Bernie Sanders

User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

Re: What would have made Free Trade Deals Work For US.....

Post by monster_gardener »

Heracleum Persicum wrote:
monster_gardener wrote:
Heracleum Persicum wrote:
noddy wrote:.

still, azari is kind of right in that last one, the restructure of the global market and the changes in employment types have been met with denial by our politics and now we pay the price.

.

All those "Free Trades" .. with China, with Mexico and and .. would have needed fundamental changes in American laws to take positive advantages of those treaties .. can not change one side of equation without changing the other side of the equation .. but the special interest did not want any change .. the full devastating force was absorbed by Joe the Middle Class when at the same time the 1% reaping the advantages of all those Free trades .. American politicians knew exactly what had to be done, but they were hired by special interest and not Joe .. now, Joe mad, fooled again by blaming Muslims and Mexicans.


.
Thank You Very Much for Your Post, Azari.......
but fault of American system not changing things to facilitate the adjustment .. It would have needed fundamental changes.
OK......

What fundamental changes .......

.

Excellent question, Monster

To understand the problem, here directly from horse's mouth, David Goldman :

Our elites, to be sure, have sold us down the river

America had 90% adult literacy in 1790, when only half of Englishmen and a fifth of Spaniards and Italians could sign their names. We had the best educated, most motivated, and healthiest workforce in the world by an overwhelming margin.

Now Americans aged 16 to 24 rank at the bottom of a 22-country evaluation of numeracy, literacy, and technological problem-solving.

Poor student performance should be no surprise: America's family structure is falling apart. Nearly 30% of non-Hispanic white children are born out of wedlock, as well as 53% of Hispanics and 73% of African-Americans. When Reagan took office, 18% of all American births were to unmarried mothers. By 2014 the figure was above 40%.

Catch-up ball doesn't begin to describe our predicament. We need nothing short of a great national turnaround.

..

Our elites, to be sure, have sold us down the river. There's unlimited capital for investors to buy foreclosed homes, while half of Americans can't raise a down payment or qualify for a home mortgage.

The Pentagon and the defense contractors slated a trillion dollars for the F-35, the biggest lemon in the history of military aviation, crowding out every other acquisition program in the military.

Our tech companies have become a conspiracy to suppress innovation, managed by patent trolls instead of engineers.

The financial industry ran the biggest scam in history, the subprime bubble of the 2000s, and the Obama administration hasn't sent a single miscreant to jail (it just slapped multi-billion dollar fines on the banks' stockholders, that is, your pension fund or 401k).

The Clintons are a criminal enterprise, as Peter Schweizer showed in his book Clinton Cash.

The foreign policy establishment treated the world like a giant social experiment and wasted blood and treasure to make the world safe for democracy.

The result is the most corrupt and cartelized economy in American history. For the first time since numbers were kept, new business has contributed next to nothing to employment recovery since 2009, as I reported here March 2.

But Donald Trump encourages magical thinking. Repeating, "We're going to make America great again" by kicking out Mexican illegals and repatriating jobs from China is nonsense.

Our elites are rotten, but the people are hurting and confused.

After the generation of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence, America has done a terrible job of forming elites. But we still need leaders who can uplift us, teach us, and inspire us. Self-educated outsiders like Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan have been our ablest leaders, not the valedictorians of Harvard or Yale. Lincoln might have been self-educated, but he was the best thinker of his generation. Reagan also was self-taught, but he had a broad and detailed grasp of foreign policy and understood Robert Mundell's supply-side economics early on. They were also profoundly good men.


..

We are in deep trouble. We need a president who can lead us out of our economic and moral slump. I fear that Ted Cruz is our last, best hope before we follow former superpowers like Britain down the slippery slope to national mediocrity.

:lol:


Now relaaaax .. and .. confirm whether you still want to know what those "fundamental changes" are. :D


.
Thank You Very Much for your post, Azari.

Thanks for the link.............

Comments were interesting too...........

confirm whether you still want to know what those "fundamental changes" are.
Sure........

Say on...........
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11696
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: What would have made Free Trade Deals Work For US.....

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

monster_gardener wrote:.
Heracleum Persicum wrote:.

confirm whether you still want to know what those "fundamental changes" are.

