Beem off base about Bernie

  • Mail this page!
  • Delicious
  • 3

Didn’t think it likely that I’d disagree with Beem, and I normally enjoy reading his column. But this time, I not only disagree, I must insist that he is flat-out wrong about not endorsing Bernie “because there is too much at stake.” To back that assertion up, he says Bernie is a single-issue candidate – economic justice. Well, Edgar, it is clear that you did not go hear Bernie in July in Portland, or read any of his hour-long speeches in full, or you would know that economic justice is only his starting point. From there he goes on to the importance of education, of people being able to actually live on what they earn, of the dangers of our old and failing infrastructure, of racial and sexual inequality, and so on, until he builds to his last and most important point: that if we don’t tackle climate change, all of the above is moot. Now explain to me again how all of that is only one issue. What he has is ideas and principles so coherent and so tied to each other that, if you weren’t paying attention, you might think it a single thing. You’d be wrong. As you are.

Dr. Gale Greenleaf

Brunswick

3
  • EABeem

    Perhaps it would have been more accurate to say Bernie Sanders is strong on domestic matters but weak on foreign policy. I have contributed several times to his campaign and I am pleased that Maine Democrats are still idealistic enough to support him. I would love to see Bernie Sanders elected president, but given the reactionary mood of the country I think there is a better chance of Americans electing the first woman president than the first Jewish socialist president. We need to win in November and Hillary Clinton is the most qualified candidate we have. Bernie would also have even more trouble enacting his progressive agenda (which I support) than Obama has had.

    • Aliyah33

      I’ve also usually agreed with you, but not a lot lately. Dr. Greenleaf is correct in this case about Sanders. Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy achievements are one’s that align with whomever will line her and Bill’s pockets, and leave people dead in her wake. Most telling is watching her reaction during the hearing on Benghazi; do you recall Hillary saying, “What difference does it make?” Wonder if she’d say that if her own family members or friends had died in Benghazi. And have you really no awareness of what Hillary’s history has been? I received the following from a friend this past weekend; enjoy this recap:

      Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are in a bar. Donald leans over, and With A smile on his face, says, “The media are really tearing you apart for That Scandal.”

      Hillary: “You mean my lying about Benghazi?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “You mean the massive voter fraud?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “You mean the military not getting their votes counted?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “Using my secret private server with classified material to Hide my Activities?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “The NSA monitoring our phone calls, emails and everything Else?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “Using the Clinton Foundation as a cover for tax evasion, Hiring Cronies, And taking bribes from foreign countries?

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “You mean the drones being operated in our own country without The Benefit of the law?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “Giving 123 Technologies $300 Million, and right afterward it Declared Bankruptcy and was sold to the Chinese?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “You mean arming the Muslim Brotherhood and hiring them in the White House?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “Whitewater, Watergate committee, Vince Foster, commodity Deals?”

      Trump: “No the other one:”

      Hillary: “The IRS targeting conservatives?”

      Trump: “No the other one:”

      Hillary: “Turning Libya into chaos?”

      Trump: “No the other one:”

      Hillary: “Trashing Mubarak, one of our few Muslim friends?”

      Trump: “No the other one:”

      Hillary: “Turning our backs on Israel?”

      Trump: “No the other one:”

      Hillary: “The joke Iran Nuke deal? ”

      Trump: “No the other one:”

      Hillary: “Leaving Iraq in chaos? ”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “The DOJ spying on the press?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “You mean HHS Secretary Sibelius shaking down health insurance Executives?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “Giving our cronies in SOLYNDRA $500 MILLION DOLLARS and 3 Months Later they declared bankruptcy and then the Chinese bought it?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “The NSA monitoring citizens’ ?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “The State Department interfering with an Inspector General Investigation on departmental sexual misconduct?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “Me, The IRS, Clapper and Holder all lying to Congress?”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “Threats to all of Bill’s former mistresses to keep them quiet”

      Trump: “No, the other one.”

