Yup, he's an independent that caucuses democrat and counted as a democrat, sounds like Joe Lieberman. You seem to be moving away from your oroginal BS that bernie sanders is a socialist. Why doesn't he run as a socialist? Why not have a socialist caucus? The only thing sanders consistently does us run as an independent and caucus with democrats.
He was hoping you wouldn't look into it and his lies will go unchallenged, typical of him.
Per Bernies Bio:
Quoted Text
Sanders is a self-described democratic socialist, (much the way the Paul Twins are 'self described Libertarians,but not 'actual' Libertarians) and has praised European social democracy; he is the first person elected to Congress to identify as a socialist in six decades. Sanders caucuses with the Democratic Party and is counted as a Democrat for the purposes of committee assignments, (because they share some similar beliefs)but because he does not belong to a formal political party, (unlike the Paul Twins who ARE REPUBLICANS AND BELONG TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY) he appears as an independent on the ballot. He was also the only independent member of the House during most of his service and is the longest-serving independent in U.S. Congressional history.
If you have a problem with these facts contact Sanders to correct the mistakes in his bio.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
If you have a problem with these facts contact Sanders to correct the mistakes in his bio.
Well the problem is with the previous "fact" you posted is that Sanders runs as a socialist and wins. That isn't FACT, it's a flat out LIE. Then when you find out he runs as an Independent and caucuses democrat like Lieberman, you suddenly claim that's what you've been saying all along.
Sanders needs to run as a member of the socialist party in order to make your comparison to Paul running as a member of the libertarian party. Sanders ain't doin that, he wouldn't be caucusing with democrats if he was a member of the Socialist Party USA.
Well the problem is with the previous "fact" you posted is that Sanders runs as a socialist and wins. That isn't FACT, it's a flat out LIE. Then when you find out he runs as an Independent and caucuses democrat like Lieberman, you suddenly claim that's what you've been saying all along.
Sanders needs to run as a member of the socialist party in order to make your comparison to Paul running as a member of the libertarian party. Sanders ain't doin that, he wouldn't be caucusing with democrats if he was a member of the Socialist Party USA.
IS Sanders a Democrat? NO Is Sanders a Republican like the Paul Twins? NO What party does Sanders belong to? Independent. So there are Democrats, Republicans and Independents of which Sanders is the ONLY INDEPENDENT.
Are Republicans Conservative? Some of them. Are Republicans Libertarians? Probably some are. Are Democrats Liberals? Some of them Is Independent Sanders a Socialist? YUP.
Like the Republican Paul Twins, who aren't actually LIBERTARIANS, Sanders Isn't a member of the Socialist party. Yet you claim that the Paul Twins ARE LIBERTARIANS but Sanders Isn't a Socialist.
Strange!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
So tell me again... how is it that you piss and cry and moan that the Paul Twins can't get elected as a third party... but Bernie Sanders can?
What is Bernie doing right and the Pauls doing wrong???
Maybe Bernie's message is popular... so popular that he even overcomes the "socialist" tag and keeps getting reelected. Maybe the Paul's message is unpopular... and no one votes for them... so they don't stand a chance of getting elected president of the USA.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Are Republicans Conservative? Some of them. Are Republicans Libertarians? Probably some are. Are Democrats Liberals? Some of them Is Independent Sanders a Socialist? YUP.
Like the Republican Paul Twins, who aren't actually LIBERTARIANS, Sanders Isn't a member of the Socialist party. Yet you claim that the Paul Twins ARE LIBERTARIANS but Sanders Isn't a Socialist.
Strange!
What is strange is that in this post you say Paul's aren't libertarians while also claiming some Republicans are libertarians. I don't know how you came to that conclusion.
Sanders is as much a self proclaimed socialist as Paul is a self proclaimed libertarian. Don't forget, you made the claim Paul's weren't libertarians. By your same standard, I said Sanders isn't a socialist. But you admit he caucuses with Democrats yet isn't any less of a socialist. It's amazing that Sanders can maintain his philosophic beliefs caucusing with democrats, but once he runs under the dem party, he loses his philosophical beliefs. Joe Lieberman is an Independent that caucuses with the Democrats and was the Democrat VP nominee - is he not a democrat? What is he? Is he somebody different than when he was a democrat?
I'm just trying to figure out how you believe parties are monolithic(except for the democrat party of course)
The neocon statists in both parties are under attack. Whether you call them libertarians or not, they are challenging the statist policies of the last 100 years. And the neocon right and liberal left have found themselves stand back to back protecting themselves and the vast government they built.
What is strange is that in this post you say Paul's aren't libertarians while also claiming some Republicans are libertarians. I don't know how you came to that conclusion.
The Paul Twins are REPUBLICANS and belong to the REPUBLICAN PARTY. Yet they are "libertarians". Bernie Sanders is an Independent. He's not a Dem or Rep. And yet he's a "socialist'. You seem to accept that the Paul Twins are Libertarians and don't belong to the Libertarian party... yet can't accept that Sanders is an Independent, and also a Socialist.
That was my point.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The Paul Twins are REPUBLICANS and belong to the REPUBLICAN PARTY. Yet they are "libertarians". Bernie Sanders is an Independent. He's not a Dem or Rep. And yet he's a "socialist'. You seem to accept that the Paul Twins are Libertarians and don't belong to the Libertarian party... yet can't accept that Sanders is an Independent, and also a Socialist.
That was my point.
