Did you watch the Iowa Black and Brown Forum last night? Heck, I'm a huge political animal and even I didn't see it though thanks to the wonder of DVR I've been watching it this morning.
Regarding Bernie I thought he did a good job-not surprisingly. He's a good man with a fine record on public service. I still think Hil is the one you want leading Team Democrat, she''s the QB but Bernie has been a good foot solider despite how he used to disparage the Democratic party.
You know me-I love me some Hillary and don't spend a lot of my time bashing her. Why? Well others over 25 years have done this so much there's hardly much demand for it-that market's been cornered. However, there may be something to the idea that it's in her own best interest to make sure she is accessible to enough news outlets for her own benefit as you can't help but notice that she soars in the polls after debates and when she does more public stuff.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/01/a-tale-of-two-polls-of-democratic-race.html
She had a great answer on John Dickerson when Dickerson tried to dismiss her attack on Bernie's 2005 vote as 'just one vote'-and he tried to draw a comparison between Bernie being from Vermont and her being from NY and supporting Wall St. The difference is there is no record of her taking pro Wall St votes. That 2005 bill was the NRA's grand slam moment shielding the industry from all lawsuits.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/01/hillary-puts-john-dickerson-in-his-place.html
"Sanders voted twice for what the head of the NRA called the most significant piece of pro-gun legislation in the last 20 years: giving gun manufacturers sweeping immunity for their actions."
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factsheets/2016/01/08/standing-up-to-the-gun-lobby-is-a-real-difference-between-clinton-and-sanders/
When the forum questioned Bernie last night-each candidate answered questions for about 25 minutes-one gentleman asked a great question: don't Americans need a banking system?
Bernie then said he doesn't want to go into exactly what he would do but the Treasury would be instructed to find out which banks are 'too big to fail' and then break them up. That is hardly scientific and could he do that without Congress's support?
What would be the effect of this-good and bad?
Bernie loves to speak in broad platitudes but doesn't love the wonkish details-that's Hillary's thing.
But when asked what he considers rich he said only $250,000. Is that with one or two earners? Certainly in two earner household that turns this out is hardly rich. They are middle class and no more than that. Even $250,000 for one isn't necessarily superrich. This isn't the CEO of Bank of America or anything like that.
Most people in this category remain wage earners-ie, working stiffs. Yet he sees them as part of the despised rich? When you factor in their property taxes and all their other expenses these are not by any means super wealthy folks.
Maybe this is why he wants to raise their taxes.
P.S. Martin O'Malley is a total poseur. He went after Bernie and basically stole his lines.
Regarding Bernie I thought he did a good job-not surprisingly. He's a good man with a fine record on public service. I still think Hil is the one you want leading Team Democrat, she''s the QB but Bernie has been a good foot solider despite how he used to disparage the Democratic party.
You know me-I love me some Hillary and don't spend a lot of my time bashing her. Why? Well others over 25 years have done this so much there's hardly much demand for it-that market's been cornered. However, there may be something to the idea that it's in her own best interest to make sure she is accessible to enough news outlets for her own benefit as you can't help but notice that she soars in the polls after debates and when she does more public stuff.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/01/a-tale-of-two-polls-of-democratic-race.html
She had a great answer on John Dickerson when Dickerson tried to dismiss her attack on Bernie's 2005 vote as 'just one vote'-and he tried to draw a comparison between Bernie being from Vermont and her being from NY and supporting Wall St. The difference is there is no record of her taking pro Wall St votes. That 2005 bill was the NRA's grand slam moment shielding the industry from all lawsuits.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/01/hillary-puts-john-dickerson-in-his-place.html
"Sanders voted twice for what the head of the NRA called the most significant piece of pro-gun legislation in the last 20 years: giving gun manufacturers sweeping immunity for their actions."
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factsheets/2016/01/08/standing-up-to-the-gun-lobby-is-a-real-difference-between-clinton-and-sanders/
When the forum questioned Bernie last night-each candidate answered questions for about 25 minutes-one gentleman asked a great question: don't Americans need a banking system?
Bernie then said he doesn't want to go into exactly what he would do but the Treasury would be instructed to find out which banks are 'too big to fail' and then break them up. That is hardly scientific and could he do that without Congress's support?
What would be the effect of this-good and bad?
Bernie loves to speak in broad platitudes but doesn't love the wonkish details-that's Hillary's thing.
But when asked what he considers rich he said only $250,000. Is that with one or two earners? Certainly in two earner household that turns this out is hardly rich. They are middle class and no more than that. Even $250,000 for one isn't necessarily superrich. This isn't the CEO of Bank of America or anything like that.
Most people in this category remain wage earners-ie, working stiffs. Yet he sees them as part of the despised rich? When you factor in their property taxes and all their other expenses these are not by any means super wealthy folks.
Maybe this is why he wants to raise their taxes.
P.S. Martin O'Malley is a total poseur. He went after Bernie and basically stole his lines.
No comments:
Post a Comment