      Hillary: “I give up! … Oh wait, I think I’ve got it! When I stole the White House furniture, silverware and China when Bill left Office?”

      Trump: “THAT’S IT! I almost forgot about that one”.

      **********

      Everything above is true. Yet she still gets the Democratic vote? Does anyone understand this??? I think we’re doomed !!!

      • EABeem

        Well, sounds as though you’ve bought into the vast rightwing conspiracy. Sorry to hear that.

        • Aliyah33

          Because Bernie Sanders is making sense, you believe there’s a rightwing conspiracy against Hillary Clinton? Are you saying Hillary has done none of these things…or is simply not responsible for any of it? Are you feeling annoyed or disappointed because “Maine feels the Bern?” EABeem, you’re sounding like a troll or shill because you’re displaying ad hominem attacks instead of giving me some useful data, so I can understand where you’re coming from. Here’s some food for thought:

          “Bernie is a breath of fresh air, but I’m not sure he can beat Hillary. In a match between Bernie and Donald, I’d vote for the former. In a match between Hillary and Donald, I’d vote for the latter. It isn’t a vote for Trump, but rather a vote against the political establishment (which must be removed from office at any cost – even if it means electing a reality TV star for president). The stakes are too high. Hillary cannot win or the oligarchy will continue unabated.”

          Source: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/03/secret-donald-trump-voters-speak-out

          An intriguing article about what some people are thinking about Donald Trump; provides more insight than random polls. You may be surprised at what they’re saying and the fact these people don’t fit into your stereotypical image of a Trump supporter.

          • EABeem

            I’m saying many of the things on your list read right out of the Republican playbook. Talk about ad hominem attacks. Your Trump-Clinton fantasy dialogue is nothing but. You have swallowed the Big Right Lie.

            The idea that Clinton was responsible for Benghazi is pure bull. And if you put her comment about what difference it makes in proper context, it makes perfect sense.
            She said, “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.”
            She’s right.

            I’m not sure how much plainer I can make it: I am not opposed to Bernie Sanders. I have contributed to his campaign. I am not disappointed Maine Ds voted for him, but I voted for Hillary Clinton. I believe pretty much what he believes. I will vote for him if he is the candidate, but I do not think he can win a general election.

          • Aliyah33

            Ad hominem meaning you’ve focused on the personal in lieu of providing viewpoints on the issue(s). Btw, I didn’t write what you’re referring to as Trump-Clinton fantasy; whoever did, it was a unique way of listing the fraudulent actions of Hillary Clinton. Substitute any name for Trump if you’d rather; fact is, the list remains the same.

            That said, now you’re providing something to mull over. Not sure how you can deem Hillary as not responsible for Benghazi; as Secretary of State she was fully aware of the security issues and risks to the embassy and its personnel in Libya. It’s my understanding there were over 600 requests for security assistance. Hillary failed miserably, and people were killed. Hillary’s response was total deflection.

            The military vote suppression’s not a hoax; this is firsthand information I’ve received from military servicemen who were deployed. What those actual numbers are in total, I don’t know, but it has happened.

            Lastly, Hillary Clinton’s been involved and profiting from relations with Russian business(es), namely uranium resources here in the U.S., pilfered from the U.S. citizens as secured mineral rights from public lands. Doesn’t this concern you, aren’t you also disturbed about the other issues of fraud perpetrated by Hillary Clinton? What I hear you say is that if it comes down to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump you’d choose Hillary.

            To me it matters not a whit about having a first female president nor a first Jewish socialist president. I care about the person’s qualifications for the job -integrity, truthfulness, a genuine care about the people of this country…,not someone who’s self-serving and puppet to lobbyists, corporations and others who’ll stuff their bank accounts and pockets and provide other perks.