.

Sure........

Suspect I can guess some.......... ;)


.


:lol: :lol: , you guessed it


"Fundamental changes" will come with sacrifice, pain, hardship, for Joe

To "endure" that pain and accept sacrifice, Joe must be sure this time things real .. for that, Joe must see that "Crooks" go to jail.

Many politicians, Sanders and others (even Trump), asking since long time, why not a single "Wall Streeter" went to jail (Tamil "Raj Rajaratnam" the real bad guy :lol: :lol: )

Come on ,

Joe must see heads rolling .. the big fat guys that Paul Volker said fleeced America and having martini in Palm Beach.

Once these crooks in Jail and stripped to underwear, then :

- Tax Laws must be totally reworked .. many issues .. why Germany has no "Hedge funds" but America full of Hedge funds .. why Private equity tax on profit is 15% (long term capital gain), why all money goes into Real Estate and not R&D and production .. eliminate all loopholes .. eliminate subsidies for companies closing down US plants and moving to Mexico or Vietnam (Tax) .. and and and .. Tax laws must reward production, R&D, invention and less "Real Estate" and things of that nature, capital must flow in the right sector .. why no house flipping in France or Germany, but in US ?

- Money, revenue, saved from all above, will finance a "revolution" in education for Joe .. "Trade schools" (like in Germany and Swiss .. 80% quit school after grade 9 and enter "Trade schools" for 4 yrs, graduate "Master" in their chosen trade) .. key for Joe is education and training

.
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11696
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

XSRUmRYrRLY



devastating



.
User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

Elitist Mindset Exposed................

Post by monster_gardener »


Thank You VERY Much for your posts, Azari.

And for the link..........

Where Goldman says...........
In 2001 my friend Arthur Laffer, the great supply-side economist, gave a seminar for my team at Credit Suisse (where I head Global Credit Strategy) and argued that America didn’t need to manufacture anything. We would provide the patents and other countries would do the dirty work.

Then came the inevitable crash.
Arthur Laffer, seems much more of a twit in that story than a GREAT :roll: supply side economist.....

That NOT everyone is going to develop patents ought to be patently obvious.. :idea:

The sort of elitist twit that isn't concerned when middle American jobs are lost by off shoring etc......

IMHO another one of the elites that sold US down the river as Goldman mentioned in another recent essay.

https://pjmedia.com/spengler/2016/03/25 ... epage=true
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6220
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

"Great supply side economist" is an oxymoron.

Supply side economics was invented by David Stockman, who admitted it was a deliberate attempt to put a deceptively positive label on Reagan's unworkable economic policies. Stockman is now a popular blogger and has fully rejected "supply side" for sound money, Austrian school economics.

Stockman is proven credible because he admitted his deliberate deception at the cost of his career. He is knowledgeable because he did operate at the highest levels of the US economy.

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11696
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Elitist Mindset Exposed................

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

monster_gardener wrote:

Thank You VERY Much for your posts, Azari.

And for the link..........

Where Goldman says...........
In 2001 my friend Arthur Laffer, the great supply-side economist, gave a seminar for my team at Credit Suisse (where I head Global Credit Strategy) and argued that America didn’t need to manufacture anything. We would provide the patents and other countries would do the dirty work.

Then came the inevitable crash.
Arthur Laffer, seems much more of a twit in that story than a GREAT :roll: supply side economist.....

That NOT everyone is going to develop patents ought to be patently obvious.. :idea:

The sort of elitist twit that isn't concerned when middle American jobs are lost by off shoring etc......

IMHO another one of the elites that sold US down the river as Goldman mentioned in another recent essay.

https://pjmedia.com/spengler/2016/03/25 ... epage=true


.

Many names, in reality idi*ts .. Arthur Laffer and Marx good sample

"Arthur Laffer" did not understand that "PATENTS" can only come from within R&D department of Industry, Patents can not be created in Vacuum.

Marx, the idi*t, thought machines and Capital generate wealth .. not understanding, WHAT to do with those machines and Capital is what generates wealth, and, the guy who decides what to do with those machines and capital (and takes the risk being wrong) is called "entrepreneur".

