bennet, a Democrat, and Sen. Cory Gardner, a Republican, both of Colorado where marijuana is legal.

I wonder if this was reported in the US Press?

 

[DooleyDarter]

i would think the numero uno reason to vote for a person for president is Pot. that is what a mature, thinking person would come up with. There are no other issues facing the country right now.

 

[about_average]

i would think the numero uno reason to vote for a person for president is Pot. that is what a mature, thinking person would come up with. There are no other issues facing the country right now.

Yeah, he should be introducing bills that will really make a difference, like Ted Cruz does.

S.Res. 226: A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that the street between the intersections of ...

... 16th Street, Northwest and Fuller Street, Northwest and 16th Street, Northwest and Euclid Street, Northwest in Washington, District of Columbia, should be designated as “Oswaldo Paya Way”.​

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/sres226

Or like Lindsey Graham

S. 1147: A bill to designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located at 83 Meeting ...

... Street in Charleston, South Carolina, as the “J. Waties Waring Judicial Center”.​

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s1147

The more that can be done to legalize recreational drugs in the US the better for the country, so Sanders' pot bill will do more good for the country than either of the above two.

 

[DooleyDarter]

So your justifying a pot vote for bernie by what cruz says? Damn stupid is as stupid does.

 

[about_average]

So your justifying a pot vote for bernie by what cruz says? Damn stupid is as stupid does.

You might want to read what you're replying to before you make yourself look stupid calling someone else stupid.

The more that can be done to legalize recreational drugs in the US the better for the country, so Sanders' pot bill will do more good for the country than either of the above two.

Also, who said to vote for Sanders because of his pot bill?