This is a bad sign
Funny how they aren't rushing to help Bernie.
It's become increasingly important what Senator Warren actually believes.
In many cases you must measure this by supporters and enemies.
When it comes to MFA it looks like Warren will settle for a public option.
Keep in mind that even this is unacceptable to much of the health care complex, but significant parts of the political establishment will accept it.
I don't want to get hung up on MFA and ignore the two other industries we need to look at: MIC and Wall Street.
Let's start with the MIC.
Senator has recently tried to portray herself as an enemy of big defense contractors.
To be fair, she does have a plan.
However, the MIC is not afraid of Warren at all.
Few companies have borne the brunt of Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) campaign-trail wrath more than defense contractor Raytheon.She teed off on its former top lobbyist during his bid to lead the Defense Department in July. And Warren’s campaign tells The Daily Beast that she opposes the company’s ongoing efforts to merge with aerospace giant United Technologies.
But Raytheon, which is headquartered in Waltham, Massachusetts, isn’t giving up on Warren quite yet, despite her populist broadsides against the company.
“Raytheon maintains positive working relationships with members of Congress who represent our employees across the country, including Senator Warren,” spokesman Mike Doble told The Daily Beast in an email.
Such anodyne language is fairly typical of companies looking to stay in the good graces of key legislators. But Raytheon has reason to remain hopeful. For years, Massachusetts’ sizable defense industry has cultivated its relationship with Warren, and the senator, in turn, has been willing to work with the industry even as she’s crafted a public image as an anti-corporate crusader.
“There’s certainly not an impression that she’s adversarial,” one Massachusetts defense executive told Politico for a 2015 story on her relationship with the industry.
Indeed, Warren, a member of the Armed Services Committee, hadn’t even taken office before she began building bridges with home-state Pentagon contractors, including Raytheon. In June 2012, months before her election to the Senate, Warren reached out to William Swanson, then the company’s chairman and chief executive. “It was a good, in-depth conversation,’’ a Warren aide told The Boston Globe at the time.
She also worked to build bridges with General Dynamics, another defense giant with major operations in the Bay State. That company called Warren a “crucial” ally in its huge lobbying campaign during her first year in the Senate to preserve funding for battlefield communications systems manufactured in part in Massachusetts.
Warren is no favorite of the MIC, but she's no enemy either.
So chances are that a President Warren won't regain control of the bloated defense budget.
Warren also doesn't take stands against our wars of empire either.
While Warren is not on the far right of Democratic politics on war and peace, she also is not a progressive—nor a leader—and has failed to use her powerful position on the Senate Armed Services Committee to challenge the status quo. While she’s voted for military de-escalation on some issues, including ending the Yemen War, she’s gone along with some of the most belligerent acts that have occurred under her watch, cheerleading Israel’s devastating 2014 war on Gaza and vocalizing her support for sanctions against Venezuela. Even judged according to the spectrum of today’s Democratic Party, which is skewed so far to the right on war and militarism it does not take much to distinguish oneself, Warren gets an unsatisfactory grade: not the last in her class, but far from first.
...
Perhaps most telling about what a future Warren administration would look like is the advisers Warren has surrounded herself with. In February 2017, she announced the hiring of Sasha Baker to be her national security advisor. Until 2017, Baker was the deputy chief of staff to the Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter. Carter oversaw the U.S. war on ISIS, as well as U.S. military buildup in the Asia-Pacific to hedge against China. Another key adviser is Ganesh Sitaraman, a professor at Vanderbilt and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a think tank aligned with the leadership of the Democratic Party that has been widely criticized for its hawkish policies, including calls for confrontation with Iran.There are numerous other warning signs—and unanswered questions. In 2013, Warren supported John Brennan’s CIA nomination. He was a major advocate of the U.S. targeted-killing program. (Bernie did not. Gillibrand did.)
While Bernie isn't perfect on the MIC, he's obviously immensely better than Warren.
Warren is better than the Democratic establishment in regards to our wars and MIC, but that's an extremely low standard.
As for Wall Street, Warren is much, much better, and this makes her the third-best presidential candidate.
There has been a fair amount of reporting about where Wall Street stands on Warren since her political career was born out of her work for consumers during the financial crisis - work that ultimately created the now-gutted Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.Plus, Warren's plans would alter Wall Street forever.
For one thing she would kill the private equity industry as we know it by forcing investors to take on more risk when they take over ailing companies. The idea is that if a private equity firm's efforts fail it shares in losses with the employees and other stakeholders (like pensioners) of the business they've taken over.
