Bernie Sanders Storms CNN And Stops A Lie About Democrats Dead In Its Tracks

[Hassin Bin Sober]

Last edited Sun Mar 26, 2017, 04:52 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.politicususa.com/2017/03/26/bernie-sanders-storms-cnn-stops-lie-democrats-dead-tracks.html

Bernie Sanders Storms CNN And Stops A Lie About Democrats Dead In Its Tracks

After CNN's Dana Bash had tried to tell Sen. Bernie Sanders that the problem in Washington is that Democrats need to work with Trump, Sanders stopped the Republican talking point dead in its tracks.

Bash asked Sanders, “Will you also tell your fellow Democrats, stop being intransigent. Let’s get together with the president to do it?”

Sanders stopped that line of questioning immediately by replying, “Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, Dana, Dana, Dana. These guys. The Republicans have the majority. They did not include. They did not include.”

https://m.

&ebc=ANyPxKoXNz3Ruql-k183aFgO-YPWgaaTLTR6qJSAckzC3WuRpjHOwt6ZbPV3mHLPQEEG2qa76rwTUwd7q6EWP8975s4xgdQc6w

Entire interview:

https://m.

[beam me up scottie]

1. Wow. That was a big fat fail on her part - Bernie doesn't suffer media fools gladly.

Bash used Trump’s talking point that the Republican failure on health care was the fault of Democrats as the basis for a factual question to Sen. Sanders. If Bernie Sanders had not stopped her and made her admit the truth, that Democrats were not included in the health care bill discussion, viewers would have accepted the Republican claim that Trump is failing because Democrats won’t work with him as a fact.

We absolutely cannot let them frame the narrative - that's how you shut it down.

Thank you Senator Sanders, keep it up!

[randome]

2. He refuted a line of questioning, he didn't 'storm' anything.

It's this utterly ridiculous hyperbole about Sanders that turns him into a subject of mockery. I don't know why pundits do it and I don't know why some DUers do it.

Good on Sanders for pushing back on the question.

[surrealAmerican]

5. Hyperbole is the norm on the internet.

It's not the worst thing ever, but it sure does get tiresome.

[Honeycombe8]

66. Yes. He "slams" this, she "blasts" that, he "knocks out" her...and so on. nt

[randome]

16. If he 'stormed' a TV station, I would congratulate him.

But he didn't.

[George II]

19. You'd think it was the Bastille or something. Did he "storm" CNN by invitation?

[NurseJackie]

25. Ha!

😂😂😂❤

[FailureToCommunicate]

64. ...

Give it a rest
pretty please

[George II]

78. Give what "a rest"? Why is that directed to me?

[Jonny Appleseed]

76. I was expecting to see him being violently held back by security guards

while he clawed his way in front of a camera after having seen the report on TV and immediately rode his bike to CNN HQ.

[ATL Ebony]

125. Agree. That was the exact image I had -- didn't happen like that at all!

Very misleading heading.

[pnwmom]

17. Some people value accuracy more than others. Bernie didn't storm anything.

He strongly disagreed with the interviewers question, which was a very good thing.

[George II]

20. It was raining outside, maybe that's what the writer was referring to?

[ATL Ebony]

126. ++

[Orrex]

22. Funny that the messiah imagery always pops up in discussing Sanders

Kind of highlights the hyperbole angle...

[NurseJackie]

119. Of course they've brought forth juniper berries!

[Alice11111]

41. I love Bernie! Lead us on, Bernie!

He calls out lies and distortion, He is out there giving it his all, after a brutal primary and election, that barely slowed him down for a couple of months.

We need a focused, strong, decisive, instictive leader now.
No one is better now than Bermie.
Look at this guy go, where others dared not, and see his results. He made an impact in defeating the Trumpcare bill. So did the people!

Lead us on, Bernie!


PS. I'll always love and admire Hillary too (& I was a Hillary supporter.)