David Goldman was singing the song of the great American economy for long long time .. now suddenly he discovers what Azari saying.


How u doin, MG ?

.
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11696
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:.


"Great supply side economist" is an oxymoron.

Supply side economics was invented by David Stockman, who admitted it was a deliberate attempt to put a deceptively positive label on Reagan's unworkable economic policies. Stockman is now a popular blogger and has fully rejected "supply side" for sound money, Austrian school economics.

Stockman is proven credible because he admitted his deliberate deception at the cost of his career. He is knowledgeable because he did operate at the highest levels of the US economy.

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com

.

"Supply side Economy" was a scam .. by crooks .. to fleece Joe

.
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6220
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Image
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:"Great supply side economist" is an oxymoron.

Supply side economics was invented by David Stockman, who admitted it was a deliberate attempt to put a deceptively positive label on Reagan's unworkable economic policies. Stockman is now a popular blogger and has fully rejected "supply side" for sound money, Austrian school economics.

Stockman is proven credible because he admitted his deliberate deception at the cost of his career. He is knowledgeable because he did operate at the highest levels of the US economy.

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com
No.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Robotization Uber Alles..........

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Heracleum Persicum wrote: Yes, 1000s of jobs disappear

but

100s of Millions of consumers pay less for transportation

As if one would forbid eMail because Mailman would lose his job, or internet banking bad for bank tellers.

.
Yes HP.
Censorship isn't necessary
noddy
Posts: 11350
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by noddy »

it has nothing todo with the post, it is an unlrelated rant on an irrelevant topic, a strawman if you wish.

were are the new labouring jobs for the masses who arent ever going to be tech gurus or scientists ?

its not a theory,its not cliche spouting, its a practical subject, you use concrete examples with numbers that prove their relevancy to reality.

im all ears...

all im seeing is 50% of the population propped up by government and labouring jobs with wages that can keep a family alive being few and far between, id like to see how im missing something.
ultracrepidarian
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Heracleum Persicum wrote:XSRUmRYrRLY



devastating



.
Wow. obama worse President than I thought.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27484
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Typhoon »

Mr. Perfect wrote: .
Wow. obama worse President than I thought.[/quote]

And a blameless supermajority.

Right.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Typhoon wrote: And a blameless supermajority.

Right.
Well yeah. I know you don't follow US politics but that is exactly why we are the supermajority. People saw what obama did, they saw that it failed, and they blamed him for it. All as it should be.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11696
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

Mr. Perfect wrote:.
Typhoon wrote:.

And a blameless supermajority.

Right.

.
Well yeah. I know you don't follow US politics but that is exactly why we are the supermajority. People saw what obama did, they saw that it failed, and they blamed him for it. All as it should be.

.

Still not clear to me, what you blame Barak Hussein for ?


.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Record debts, record unemployment, record poverty/ homelessness, destruction of the constitution and and and

Same things Sanders blames him for. Sanders and obama not on the same side az, you'll have to pick a side.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Mr. Perfect »

BTW Bernie Sanders is a dumb@$$ who has no idea what he is talking about.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/bernie-b ... mpaign-is/
For all the attention that Donald Trump has gotten for his policy-free trainwreck of an editorial meeting with The Washington Post and later The New York Times, not much attention has been given to the fact that Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders gave an equally disastrous interview to the editorial board of the New York Daily News.

NYDN released its transcript of the editorial meeting late last night, and boy is it a doozy. The worst parts are below, but those with the time to spare should really read the whole thing. Suffice it say, it was more or less an hour-long exercise in the editors asking serious and well thought-out questions about policy, and Sanders revealing that he was in way, way over his head.

Right off the bat, when it came to the central message of Sanders’ campaign– that Wall Street should be prosecuted for their role in the 2008 financial collapse– he couldn’t even say what laws they were supposed to have broken, saying he only “suspected” and “believed” they broke the law.

Daily News: …Do you have a sense that there is a particular statute or statutes that a prosecutor could have or should have invoked to bring indictments?

Sanders: I suspect that there are. Yes.

Daily News: You believe that? But do you know?

Sanders: I believe that that is the case. Do I have them in front of me, now, legal statutes? No, I don’t. But if I would…yeah, that’s what I believe, yes.