As the industry stands now that doesn't always happen, to put it mildly. For example, research from the California Polytechnic State University shows that 20% of companies acquired by private equity through a leveraged buy-out (which adds more debt to a company's balance sheet) go bankrupt again within 10 years.
If you aren't sure what private equity is, think 1980's junk bonds.
Warren would end them.
Cooperman, a billionaire investor who settled insider trading charges with the Securities Exchange Commission in 2017, has been griping about Warren in a very particular way. Not only does he think Warren's Wall Street policies bad for him and his business, they are - he argues - anti- American. They are against our values.
...Research published by worker groups including the Private Equity Stakeholder Project and the Center for Popular Democracy argue that private equity firms were directly and indirectly responsible for the loss of 1.3 million jobs over the last decade. It hardly seems un-American to want to do something about that.
Wall Street is the only area where Warren has street cred.
Unlike health insurance and the military, she probably will fight against Wall Street.
If Warren becomes wins I think she would be the best president we've had since the 60's.
Of course a) that's a very low bar. We've had nothing but bad and/or corrupt presidents since then, and b) she would still not be good enough for what needs to be done.
Fortunately there is a much better alternative.
Comments
Listen to the roar of that crowd
He was warning about centrist Democrats
FDR does comedy timing.
Problem with first video
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Jack White music and more from today's Bernie Rally in Detroit
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIWz3IHbm2Y]
And here's a clip of Bernie talking 1% and 99% from the rally (I think I time it right where the relevant segment starts at around 1:33:00) and he's taking some pretty, pretty direct shots at his opponents:
[video:https://youtu.be/jYBKZ7DPkkQ?t=5584]
[video:https://youtu.be/vqxLHmpunoE]
Bernie needs to start using language like this
Stop being so nice Bernie. Do like FDR
And this too
What specifically, gjohnsit?
You listened to the 10 minutes or so that I set up on prompt at the end of the video?
The rhetoric seems pretty similar to me.
There's parts of FDR's delivery that I prefer over Bernie's and vice-versa. Persona-wise, I perfer Bernie. I mean FDR was still a Roosevelt.
I may be mistaken but isn't David Sirota Bernie's principal speech writer?
I think he's pretty damn good if so, especially the ending of that Detroit speech.
I'm a huge Bernie fan
My constructive criticism is that FDR was even more direct.
"government of organized money...government of organized crime"
"economic royalists"
Bernie gets close to that, but never totally there.
For a modern example:
Love Jeremy Corbyn.
Bernie's flaws are primarily in the area of presentation. But his heart, his intentions, are 100%.
Lurking in the wings is Hillary, like some terrifying bat hanging by her feet in a cavern below the DNC. A bat with theropod instincts. -- Fred Reed https://tinyurl.com/vgvuhcl
So Bernie should say "We are many, they are few"
. . . instead of "At the end of the day, the 1% is still just the 1%. . . . And 99% is still a helluva lot more than the 1%"?
If he uses that other line, as good as it is, he'll be accused of plagurism.
And I don't think an aristocratic/British accent or tone will help Bernie (making a funny here, but only partly coz I do think the former sorta applied to FDR).
Any other suggestions as an alternative? I'll be happy to send a letter offering good ideas to David Sirota if no one else is doing it.
Bernie's often been criticized for supposedly being mean, grumpy, irrascible and worse.
I think he has actually tried to become softer in the delivery of his speeches after his heart attack.
But he's starting to draw the lines in a sharper manner as laurel notes below. My guess is those lines will be drawn clearer and clearer as we move into next year.
How 'bout a little Huey Long?
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hphgHi6FD8k]
At ~1:36:00 he says, "It's not just the Republican
(edited to add :00 to the time)
Lurking in the wings is Hillary, like some terrifying bat hanging by her feet in a cavern below the DNC. A bat with theropod instincts. -- Fred Reed https://tinyurl.com/vgvuhcl
I was really happy to hear/see that, too.
I expect the lines to be drawn even clearer, crystal clear, after the New Year.
"she’s crafted a public image as an anti-corporate crusader"
This is probably the kindest thing I can say about Warren. She has crafted an image of being against such and such even though not much has come from it. Lots of fiery speeches against the banks since the great bailout, but the GOP along with their democratic friends have been voting to deregulate them again. Pretty much every bill passed since 2008 has been gutted. But my biggest problem with Warbama is that she doesn't have history behind her like Bernie does. It's kinda like Pelosi sending Mitch a bunch of progressive legislation knowing full well that he would never allow it to come up for a vote. Why didn't Pelosi try to get it passed when democrats had the chance to during Obama's tenure? It's all kabuki in my book.