[elleng]

47. Exactly.

[retrowire]

10. My most hated hyperbole?

SLAMMED

HILLARY SLAMMED TRUMP AND THEN HE SLAMMED BACK AND THE MODERATORS SLAMMED THEM AND IT JUST A BIG OL CAGE MATCH

[Beartracks]

32. Don't forget "destroyed." n/t

[SticksnStones]

121. EPIC is mine...I see EPIC...I skip the read...

The more clickety-baity the headline, the less likely I am to clickety...

[Beartracks]

141. "EPIC slam absolutely DESTROYS entire Trump agenda!!!!!!!!!...

... ............ on Twitter."




==================

[klook]

31. The OP quoted the headline of the PoliticsUSA article.

Whether or not Sanders "stormed," "confronted," "annihilated," "criticized," "challenged," "obliterated," or "begged to differ with" CNN is something to take up with PoliticsUSA.

[FailureToCommunicate]

62. THANK YOU! This thread was going off the rails for something BERNIE didn't write. Sheesh.

Not surprising, just disappointing.

[synergie]

102. Who said Bernie wrote that?

It's not surprising, just disappointing that people keep asserting things that simply are not being said.

It's corny hyperbole and those pointing that out are not attacking Bernie, perhaps don't attack them for calling out ridiculousness where it's clearly apparent.

He didn't storm anything, that's not what that word means and the word is ridiculous in the way it's misused here. Not attack on BERNIE, but a commentary on the person who wrote that title, and those who are donning the armor to defend this silly bit of nonsense.

Our fight is with Trump, enough already with storming and railing against those pointing out the nonsense, it's divisive and distracting. We won a battle on Friday, we have many left to fight in this war.

[LiberalLovinLug]

110. get real

The fact is there are a few on here that will take any excuse they can to water on any thread that praises the cranky old "usurper". Very evident to me in the snide attempts earlier up thread to make the whole exercise a farce at Bernie's expense.

All it takes is one ill-advised over-the-top headline and the thread derailing shall commence.

[synergie]

115. A huge part of getting real is to acknowlege the fact that a few here seem to be dedicatd to

refighting the primaries and are turning any and everything, including a ridiculously hyperbolic headline into a reason to wage war.

It's very evident that some people are indeed lacking in humor but up to the tricks we had not seen since last year.

It was an amusing title, and people who seem to wish to pick fights have decided that's their cue to derail it based on imagined attacks on their favorite candidate, if we're going to get real, we're going to have to address what's been happening over the past couple of days, it's not subtle.

[LiberalLovinLug]

116. I agree

[ATL Ebony]

127. "We won a battle on Friday, we have many left to fight in this war." - TRUE

Let's not make it a fight amongst ourselves

[randome]

63. I wasn't blaming the OP at all.

[synergie]

103. How is pointing out the silliness of the headline writer an attack on the OP?

Honestly, people need to calm down a bit.

[George II]

68. The headline is false. I wouldn't post a false headline. Plus, the correct characterization...

...of his appearance could have been posted instead of the Politico headline, this isn't LBN.

[NBachers]

35. I immediately got the image of some kind of medieval warfare campaign rampage.

[rpannier]

36. Title of the article nt

[Egnever]

46. Stupid tittle

Not the OPs fault but still a stupid tittle.

[rpannier]

89. It is

I agree with you

[druidity33]

94. I also think...

it was a stupid tittle.

tee hee, tee hee snicker snicker

[sprinkleeninow]

112. Now how did I know a poster was gonna point that outttt?

Twas a poor choice of tittles.

[meadowlark5]

55. I remember John Stewart doing a bit on his show reading headlines from Huffington Post

It seems HuffPo has since toned it down, but every teaser headline for an article back then was "so and so destroys this talking point" "so and so eviscerates conservative X" then you read the article and it's :meh:

[synergie]

104. I remember this!

Here it is, for all those who seem rather humor deficient this weekend.

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/a9sb7r/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-the-blogs-must-be-crazy

And the John Oliver version:

[kacekwl]

69. Shame we can't focus on what he said

Not some headline he had Nothing to do with.