When pressed further on the topic, Sanders sounded downright Trumpian, repeating the word “fraudulent” ad nauseum but giving little insight into the actual law.

Daily News: What kind of fraudulent activity are you referring to when you say that?

Sanders: What kind of fraudulent activity? Fraudulent activity that brought this country into the worst economic decline in its history by selling packages of fraudulent, fraudulent, worthless subprime mortgages. How’s that for a start?

Subprime mortgages were (and still are) legal. It’s possible industry practices towards subprime mortgages in the lead-up to the financial crisis were illegal, but if so Sanders clearly can’t articulate why.

When it comes to his campaign promise to break up the large financial institutions, Sanders clearly has given little thought to how he would actually carry it out. In the span of a few questions, Sanders told the Daily News he will pass a law to do it, then claimed the administration already has the power to do so under Dodd-Frank, and then claimed the Federal Reserve has the power to do so by fiat.

Likewise, Sanders has evidently given little thought to what impact his policy would actually have on the large institutions he wants to break up:

Daily News: So if you look forward, a year, maybe two years, right now you have…JPMorgan has 241,000 employees. About 20,000 of them in New York. $192 billion in net assets. What happens? What do you foresee? What is JPMorgan in year two of…

Sanders: What I foresee is a stronger national economy. And, in fact, a stronger economy in New York State, as well. What I foresee is a financial system which actually makes affordable loans to small and medium-size businesses. Does not live as an island onto themselves concerned about their own profits. And, in fact, creating incredibly complicated financial tools, which have led us into the worst economic recession in the modern history of the United States.

Daily News: I get that point. I’m just looking at the method because, actions have reactions, right? There are pluses and minuses. So, if you push here, you may get an unintended consequence that you don’t understand. So, what I’m asking is, how can we understand? If you look at JPMorgan just as an example, or you can do Citibank, or Bank of America. What would it be? What would that institution be? Would there be a consumer bank? Where would the investing go?

Sanders: I’m not running JPMorgan Chase or Citibank.

Daily News: No. But you’d be breaking it up.

Sanders: That’s right. And that is their decision as to what they want to do and how they want to reconfigure themselves. That’s not my decision.

Now I suspect that some Bernie fans would appreciate his somewhat dismissive attitude towards what will happen to giant financial institutions once he intervenes and breaks them down. But if the financial crisis proved one thing it’s that the health of the world economy is often tied to the health of these institutions. If Sanders can’t even predict what’s going to happen to JPMorgan after you break up JPMogran, how can he predict its effect on the global economy and everyday Americans?

NYDN then brought up a recent court case in which a federal judge rebuked the federal government’s ability to designate MetLife a “systematically important” company in need of greater oversight, asking what the implications for Sanders’ policies were. “It’s something I have not studied, honestly, the legal implications of that,” Sanders responded.

That’s not some minor and obscure issue, by the way. Just last week, The New York Times editorial board declared the ruling a threat to Dodd-Frank itself.

It bears repeating that these aren’t questions about foreign policy or social justice issues, generally considered Sanders’ weaknesses. This is just on financial policy, the entire underpinning of Sanders campaign. And on question after question, Sanders whiffed.

On foreign policy, we again see the pattern of Sanders speaking broadly about the issues that need to be fixed, but offering zero concrete answers on how to do so. On Israel, for example, Sanders condemned the building of settlements but couldn’t say how far or how much Israel should pull back. “You’re asking me a very fair question, and if I had some paper in front of me, I would give you a better answer,” he said frankly.

Even while continuing to condemn the settlements, Sanders basically telegraphed that he would do nothing as president to end them. “Israel will make their own decisions. They are a government, an independent nation,” he said.

When pressed about his belief that Israel shouldn’t face charges of war crimes, Sanders couldn’t even explain his own stance.

Daily News: Do you support the Palestinian leadership’s attempt to use the International Criminal Court to litigate some of these issues to establish that, in their view, Israel had committed essentially war crimes?

Sanders: No.

Daily News: Why not?

Sanders: Why not?

