**sigh**
Even without any great expectations.

Thank you for the respectful tone. The comment preceding yours has just about convinced me not to write the essay. I don't mind criticism. I thought it might be possible the have a discussion that would be helpful. People have plenty of opportunities to vent and plenty of things more deserving of their wrath. I don't believe I would be doing anything productive for the community here that I have come to value deeply.

Re the F-35 in Burlington, you can get the basics here:

As part of the effort to keep the F-35 out of the Burlington airport people in the area spend a lot of time on the inadequacies of the F-35 as a plane, a boondoggle. You'll need to look for links talking about the health and economic effects on the community.

You can also look here:

Patrick Leahy had the clout to do the deal. His wife's cousin, Ernie Pomerleau, is a commercial real estate developer. Commercial development has already begun in the dead zone created by the F-16 where South Burlington used a federal grant to buy 200 homes.

There is a growing body of evidence documenting harm to health caused by airport noise. The US government considers an area with an average daily decibel level of 65 or greater "unsuitable for residential use." There are already people living in such an area. A South Burlington School and the entire Winooski School District, grades K-12 are or will be in the area. The government standard for schools is 55 decibels.

I will not take the time to detail the inaccurate information the VTANG submitted about residential development (decades old) that got the Burlington Airport to the top of the list. The most recent medical information in the environmental impact statement was from 2003 if I recall correctly. A study by commercial realtors insisting there would be no negative impact on home values was refuted when the Northwestern Vermont Association of Realtors announced they believed the law required sellers to notify potential buyers of the "unsuitable for residential use" designation.

Leahy was the initiator, but Bernie was in on it and rarely missed a photo op. Most of the sense of betrayal is directed at Bernie because people expect such things from Leahy. The area around the airport has the largest amount of affordable housing in VT. The working class people of Winooski think of themselves as Bernie's people. It's a working class city, with some areas in the middle class.

I had reason to drive through Winooski to a party last night. The Bernie for President signs have not come down. I didn't see a Hillary sign. One of the people at the gathering said what hurts most is that he wouldn't even talk to us. To the best of my knowledge Bernie Sanders has never once sat down with the people in the affected area to listen to their concerns.

The F-35 program is the most expensive weapons program in history. Did Leahy or Bernie request funds to increase sound insulation in area schools? No. They couldn't risk raising any obstacles in their effort to get the Air Force to do something it didn't especially want to do in the first place.

Since you began by agreeing on the F-35 the above is more for others. Bernie had any number of opportunities to hit Hillary Clinton much harder. He could have joined lawsuits of his supporters on voter fraud and raised it as an issue. If anything he tamped it down considerably. Bernie's limited reaction made it easier for those at TOP to dismiss the issue as a CT.

But the big issue is the relationship between Hillary Clinton as SOS and donations to the Clinton family. There was nearly a formula. You have an issue that involves the State Department, say repealing a minimum wage increase in Haiti. You invite Bill to give a 6 figure speech. The State Department acts. And you make a 7 figure donation to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation. Suppose when Hillary accused Bernie of attacking her integrity and said he couldn't give an example he turned, pointed at her and gave a case where an organization, or sometimes another country, paid Bill to speak; the State Department acted in a manner that benefited the actor; and the actor made a large contribution to the Clinton Foundation.

I know, that doesn't demonstrate a quid pro quo. I read it at TOP. But it would have made his point. As it was the media had a field day with Bernie's baseless charge. He could have built commercials on the same theme.

I have no desire to go on. I admire and respect Bernie. I think Bernie's statement on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the most courageous stance a politician in either party has taken in many years. But the picture of Bernie that has been emerging here is less than consistent with the Bernie I have been observing since he was mayor.

Counting my reading before my initial post I've been here for nearly five hours. I need to go. Apologies to those who would like to continue a dialog.

I never tried to insert a link before. If they don't work I'll insert below so anyone interested can copy and paste into a browser.

Peace to all. I'm not here to divide.