[still_one]

106. and that is a big deal, and bash should be ashamed of herself. She of course isn't the only one in

the media to set up that false narrative, and whenever and wherever that happens, they need to be called out immediately on that

Good for Bernie

[maddiemom]

120. The same way that they made Biden out to be a buffoon for all those years

Now that he's out of office, they treat him with more respect.

[tenorly]

3. Dana BUSH, up to her old tricks again.

[LenaBaby61]

108. Dana BUSH, up to her old tricks again.

Exactly, and I'm happy that Bernie shut her down when she tried to put words in his mouth AND talk too quickly @ him Like he wouldn't hear her. HE did hear her and he corrected her. NOTHING that happened this past Friday NON-repeal of O-Care was Dems fault at ALL--Bernie told her

Dems have to continue to frame the narrative, and stick to it. Chuck Schumer did the same thing today, and I'm happy over that as well

Again:

DEMS MUST OWN THE NARRATIVE AND STICK TO IT LIKE WHITE ON RICE.

[tenorly]

109. Well said.

With the shameless, one has to be assertive. In politics as in life, right?

[JudyM]

4. I was watching that interview - she kept trying to force him into statements rather than asking his

perspective. He seemed a little off his game, though, not answering as directly as usual.

[LWolf]

130. I've always loved

the way he redirects the conversation back to the issues at hand when the media tries to back him into a corner with "push poll" types of questions. She was particularly aggressive this time, and he had to fight harder to stay on topic. Overall, though, I think he got the better of her.

[JudyM]

136. I agree. But it was uncomfortable to watch.

Who does she think she is, rolling her eyes and acting all put out?!

[NRaleighLiberal]

6. "both sides do it" just slips so easily off the tongues of the MSM!

Bravo Bernie!



So tired of reporting from the Institute of False Equivalency!

[spooky3]

8. He did a good job with that.

[Dorn]

9. Public option, public option, public option, public option, public option, public option

[Alice11111]

43. Repeat

[wryter2000]

61. Exactly

And my name is Alice, too.

[Alice11111]

67. Hi Alice...Public Option. Public Option.Public Option

To all of the notable Alices of the world.
Alice in Wonderland
Alice, with Linda Lavin
Alice, my wonderful beagle, years ago.
Alice's Restaurant

[SticksnStones]

122. Alist of Alice...nice!

[wryter2000]

128. Back atcha

[yodermon]

124. actually i'd repeat "single payer single payer" and then we might LAND on a public option. n/t

[MaeScott]

11. I listened to much of the interview and Dana was definitely

spewing rw talking points. By the end of the interview Sanders was getting louder because she would talk while he was refuting and was getting pissed about it.

[LiberalLovinLug]

114. So right

Dana is insufferable to put up with. Rudely making emotive noises in the background while he's speaking. Her face involuntarily twitching in discomfort whenever words like "single payer" or "public option" or "poor" is spoken. How fast she had to jump on the end of his last word on the "public option" which is cut off on that first video. Where she must insist on throwing cold water by pointing out how impossible it is to get the votes. Along with her dismissive forced laughter like he's a senile old uncle telling her he's going to buy her a pony.

I particularly like how he battled her insistence that he answer if there will be a filibuster!!!! A filibuster is sexy, a filibuster is also a way to get a story on "angry Democrats shut down government!" as a way to balance all the plethora of daily negative coverage for the Trumpublicans. He stood firm in the truth that its not about what the Democrats or he will do in regards to filibustering some as yet to be determined outcome, but that it was in Republicans hands to find 60 votes. That is the important bit.

[IronLionZion]

12. Challenge them to make costs of care more transparent

why does the itemized bill cost so much? (of course we know it's greed, but why not delve into it and expose it)

Oh yes, I know it's politically difficult to challenge the health care (not insurance) industry (hospitals, clinics, pharma, suppliers, device makers, etc) so why not force the issue to the forefront now that Republicans are in charge of everything? Get their constituents to ask them. Constantly bring it up on the talking head shows. Make it an issue worth discussing.