Daily News: Why not, why it…

Sanders: Look, why don’t I support a million things in the world? I’m just telling you that I happen to believe…anybody help me out here, because I don’t remember the figures, but my recollection is over 10,000 innocent people were killed in Gaza. Does that sound right?

Whether you agree with Sanders position here or elsewhere it besides the point. I would expect a presidential candidate to be able to explain pretty clearly why he doesn’t support a U.S. ally being brought before an international court to answer charges they committed war crimes, especially if that candidate was a former resident. (And that last part of Sanders’ response makes no sense. Who defends Israel by listing off the number of people they killed?)

To say nothing of all the times Sanders simply dodged a question. For example, he gave a lengthy three-hundred word response to a question about the Obama administration’s drone policy that didn’t even mention drones. He did however bring up the fact that Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq War while he didn’t.

The editorial board tried again: “President Obama has taken the authority for drone attacks away from the CIA and given it to the U.S. military. Some say that that has caused difficulties in zeroing in on terrorists, their ISIS leaders. Do you believe that he’s got the right policy there?”

Sanders’ response: “I don’t know the answer to that.”

On social policy, Sanders did somewhat better. He did hit a snag when asked about his promise following the Oregon shooting to release a comprehensive gun control agenda, an agenda he’s yet to release. “What the agenda is is very similar to where to where President Obama is…” Sanders said. “So I support pretty much the President’s agenda.”

But Sanders got called out when he listed four principles of his new gun control agenda. “Just to be clear, the press release your campaign put out the day of that announcement of the forthcoming comprehensive plan, you made that announcement, those were the four points you made then,” an editor pointed out. “Have you moved any further beyond that?”

“Well, I don’t know that anyone has moved…I think that’s the President’s vision, that’s my position,” Sanders replied.

All in all, a simply pitiful performance from Sanders. It’s hard to read the entire thing and not agree with former Obama advisor Dan Pfeiffer‘s take: “The transcript of Sanders’ meeting with the Daily News Ed Board is almost as damning as Trump’s with the WaPo.” But at least Trump was in hostile territory; Sanders was talking to a liberal tabloid.

It’s possible Bernie just had an off-day, that he actually knows all the answers to those very basic questions he was asked. But it seems much more likely that the reason he couldn’t answer those questions were because he lacks the seriousness and savvy one expects from a presidential candidate. I’m sure if you asked Sanders himself what went wrong, he’d give the same answer he gave for an hour straight: I don’t know.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27484
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Typhoon »

The Grauniad | Bernie Sanders just won his seventh straight victory. Is he unstoppable?

If Sanders were to win NY and CA, that would certainly make things interesting.

There is no way that Harridan Hillary could claim to have a mandate.
Not that that would stop her for trying.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11696
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

.

The Rich Live Longer Everywhere.
For the Poor, Geography Matters


For poor Americans, the place they call home can be a matter of life or death.
.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Typhoon wrote:The Grauniad | Bernie Sanders just won his seventh straight victory. Is he unstoppable?

If Sanders were to win NY and CA, that would certainly make things interesting.

There is no way that Harridan Hillary could claim to have a mandate.
Not that that would stop her for trying.
Hillary Clinton will absolutely win the Democrat nomination, the MSM will absolutely claim a mandate. There is no excuse for anyone not to know this at this point.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Heracleum Persicum wrote:.

The Rich Live Longer Everywhere.
For the Poor, Geography Matters


For poor Americans, the place they call home can be a matter of life or death.
.
This is why I fight the Democrats so hard. Their legacy is one of death.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Zack Morris
Posts: 2837
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
Location: Bayside High School

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Zack Morris »

Guess you didn't read the article. Here's the low-down for you low-info AM radio types: poor people live longer in Democratic districts. Why are Republicans shortening their lifespans?
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12618
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Doc »

Zack Morris wrote:Guess you didn't read the article. Here's the low-down for you low-info AM radio types: poor people live longer in Democratic districts. Why are Republicans shortening their lifespans?
Wrong question Zack The real question is how many years of your life are you willing to give up to correct this gross inequality?
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Zack Morris
Posts: 2837
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
Location: Bayside High School

Re: Bernie Sanders

Post by Zack Morris »

Behold the American right wing, in all its intellectual glory.
Post Reply