          • Kevin McCarthy

            I’m a Sanders supporter and I voted for him yesterday, but you’re embarrassing me. There are legitimate reasons to question Clinton’s judgment. Using dubious, wrong, distorted, fabricated right-wing talking points isn’t the way to do it.

            EAB raises some good points about Sanders’ electability and effectiveness but I disagree that the only measure of success is the actual legislative enactment of policy. I also disagree with his characterization of Sanders as a “jewish socialist’ although I think I understand his usage of that term in its context. Sanders is not a socialist – that term gets used too easily without regard for its true meaning. Sanders and Clinton believe that government can be good and that it has a necessary role in everyday life. Where and how government can be the most effective is the obvious question. That has to be balanced with individual freedom. That tension is, to me, at the heart of the Democratic Party. How it gets resolved is a continuous struggle. Clinton and Sanders understand that.

            A much more mundane, but important, problem for Sanders is that he has not been a Democrat until this campaign, so the party machinery and network isn’t as easily available to him. It might be after the convention should he win but in a close presidential election campaign that could be crucial.

            Whether it’s Clinton or Sanders, they need our support. We don’t need to beat up on each other. The Republicans are digging their own grave. Let’s not join them.

          • EABeem

            Once again, the voice of reason. Thanks. Of course I understand that Bernie is not a state socialist. He’s a democratic socialist, as am I. I just don’t want to lose to the crazies and that’s about all that’s left in the GOP. I fear Bernie will lose votes because he is not really a D, is Jewish, and will be 75 when he takes office. All bad reasons not to vote for him, but no one ever lost an election underestimating the ignorance of the American voter.

          • Aliyah33

            EABeem, you’re sounding omnipotent now. Anyone who doesn’t align with you on a subject is to be entirely dismissed…your reasons are the only reasons? I have faith in the majority of Americans – they’re not as stupid as you think.

          • Jimmy_John67

            “EABeem, you’re sounding omnipotent now. Anyone who doesn’t align with you on a subject is to be entirely dismissed…your reasons are the only reasons?”

            You must be new to reading Beem if you are suprised at that stance. That’s Beem Trolling 101.

          • Aliyah33

            I was giving Beem the benefit of a doubt.

          • EABeem

            Not omnipotent. I just state my case and defend my point of view. And I do it under my own name. I believe people should stand up for hat they believe.

          • Aliyah33

            IMO, you believe people should agree with you.

          • EABeem

            Of course I do. I understand that they don’t, but I believe that they should. Have you ever heard anyone argue, “How dare you agree with me?”

          • Aliyah33

            “Of course I do.” 🙂

            Sometimes, I do agree with you. Have you heard: “We can agree to disagree”?

          • Aliyah33

            Clearly, Kevin, you’ll vote Democratic Party ticket no matter what. That’s an area where we differ. Steve Woods wrote an excellent response regarding an independent point of view that resonates with me. Therefore, your own embarrassment appears to come from a strictly staunch support of the Democratic Party, across the board at all costs, and seemingly includes an assumption that I must be a Democrat as well.

            In my opinion, after reviewing numerous information available to each and any one of us via the internet, it’s my observation the people in this country are seeking truth – and for that truth to come out. The majority are tired of the widespread corruption at all levels of government. We have an elite not held accountable for their criminal activities and we’re living in a police state pushed by an oligarchy. Hillary Clinton has never embodied truth; she’s an opportunist (the pattern and history of actions are there). Hillary belongs in jail.

            Bernie Sanders may be a “quasi Democrat” because he needed the funds. I can truly understand that; one needs to be a millionaire or billionaire in this country to run for President. Sanders heart appears in the right place; he’s aligned with what the people want – not what Corporations and their lobbyists want.

            At the beginning I thought Donald Trump wouldn’t be in the race too long. I was wrong; so then began to look at reasons so many were gravitating towards him. EABeem was calling Trump supporters ignorant, basically implying they were also the piles of horse manure he deemed Trump to be. I understand business and marketing; and can pinpoint Trump’s approach and why it’s working. This doesn’t mean I align with Trump, but I can understand why others do, and the reasons Trump’s effective at this time.