Insurance is just the tip of the iceberg.

[furtheradu]

13. Thank You, Sen. Sanders!

NO tolerance for bs.
I like that a LOT!

[doc03]

14. Obama adopted the ACA (a Republican Plan) as a compromise to try

and get Republican support. Am I right?

[2naSalit]

21. You are correct.

[Talk Is Cheap]

83. Maybe, maybe not...

I know that the Dems killed the public option and Medicare for All was never on the
table.

Sorry, but the Dems held the majority and presidency - they could have passed *anything* they wanted...

They chose the republican plan...

[doc03]

85. I think they were expecting some bi-partisan support by doing that. I don't think

they could have got "anything" it barely passed as it was.

[Talk Is Cheap]

86. Dems held the majority and could have passed anything....

....but they chose to keep the insurance companies.... No surprise there....

[doc03]

87. No they couldn't have passed "anything" nt

[Talk Is Cheap]

88. Why not? Democrats held the majority?

What stopped them from passing Medicare for All?

[bettyellen]

96. Lieberman. Jeeze I can't believe people are still spewing this nonsense.

[EleanorR]

93. Lieberman killed the public option nt

[GulfCoast66]

113. Not being derogatory, not looking for a hide and I think you are honestly asking...

but that is bullshit.

The Democratic party had veto proof majorities. Could have done whatever they wanted. President Obama, who I love, was new and let the congress make the policy way too much. He kind of did what Trump has just done...trust that his fellow party members who were experienced with congress would cover his bases. Of course, he was trying to actually help Americans whereas the republicans today are trying to help the 1% and corporations. But too many Senators were scared about re-election to go all in on anything even close to single payer.

It was a stretch even to get the ACA. Everyone here like to blame Lieberman, and he was definitely a villain, but several of the Midwestern Senators were real holdouts.

But one of the defining moments of President Obama for me was when he told he congress folks that this vote was actually worth losing their seats for. And many of them took that to heart, voted for it, and then lost their seats. To me, that will always be the ultimate example of a great public servant.

And now Americans consider Health Care a right. The fascist wing of the republican party does not know that yet, but most of them do. What happened Friday is proof.

Now is the time to push for single payer.

[JI7]

15. Dana Bash is a fucking idiot

[NoMoreRepugs]

99. I second that emotion

[iluvtennis]

18. Was happy to hear Bernie shut her down. CNN seems to push back more on Dems than rethugs. GAH

[mcar]

23. He did a good job of setting Bash straight

But he didn't "storm" anything.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

24. tRump cant even work with his OWN base, the House Freedom Caucus.

He gets Bannon to give them an ultimatum that is rejected flat-out.

David Frum tweet:  ? "Regular reminder that Donald Trump’s core competency is not dealmaking with powerful counter-parties. It is duping gullible victims."

[Rural_Progressive]

26. Let's see, the repukes got to stonewall Obama for 8 years

didn't hear a lot of uproar from the MSM about that. But now, the dems are supposed to be gracious and work with the repukes and the orange gibbon?

I think Bill Maher was spot-on when he described the magic capital "R".

[NBachers]

42. Yes, but that's all "behind us now." We're supposed to be "going forward." Don't you understand?

[Rural_Progressive]

105. Funny thing about that

if I happen to get bit by a snake I'm not inclined to put myself in a position to get bit again. If the snake doesn't get the message I'm more inclined to put a few rounds of snake shot in my little pistol and solve the problem then put the bite "behind me" and get bit again.

I seem to recall some fool saying something to the effect of “There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”

[Stuart G]

27. Bernie talked about the .."greed of the pharmacutical industry"

The Republicans "love it/ and love them.. Why? that industry gives them lots and lots of money.....I tried some new medicine last year...for 30 days supply, over 500 dollars...yep...so that is what the Republicans love....Hard to work with those people..