Scientists are concerned that conspiracy theories may die out if they keep coming true at the current alarming rate.
Some say Warren's condescending
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VguQ--WZnOk]
Exactly,
She tries to sound good, but other than the CFPB, which was a good concept, there's nothing to back her up. The way she constantly hedges her bets makes me nervous. Who is she, really? "Got to be good lookin' cuz she's so hard to see." She's like a gamble, and I don't have a good feeling about it.
It's too bad she can't just sit down and be real like Bernie and Tulsi do. And be willing to risk something for her stated beliefs.
Lurking in the wings is Hillary, like some terrifying bat hanging by her feet in a cavern below the DNC. A bat with theropod instincts. -- Fred Reed https://tinyurl.com/vgvuhcl
Liz reminds me of a Tibetan prayer wheel
Here's an example of Liz doing her best impression of "I'm almost a warmonger"
It's beyond kabuki my friend.
It's strait up theater. It's all in the looks. Not the action.
Is it any wonder I support none?
Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.
It all looks like pretend to me.
Remember when Obama promised us a health insurance bill with no mandate penalty and a public option back in 2008?
The ruling classes need an extra party to make the rest of us feel as if we participate in democracy. That's what the Democrats are for. They make the US more durable than the Soviet Union was.
Agree it is kabuki
Agree that it is pretend.
The Princeton study video featured in Lookout's fantastic round
up only takes 6 minutes to figure it out.
I am about to reach this point where I believe elections are a stage production with plutocrats funding them.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
I think that is exactly what they are
The outcome for democrats has already been decided, but they want us to play along and pretend that we get a voice in who gets picked. After that DNC lawyer admitted that they could just pick their candidate I'm going to be surprised if people are surprised that they rigged the primary again. It's going to be up to Bernie if they get away with it.
Scientists are concerned that conspiracy theories may die out if they keep coming true at the current alarming rate.
The underlying tier
They run our government and run it strictly for their benefit.
We get hope and dreams distractions.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
The outcome is not decided but the MO is
Or a kind of football
that has people howling ahout "winning," having to win, believing in
nothing but "winning" -- as entire stadiums roar for nothing but another game.
Jimmy Dore and gang have it right.
Dore was talking to somebody but forgot who. The point was made that Warren did not really move to progressive positions. Rather the democratic party moved right to make Warren look "liberal-ish". I don't think she has ability to overcome opposition both within the party and from the gop if she does become president. Bernie does have that power of persausion.
No she woulld not
be the best candidate since the 60's as far as financial reform goes. She's a freaking Republican and if her past legislative history means a damn thing then why would you believe she would be any better then any other mealy mouthed,lying establishment Demorat that has 'served' in the legislative branch? A current Killary pick as she loves the 'markets'. Never ever believed anything that came out of her duplicitous mouth since she came on TV in 2009. I think it was on Bill Maher.
She sucks a big one. Why would anyone think this ex-Republican, market loving, war monger is a good choice? Dodd-Frank? Gimmie a break. So anyway forget about Liz she's the monkey's paw. Why oh why would anyone with a brain in their head think this woman is a viable choice for president? Do not listen to bs. that emanates from the media or the net. She sucks even as far as market reform goes. A disaster cappie. No she would not be any choice 3rd or 4th or 5th, she's just god awful and there ios no way in hell I will vote for this woman. She's a freaking tool.
Really?
Because Carter, Clinton, Reagan, Trump and Dubya all deregulated Wall Street.
That leaves very few presidents left to choose from.
Warren is a hard no
I don't know him personally but Jimmy Carter seems like a genuinely decent person. I don't think Carter was a bad President, I think he just got blitzed by the organized corruption and bad actors all around him. Warren has been firmly on Team Organized Corruption since the 80s, so either she doesn't know where she is or else she does know, and either thing makes her way worse than Carter. I don't believe for a second that she'd actually fight Wall Street, and working with the Clintons strongly suggests she'd also like to run the markets on blood money.
Just for the record, if these assholes force a Warren nomination on the country I will be campaigning as hard as I can against her here in Ohio.
I was against Warren running for Senate. After she was forced
to give up her “baby,” the CFPB to the tender mercies of others, she as diverted into politics where the labyrinthine deals could keep her off balance. As an advisor on consumer economics she seemed to have a clear vision, but her political vision is not so clear. Some have speculated that her aim was elected office all along. Perhaps so, but if not then her talents have been sidetracked.
YMMV
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"