            Instead of being embarrassed, get beyond your comfort zone. To deny reality is akin to cognitive dissonance. Ayn Rand said something like: we can ignore reality, but we can’t ignore the consequences of reality. I’m not berating you nor anyone else for being tied to their Party; just keep in mind that studies are showing that approximately 64% of the voters are not voting strictly along Party lines. Sounds like there are plenty of surprises, many people not willing to admit they really support Trump, and much criticism at what’s deemed an elitist-controlled, corrupt system already putting Hillary in place as the next President.

          • Kevin McCarthy

            The error in your logic arises in your first sentence. Yes, I’m a Democrat. No, I don’t vote the “Democratic Party ticket no matter what.” I have issues with both Sanders and Clinton. But those issues pale in comparison to ANY of the Republican candidates. Sanders and Clinton aren’t attractive simply because they’re Democrats. They each have certain qualities and accomplishments in their own right, but their attractiveness has to be measured in context. That context is this presidential election. Trump is the least beholden to the Republican Party but his flaws are so personal and egregious that his distance from the Party, while admirable in one sense, ultimately is irrelevant. Cruz embodies the narrow, insular and theocratic tendencies of the extreme right. Rubio is a pathetic lightweight trying to be something he is not.

            My embarrassment arises from the manner in which you dismiss EAB’s argument by using demonstrably bogus claims against Hillary Clinton. My embarrassment arises from the same vein that I hope would exist for Trump supporters as he insults and berates his opponents, calls people stupid, fat or ugly, and suggests anything at all about the size of his penis. Curiously, there don’t seem to be many, if any, of his supporters who express any objection to that childish behavior.

            You claim to object, and seem to be particularly sensitive, to “ad hominem attacks” (as noted in one of your posts above). Yet you don’t have a problem deploying them yourself. We can all complain about politicians, politics, corruption, lobbyists. With good reason. But the simple fact is there’s a presidential election coming up. Somebody’s going to win. If you are supporting Sanders, then, by definition you cannot support any of the remaining Republicans. It is a total and complete cop-out to dismiss Clinton in the face of the possibility of a Republican victory.

          • Aliyah33

            Kevin, the error of your logic is assuming it matters to me if someone’s labeled “Republican”, “Democrat”, “Independent”, “Green”… that it matters to me if we have a Democrat or Republican victory. “It is a total and complete cop-out to dismiss Clinton in the face of the possibility of a Republican victory.” shows you want a Democrat victory, that your interest mainly falls within Party lines. That’s fine, I’ve not berated anyone if that’s their choice. I wondered if most people voted this way and looked it up – and was intrigued the estimate is around 64% won’t vote strictly Party which means there’s a lot of people who won’t say whom they really vote for, or keep it secret.

            We’re taught to accept a two-party system and that we also vote for the President, when in actuality, we get to say who we like and the delegates, superdelegates, and electoral college takes over. Yes, I agree with you, it’s a simple fact somebody’s going to win, but it’s not the American citizens.

            I’m looking for a history showing a pattern of behaviors when considering any candidate. A good prediction of current behavior is based on past behaviors. Hillary Clinton’s history is well-documented. Further, I recently discovered Clinton’s relationship with Russian busines to extract the U.S. uranium via mineral rights from public (think BLM) lands is fact; she’s personally profited and was Secretary of State at the time. Look it up.

            Additionally, I haven’t disagreed with anyone about the characteristics of Donald Trump, but instead have considered why is he receiving so much support. I don’t disagree with you in judgments of Cruz and Rubio, either. And I don’t know how to make it clearer, “ad hominem” meaning personal statements (“hooey”, “fantasy”, “wacko”, etc.) instead of giving a link or fact. Often, I will look at the links given. As far as your feelings of embarrassment – well, certainly you have a right to feel your emotions.