[bhusar]

28. Bernie, the voice of truth on Cable news

[Oneironaut]

29. "Storms CNN?" Really? "Storms?" Clickbait bullshit headline

There's trying to generate clicks on your website, and then there's cartoonishly ridiculous hyperbole. This is so bad, it's funny!

[oberliner]

30. Donna??

He should maybe learn the name of the person to whom he is speaking.

[cwydro]

40. Lol.

I heard that too.

Thought it was my ears.

[LWolf]

131. I heard both.

He's out there defending us; probably the most prominent voice for Democrats at this point. And his focus was on not letting her hijack his opportunity to make our points with her own right-wing republican-friendly talking points.

And THAT is the point. He didn't let her succeed.

I'm glad my students are patient and forgiving when I accidentally use the wrong name; when you talk to that many people on a regular basis, and your brain is focused on the point, it can happen. I also noted that he caught himself.

[oberliner]

134. Bernie is great

No question about that in my mind. I just thought it was funny that he was calling her Donna.

[beachbum bob]

33. All Democrats must call out lies echoed by media.

Bernie especially

[Enoki33]

34. Dana Bash always tries her best to sway arguments

in the Republican direction. She would be better suited at Fox.

[Warren DeMontague]

37. Hooray for SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS!

We're so fortunate to have him FIGHTING for US!

[asuhornets]

39. Bernie did a good job. Nt

[HoneyBadger]

44. Once again, Bernie leads

[C Moon]

45. Hard to believe the infighting here...

the point is being missed: some in the media are still trying to make the Trump sound legit. He's not.

[Iggo]

51. Yep.

You want to fight Trump? Step right up.

You want to keep fighting the primary?*
Get out of the way.

(* A primary that they fucking won, ferchrissakes!)

[ornotna]

91. Yep

It's more important we discuss how he mispronounced Dana than what he's actually trying to accomplish.

[Stardust]

142. I thought he pronounced it correctly, i.e "DAN-ah.

[Go Vols]

48. Keep storming Bernie

transitive: to say something in a very angry way

“What are you saying?” she stormed.

[Stardust]

143. Excellent!

[monmouth4]

50. Bernie is the best..n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

52. Yes. He's always ready to do what's right.

I salute this man

[romanic]

53. Bernie is the man!

I don't care if technically isn't a Democrat anymore, he has more balls than anyone and it's much needed now more than ever!

[slumcamper]

54. Bernie is hemming and hawing.

I only have this soundbite to go on, but it leaves me wanting.

I wish Bernie would say "Republicans--if they genuinely care about PEOPLE over politics--need to WORK WITH US."

Bernie needs to lay this shit on the line. NOW is the moment to make the point.

[coco22]

56. Yes,I posted about this earlier..

I watched as she interviewed Kasich and I was screaming as Kasich kept saying shame the Democrats until they help them.

Dana Bash 's introduction and line of questioning throughout the show was Democrats need to help RepubliCONS. I am sick of her shit Trump loving -----!

[democrank]

57. I don't care if Bernie stormed CNN or crawled in on all fours begging for a minute of their time.

Fact is, he was there, and while he was, he stopped Dana Bash as she regurgitated right wing talking points. I appreciate his efforts.

[BainsBane]

58. Clinton ran on the public option

and that was decried as unacceptable at the time.

That it's now being championed demonstrates the low priority placed on policy in a political culture that values personality over issues. Do people really imagine a party can be built entirely around the celebrity of a septuagenarian?

[Warren DeMontague]

73. No, we desperately need to expand our leadership bench. It's horribly overdue.

My humble suggestion is to start looking in odd, obscure, weird, out of the way places like the West Coast of the United states and among people born after 1964.

[BainsBane]

77. Or focus on issues and principles as opposed to individual politicians

Candidates will present themselves; there is no shortage of ambitious people in politics.

I don't want a party that is built around hero worship. I find it disturbing. When I see so many people who care about nothing else, I despair for the future of democracy in this country.