No, I accept he's a socialist philosophically, whether he runs as an independent or democrat or republican or whatever other means he uses to get on the ballot. If the democrat party had a strain of open socialist philosophy within the party, and Bernie Sanders used the Democrat Party to spread his philosophical beliefs, it wouldn't make him any less of a socialist because he registered with the democrats. Just like Paul isn't any more or less libertarian because he uses the Republican Party as a platform to articulate his political philosophy. You were saying because he doesn't run on the libertarian line on the ballot, he is somehow less of a libertarian philisophically.
I was using your standard to discredit Paul's philosophical libertarianism because he does not run with the libertarian party, to discredit Sanders socialist philosophy because he doesn't run for office with the socialist party.
You keep on trying to make the claim that a political party is monolithic and does not change over the course of history. The Republican Party of Lincoln is the same Republican Party as Bush. Somehow you believe the vehicle used to espouse your political philosophy invalidates your political philosophy.
No, I accept he's a socialist philosophically, whether he runs as an independent or democrat or republican or whatever other means he uses to get on the ballot. If the democrat party had a strain of open socialist philosophy within the party, and Bernie Sanders used the Democrat Party to spread his philosophical beliefs, it wouldn't make him any less of a socialist because he registered with the democrats. Just like Paul isn't any more or less libertarian because he uses the Republican Party as a platform to articulate his political philosophy. You were saying because he doesn't run on the libertarian line on the ballot, he is somehow less of a libertarian philisophically.
I was using your standard to discredit Paul's philosophical libertarianism because he does not run with the libertarian party, to discredit Sanders socialist philosophy because he doesn't run for office with the socialist party.
You keep on trying to make the claim that a political party is monolithic and does not change over the course of history. The Republican Party of Lincoln is the same Republican Party as Bush. Somehow you believe the vehicle used to espouse your political philosophy invalidates your political philosophy.
Again. As much as the RP groupies on this board deny it... Ron/Rand Paul are REPUBLICANS, in every sense of the word. They may lean one way or the other, but THEY ARE REPUBLICANS! Denying that fact will not change the outcome of this race... Even if one of the Paul Twins manages to survive the GOP primary.
I wonder what would happen if Randy Paul were offered the VP job. Can you imagine the anguish among the RP true believers.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
I wonder what would happen if Randy Paul were offered the VP job. Can you imagine the anguish among the RP true believers.
I wonder what would happen if Barack Obama supported the same policies as George W Bush, such as warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detention(NDAA), GITMO, corporate welfare, etc...Oh yeah!!! They would follow him blindly and argue that his same policies are different, even when they are the same, and in many cases expanded.
So yes, there would be anguish, unlike the Obama "true believers" that were sold a pack of lies, they now spend the rest of their lives trying to defend Obama and convince everybody that he is different than GW Bush.
I wonder what would happen if Barack Obama supported the same policies as George W Bush, such as warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detention(NDAA), GITMO, corporate welfare, etc...Oh yeah!!! They would follow him blindly and argue that his same policies are different, even when they are the same, and in many cases expanded.
So yes, there would be anguish, unlike the Obama "true believers" that were sold a pack of lies, they now spend the rest of their lives trying to defend Obama and convince everybody that he is different than GW Bush.
GWB & Obama do have some similarities... Both are for immigration reform. Both are using Drones to destroy Al Qaeda... although Obama is much more effective using drones.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
GWB & Obama do have some similarities... Both are for immigration reform. Both are using Drones to destroy Al Qaeda... although Obama is much more effective using drones.
You forgot Obama extending Bush's tax cut for the rich, and allowing the payroll tax expire - raising taxes on the middle class and poor. Oh-oh...you forgot, he hasn't prosecuted one banker responsible for the financial crisis and the $800 Billion stolen from the taxpayer and handed to the bankers. You know, to big to jail. Oh, and the record profits on Wall St. while companies like GE pay no corporate taxes, yet the CEO of GE is a part of his administration. All while the middle and lower classes become poorer. And the libtards put their faith in Obama, and thought Gitmo was going to be closed, and the indefinite detention of "terrorists" without being charged with a crime was against their civil liberties. Sh!t, Obama expanded the indefinite detention without being charged with a crime to include American citizens.
Obama took the fascist state and expanded it to exceed the neocons wettest dream.
You forgot Obama extending Bush's tax cut for the rich, and allowing the payroll tax expire - raising taxes on the middle class and poor. Oh-oh...you forgot, he hasn't prosecuted one banker responsible for the financial crisis and the $800 Billion stolen from the taxpayer and handed to the bankers. You know, to big to jail. Oh, and the record profits on Wall St. while companies like GE pay no corporate taxes, yet the CEO of GE is a part of his administration. All while the middle and lower classes become poorer. And the libtards put their faith in Obama, and thought Gitmo was going to be closed, and the indefinite detention of "terrorists" without being charged with a crime was against their civil liberties. Sh!t, Obama expanded the indefinite detention without being charged with a crime to include American citizens. Obama took the fascist state and expanded it to exceed the neocons wettest dream.
Cissy is like a wind up doll... nothin to do but wait till he winds down!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Christie just came out attacking Rand and other libertarian leaning politicians, as I said before the GOP is dead unless they start to embrace the younger generation conservatives, they lost a ton of support during the last election. However this isn't about parties, this is now a fight between those who want freedom and those who want masters.
that is very true....the new conservatives want everyone OUT of their pockets, they dont care who gets married, they have the kardashians to oogle.....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Logged