            Yes, we can definitely complain about politicians, lobbyists, corporations, etc. taking from all of us – and we should. We should be quick to point out fraudulent actions and push to have them rectified. As for me, there’s no way I’ll go along when someone says “the emperor’s wearing clothes”, when it’s patently false. And, it’s my understanding I can still write in any candidate … be it Bernie Sanders… or Mickey Mouse.

          • EABeem

            That fraudulent list you posted comes from Yes, I’m Right, a pro-Trump conservative website. It’s all hooey, as Kevin McCarthy notes below.

          • Aliyah33

            Then tell me, which ones are “hooey”?

          • EABeem

            All of them. I am amazed that you would wave a rightwing wacko list around as though it were true.

          • Aliyah33

            Which ones and why? For some reason your word choices and responses appear to degrade at this time of the day (night).

          • Jimmy_John67

            It’s not the time of day, it’s that you are trying to engage him in a fact based debate. Beem doesn’t do well with facts especially when they get in the way of his argument so instead he resorts to name calling, non specific responses and making outrageous claims, like he invented the question mark.

          • Aliyah33

            Guess I’m now on the “bad” list…”hooey” list… oh well.

          • EABeem

            Not necessarily, but I can tell you from long experience that conservatives are forever presenting bogus information and then demanding that you prove them wrong. I don’t play that game anymore. I corrected the “What does it matter” and military vote suppression. Republican conspirators are masters of taking a shred of truth and twisting it into a major crime and, if that doesn’t work, just making up facts. Again, I am surprised that you would offer into evidence a list off a propaganda website and I explained as clearly and simply as I can what I think about Bernie. So that’s all for me.

          • Aliyah33

            Apparently, he can have fact-based responses purged as well; seems it’s deemed “not okay” to paraphrase something he’d said. Go figure.

          • Jimmy_John67

            Yup I stopped trying to debate him with with facts, reason and logic long ago. It’s really impossible considering his whole strategy is to present bogus info and then demand you prove him wrong. These days I just like to point out his mind boggling hypocrisy and warn others about the dangers of engaging the Beem Troll in factual debate.

          • Aliyah33

            The purging surprised me…guess it shouldn’t have. Made me realize that it’s highly likely a lot of others are censored for nothing to do with a discourteous response, but rather a nonconforming one. Thanks for a heads up. Censorship’s very much alive at this not-so-progressive publication.

          • EABeem

            You’ve got that right, just backwards. To begin with, how many other columnists even bother to respond to anonymous internet trolls? Then they start trying to dictate the rules of engagement. Then, as in this case, they quote a bunch of bogus lies and demand that I prove them wrong. As W used to say, “Not gonna do it.” I have found there is no point discussing facts with people who just make them up. And, of yes, the primary modus operandi of conservatives is to say, ” I know you are but what am I?” I’m sure that has something to do with their stunted social skills.

          • Jimmy_John67

            Looks like the Beem Troll is angry! I better watch out or he is going to come out from under his bridge and gobble me up!

            Notice how the Beem Troll starts his comment with saying “I know you are but what am I”. I’m sure that has something to do with his stunted social skills. You really make this too easy for me.

            By the way, it was H.W. who said “not gonna do it” not W.

          • Aliyah33

            Well, perhaps he won’t hold a grudge. “Each one, teach one.”

          • EABeem

            I never hold grudges, but I do give up on some commenters just because there is no satisfying them.

          • Aliyah33

            Glad you don’t. I truly understand why some information doesn’t fit; that’s okay. Truce. Good night, EABeem.

          • Jimmy_John67

            But really it is because you are deeply insecure and can never admit you are wrong even in the face of blunt facts so instead of actually admitting an error you throw a tantrum, call people names and take your ball and go home.

          • EABeem

            I’m at least secure enough to use my own name and photograph.