[Warren DeMontague]

79. I would agree with that. Although leadership as an organic phenomenon can't be discounted.

It's not necessarily "hero worship" to recognize it when it presents itself.

Case in point, Barack Obama.

[beam me up scottie]

80. Yep. I remember when we were accused of worshiping Obama.

The right even referred to him as our 'messiah' iirc.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with being inspired by and praising our leaders, whether it's Barack, Hillary, Bernie or someone else.

When Hillary tweets encouragement we rejoice, when Obama throws shade on Twitter we thank our lucky stars he's still around, when Bernie puts a media talking head in their place we cheer.

We're all part of the resistance - it's a big movement.

[Warren DeMontague]

81. I remember driving around the Chicago area in early 2004, seeing signs that said "Obama"

I was, like, gee, it's a shame that guy has such an unfortunate name, it's almost "Osama".

By the time he gave the keynote at the convention, I came around.

[beam me up scottie]

82. I remember that speech like it was yesterday.

There were only two Democrats in the office at the time, an aging hippie and me - when we got to work the next morning we discussed it quietly in the break room and we both agreed - Barack Obama was going to be president one day.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

95. I remember running in to an old buddy who was one of the first Obama "fans"

My office was in The Merchandise Mart at the time. My buddy was on his way to phone bank for Obama in the Democratic Senate Primary when I ran in to him in the hallway.

I asked "what's the deal with this dude with the funny sounding name?"

He told me he was "the real deal" . I changed my intended vote from the party hack to Obama.

[R B Garr]

107. Comparing Obama to Sanders is shallow and futile.

There is no comparison. Obama was a political threat and the right took every one of his assets and turned it around on him as a criticism to blunt his appeal in their Rovian fashion. They haven't bothered with Bernie.

[BainsBane]

118. Leadership is necessary

The problem lies with an electorate that values the man over policy,. To inspire people to organize around issues is great, but sadly in our current political culture, issues take a back seat to reverence for a few great men. Since the point is the individual and not any particular issues or concern, there is no effort to organize broadly. Instead, the emphasis is on enforcing fealty to particular politicians. Imagine the potential for mobilization if we had seen threads geared toward organizing people around single payer, a $15 wage, or tax reform rather than promoting one man?

I supported Obama, even as I disagreed with him on some of what he did as president. I didn't feel the need to declare him a POSUCS because of those disagreements, but nor did I idolize him. I see that vitriolic condemnation of Obama as part of the same phenomenon as the uncritical adulation of political figures across the political spectrum. The reaction here is an example. When Clinton ran on a public option she was condemned as a corporate sell out. When Sanders suggests it as an option, he is applauded. That stark difference reveals the prioritization of personality above policy or principle.

Then we saw the activism of millions across this country dismissed in order to credit one man for the defeat of Trumpcare. That kind of reverence for a great man and dismissal of the widespread popular mobilization in pressuring GOP congressman reveals a hierarchical worldview that rhetorically undermines the only potential for resistance: popular activism.

[Warren DeMontague]

137. I think there are some faulty premises in your post.

I have about as much interest in endlessly re-hashing the 2016 primaries as I do in listening to a 5 hour loop of Rebecca Black's "Friday".. that said, it is hard for me to imagine that what drove Bernie Sanders' following back then was something about personality or great man hero-worship.

The guy- and I like the guy- is frumpy, cranky and has a tendency to say the same thing over and over. He's NOT Obama. However, there was a thirst in the party for someone to bring issues to the fore that Sanders did- like, as you mention, a $15 minimum wage. Rightly or wrongly, there was a perception that some of this stuff had been ignored by the folks in charge. I'm talking early 2016, now, not by the time we got into the general.

I do believe that his presence in the primaries actually resulted in a much MORE issues-oriented campaign, and despite much hand-wringing to the contrary, I believe he helped both our party and caused Hillary to run a better campaign in the long run.


Obama himself said exactly the same thing.

But, yes, we should focus on issues and effecting positive change.

[BainsBane]

138. I'm not talking about the primaries.

I'm talking about now, the same as most other people posting in this thread. If it were just about the primaries, we wouldn't have countless threads, day in and day out, in which he is declared a hero who must not be questioned or criticized in anyway. All one need do is read through these threads to see what people care most about. The phenomenon extends across the political spectrum and is not dissimilar to how Trump's supporters treat him and to a lesser extend how some Clinton supporters treated her. I find it troubling.

[Warren DeMontague]

139. It is undeniable that Bernie Sanders generates a lot of enthusiasm in some corners of our party.

So at least there's that.

He's not going away, but I also don't think he- or HRC, for that matter- is running for President again.

I fall firmly on the "we need everyone on board" side of things, as well, as you know, on the "we seriously need to expand our leadership bench both generationally and geographically" side.

In the meantime, there's always "hide thread by keyword"; I've never tried it, but I think it works.

[BainsBane]

140. This is obviously pointless

I don't know why it's so difficult for you to follow my point, but I give up. You keep thinking the only thing I'm worried about is my DU feed or Bernie. I suppose it's easier than thinking about what I've actually said.

[nikibatts]

92. Hillary WAS about policy and working for us all. She was the most progressive candidate with

great ideas. She was rejected by the anti-status quo folks as though she were a proponent of the status quo. She was not.

[BainsBane]

117. And not what she proposed is suddenly supported

Because Bernie has decided it's okay.

[mdbl]

59. Dana Bash my head against the wall

what is wrong with these idiot journalists? Work with trump? Is she kidding? Has her head been in the sand for the last 4 months?

[wryter2000]

60. Good Lord, work with them?

Sure, lets figure out exactly which 24 million will lose their health insurance and figure out of the tax break for the wealthy is big enough. Like that?

What planet do these people live on? Have they no eyes to see what the current bunch of bastards who call themselves Republican are doing?

[Omaha Steve]

70. Over in LBN: BERNIE SANDERS TO SPONSOR SINGLE-PAYER HEALTHCARE BILL

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141739126

[wryter2000]

129. Yay

😍

[Honeycombe8]

65. Damn Straight! Don't let them bully Dems into thinking DEMS had anything

to do with the failure of fixing Obamacare...the Republicans INTENTIONALLY DID NOT INCLUDE DEMS.

It's not on the Dems to go crawling to the Repubs. HEALTH CARE BELONGS TO THE REPUBS, now. The buck stops with the party in power. If the Repubs want Dem ideas or votes, they need to invite their input when writing the bill.

[YOHABLO]

71. That's ridiculous HEALTH CARE BELONGS TO US. You can't depend on Republicans

to do the right thing. Millions of people like you and me are suffering daily. The buck stops with US. That's why we must be active, be militant if necessary. Do whatever it takes for those less fortunate.

[Honeycombe8]

75. Well, that's true. I meant the Repubs are in power, so the problems are on them...

for not fixing the problems. They will probably even defund it, to cause more problems, and say "Look! We told you Obamacare would explode."

They will try to say, as Trump said, "Obamacare totally belongs to the Democrats now. So when it explodes, the Democrats will come to us and want our help" or something like that.

I'm saying...NO. The party in power is responsible for the failure of a program, or failing to fix it, even if it's the other party that passed it.

But yes...I think we need to keep up the drumbeat of single payer, and a better Obamacare as a backstop.

[SMC22307]

72. Everyone's panties un-wadded over the use of "storms"?

Good. Be thankful Bernie's calling out the Corporate Media bullshit that Republicans can obstruct, but Democrats must "work with."

Get past the shiny headline...

[beam me up scottie]

97. Well said.

[lancelyons]

90. I know watching Dana, I was pretty upset at her approaches.

That seemed to be her deal for the entire state of the union, picking on democrats for not working with the president. She was pushing trumps reasoning. At one point I wondered if she was a republican under cover or just trying to be more neutral. Still wonder that.