          • Aliyah33

            I’m not an IT expert, but there’s been comments before on your op-posts from IT experts saying there are security reasons not to use a real name and photo. (Your case can be considered different because you have a weekly publication.) People are also being warned about identity theft even by those gleaning obituaries now. “Your character is who you are in the dark.” I’ve a feeling if you met Jimmy_John 67 what he’s written is no different than what he’d say in person if you two were having a discussion at a coffee shop.

          • Jimmy_John67

            Who said my name wasn’t James John?

          • Lucy Ball

            A pro Trump conservative website did have fun with the Hillary topics…….drawn from facts.

          • Lucy Ball

            Guess you missed the “unclassified” email to Hillary from Huma that laid out all of Ambassador Steven’s travel plans.

  • Hillary should direct attention to the Republicans covering-up the murder of her friend.
    http://www.fbicover-up.com/vincent-foster-report.html

    • EABeem

      The Clintons have been the target of rightwing conspiracy theories and lies forever. Vince Foster committed suicide, as Ken Starr’s investigation agreed:

      “On October 10, 1997, Starr’s report on the death of deputy White House counsel Vince Foster, drafted largely by Starr’s deputy Brett Kavanaugh, was released to the public by the Special Division. The complete report is 137 pages and includes the appendix added to the Report by the Special Division over the objection of Kenneth Starr.[15] The report agrees with the findings of previous independent counsel Robert B. Fiske that Foster committed suicide at Fort Marcy Park, in Virginia, and that his suicide was caused primarily by undiagnosed and untreated depression. As CNN explained on February 28, 1997, “The [Starr] report refutes claims by conservative political organizations that Foster was the victim of a murder plot and coverup,” but “despite those findings, right-wing political groups have continued to allege that there was more to the death and that the president and first lady tried to cover it up.”[16] CNN also noted that organizations pushing the murder theory included the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, owned by billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife, and Accuracy in Media, supported in part by Scaife’s foundation.[17] Scaife’s reporter on the Whitewater matter, Christopher Ruddy, was a frequent critic of Starr’s handling of the case.

    • Aliyah33

      Thanks for the link. In perusing the site, the linked Appendix, added later to the 137 pages of the initial report, is very revealing of the lengths the FBI went in the cover-up of Vince Foster’s murder. IMO, I think most people in this country would hold the FBI in high-regard and either not believe it possible for FBI corruption to occur or perhaps, if it does, it’s only a random event. Unfortunately, this isn’t the case. I listened to an interview yesterday between James Corbett and former FBI Special agent (Crime Lab) and whistleblower Dr. Frederic Whitehurst. (Found on YouTube and thecorbettreport.com); here’s a link:

  • Diane Robinson

    There is an essay on the internet written by a young Bernie Sanders. This is one of his remarks: “A woman enjoys intercourse with her man – as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously.” There are more of his outlandish remarks in the essay. You should read it. Also, here is an excerpt of Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’: “Millions of workers, I am sure, started out as enemies of the Social Democratic Party in their innermost soul, but the resistance was overcome in a way which was sometimes utterly insane; that is, when the bourgeois parties adopted a hostile attitude toward every demand of a social character. Their simple, narrow-minded rejection of all to better working conditions, to introduce safety devices on machines, to prohibit child labor and protect the woman, at least in the months when she was bearing the future national comrade under her heart, contributed to drive the masses into the net of Social Democracy which gratefully snatched at every case of such a disgraceful attitude. Never can our political bourgeoisie make good its sins in this direction, for by resisting all attempts to do away with social abuses, they sowed hatred and seemed to justify even the assertion of the mortal enemies of the entire nation, to the effect that only the Social Democratic Party represented the interests of the working people.” Does this sound familiar? Does this sound like the goals of the Democrats? This paragraph sound like it came from the Democratic playbook. Democrats share Hitler’s great aspirations; but in reality, he ended up a mass murderer. Yet, they compare Donald Trump to Hitler.