Im glad Bernie shut it down fairly quick.

Democrats should not work with Republicans that are only trying to undo what the democrats already put in place as a major item. They wont get no help on that. Like Bernie said, if they want to work on reducing drug costs or reducing insurance premiums, etc to fix ACA, then no problem.

[Akamai]

98. I saw that interview and certainly applaud Bernie's strong response!

I certainly wish that more people would bring up the Hastert Rule that guides the Republican house.

The "Hastert Rule" named after the disgraced Republican Speaker of the House, Danny Hastert, says that no action will pass in the house unless it is supported by a majority of the majority. That is, when Republicans are in control, the only piece of legislation they will allow to pass is that the majority of the Republicans supported, and the Democrats be damned.

Speaker of the House, John Boehner, had to violate that at times to ensure that the house passed out bills allowing the government to continue, because the majority of his own party, the Republican Party, did not care that they were going to try the country right off a the cliff.

The Democrats have no such practice as the Hastert Rule and all the media know this to be true. Still then they say that both sides are equally intransigent, uncompromising, and the media knows this is a goddamned lie.

The "both sides do it" argument is absolutely false, because People know that the Democratic Party is not as obstructive, as mendacious, as greedy, as heartless, as is the Republican Party.

[Lordquinton]

100. Go Bernie! A true progressive hero

We need to support everyone fighting for us.

[Shoonra]

101. NOW the Republicans want to work WITH Democrats

For eight years of Obama, the Republican Party prided itself as the Party of Hell No! But now that they have both Houses (narrowly) and the White House (occupied by a loony) they are suddenly desperate for bipartisanship. Yes, I am sure the Republicans want to be able to share the blame with the Democrats.

It's time for the Republicans to taste their own poison and in the next election they'll discover they have to take the full responsibility for the Trumping of America.

[The Wielding Truth]

111. Medicare 65 to 55. That is a sound proposal.

[klook]

123. 65 to 0 works for me.

We're not positioned to go for that yet, but I like the energy I'm seeing behind Medicare For All.

I hate everything about Republicans' policy "ideas" (both of them), but one thing I've learned from observing them is that you have to demand way, way more than you realistically expect to get. So it may be that we push for Medicare For All and get 65 to 55.

Then eventually, down the line, Single Payer may be within grasp.

[LWolf]

132. Yes.

People in my profession are often encouraged to retire early. I'll admit, it takes youthful stamina to keep up with crowds of adolescents all day long on a second-to-second schedule. Since I'm in my late 50s, and beginning to look into retirement within the next decade, I've wondered: what kind of health care do people GET 55 - 65 if they are "encouraged" forcefully to retire before they are eligible for medicare?

[klook]

133. I am in that particular window myself,

and fortunate to have fairly affordable health insurance through a continuing policy from my spouse's former employer. (The health insurance options through my employer were okay but not as good.)

If spousal insurance benefits aren't available, thanks to the ACA you should be able to get coverage for maybe an arm and half a leg instead of both arms and both legs as would have been the case if TrumpRyanDontCare had passed.

Of course, the Republicans have actively worked to sabotage the evil spawn of Satan, "ObamaCare," and will continue to do so. So it would be prudent to plan for a possible future where the ACA's protections aren't in place.

If it were me, I'd probably go with a high-deductible plan and save, save, save until I had enough to cover the deductible for a couple of years -- not needing that dough for anything else. I know there are many others on this board with more knowledge of these matters than I have, so I hope they'll continue to share their expertise.

I believe one of the Republicans' goals is to make it harder for people to retire or to switch employers. The more of us who are dependent on "cubiclecare" from our current employer, or have limited employment mobility for other reasons, the better it supposedly is for the oligarchs.

Of course, we know that freedom and mobility are better for society as a whole -- but society as a whole is not what the gilded few care about.

[lunatica]

135. Were Democrats supposed to help the GOP repeal Obamacare?

Dana is a dunce!