2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumMore made up shit about the Vatican visit.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1107104779"Bernie Sanders invited himself to the Vatican!" BZZZZZZT! Oopsie! No he didn't.
"Bernie Sanders won't speak at the Vatican conference." BZZZZZZT! Oopsie! Yes he was, and he did. And while he was at the Vatican Hillary was selling her soul for $335,000 a plate. Drops mic.
"Bernie didn't meet the Pope!" BZZZZZZT! Oopsie! Yes he did.
"Bernie ambushed the Pope from the bathroom." BZZZZZZT! Oopsie! From the fucking bathroom? Are you all fucking mad? Do you have to just make shit up like this to support your candidate? Who does such a thing other than one without any ethical standards whatsoever?
Here are the fucking facts:
Bernie stayed at the Papal residence at the invitation of the Vatican. He was informed, through channels, that Pope Francis would be departing early, but if Bernie could arise early, there could be a brief meeting. That is what happened.
Hillary supporters, get the fuck over it. It is not worth losing your already very low public credibility over this.
If Hillary manages to win the nod for November it will only be because the public is so blinkered blind that they cannot see how idiotic Hillary supporters are.
Don't get me started about their opinions on little finches. One had better bring on the fainting couches for that topic.
I have a better idea. Let's get together. I tried that with the Hillary Clinton group. For naught. (They all passed out about a little birdie.) Nevertheless, I am willing to reach out. After all, we are going to have to do so or we lose in November.
Maybe some people don't care, but I do.
Let's start by dropping the Vatican visit, which even Pope Francis says was not political. (Apparently, Hillary supporters disagree, so they will have to take the initiative here.)
Where do we go from here?
uponit7771
(90,348 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)But the most important words occurred in the middle of dinner, when a personal secretary for Francis arrived with the news Mr. Sanders had been hoping for, Mr. Sachs said.
If Mr. Sanders were in the foyer of the Casa Santa Marta at 6 a.m. the next day, he would be able to speak briefly with Francis as the pope headed to the airport for his Saturday trip to Greece, where the pope would be addressing the migrant crisis.
So early Saturday morning, Mr. Sanders stood in the marble foyer, which looks out onto a large cobblestone drive just inside the Vatican walls. Joining him were his wife, Mr. Sachs and his wife and Bishop Sánchez Sorondo, the senators de facto Vatican fixer.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/us/politics/bernie-sanders-pope-francis-vatican.html?_r=0
uponit7771
(90,348 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)uponit7771
(90,348 posts)... so they have no credibility.
Pope said it was a greeting.. nothing more
longship
(40,416 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)The Pope met Bernie. That, in itself, is an incredible thing.
And yes, this meeting was arranged the night before. We've been told the facts. They're spelled out in the New York Times article. Bernie was told where to go, if he wanted to see the Pope. So he did. This was pre-arranged.
I find it hilarious that you weren't there--and you feel qualified to judge what did and didn't happen; and what was said and what wasn't said.
You have absolutely no idea what transpired at Vatican City. Absolutely none. And when the facts are reported you know better.
That's nutty.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)some of these people are loosing credibility so fast it should be recorded for posterity.
840high
(17,196 posts)ago in my book.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)uponit7771
(90,348 posts)... "nothing more" part stands out no?
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Here's the full quote.
When I came down, I greeted him, I shook his hand and nothing more. This is called good manners and it is not getting involved in politics,
The Pope was RESPONDING TO a Reuters reporter who asked him if the meeting with Sanders was a political endorsement or a political statement.
The response was about those who seek to politicize all of this! Clearly. It was not a comment about Bernie.
Nice job of cutting off the quote and misrepresenting not only the comment, but the question that was asked that sparked the Pope's comment.
Wow!! I mean...you guys aren't even trying to hide your lies and manipulations.
longship
(40,416 posts)And Hillary supporters are just making shit up about it, turning it into a clusterfuck.
Pathetic, fucking pathetic!
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Even before Bernie left for Vatican City--they were spinning their tales.
Their vitriol has ended up being a big part of the story. I think their pettiness has seemed to damage the Clinton camp.
Here's another except and article, this time from Vanity Fair. As more information and reporting pours in on Bernie's trip to Vatican City--their talking points will further erode to dust. I hope they keep going. So easy to rebuke their lies.
Fortunately for him, his local liaison Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo was close to Francis and helped facilitate an audience for Sanders with the Pope at the Casa Santa Marta, the Vatican guesthouse where Francis keeps his residence.
As schedules continued to shift and Sanders bounced from meeting to meeting around the Vatican, the certainty of the Popes availability became increasingly cloudy. But while seated at dinner with foreign policy advisor Jeffrey Sachs and their wives Jane and Sonia, respectively, Sanders received the news he had been hopefully awaiting. His time with the Pope would be informal and brief, a quick meet-and-greet in the foyer of the Casa Santa Marta at 6 A.M. the next morning, but he had been granted an audience.
So, Monsignor Sordondo, a close personal aid of the Pope's, facilitated and arranged the brief meeting between Bernie Sanders and the Pope. The New York Times confirmed that the Pope's personal secretary informed Sanders, the night before dinner, that the meeting would happen at 6:00 a.m.
Tell us the story again, Hillarians--about how Bernie ambushed the Pope! I love that one!
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/04/bernie-sanders-meets-pope
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/us/politics/bernie-sanders-pope-francis-vatican.html?_r=0
uponit7771
(90,348 posts)... no need to "hear" anything
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)How many times are you going to spin the Pope's words into Bernie bashing--by cutting off part of the quote?
When I came down, I greeted him, I shook his hand and nothing more. This is called good manners and it is not getting involved in politics,
The Reuters reporter asked the Pope about the politics of the meeting.
The Pope also added that those who politicize the meeting--should seek psychiatric help. I don't know how much more obvious it gets, that the Pope was admonishing people who are making so much political hay about this. That ain't Bernie. That's the chorus of rambling chipmunks who have been going non stop since last week--about Bernie's Vatican trip and embarrassing our county on the national stage.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/16/bernie-sanders-meets-pope-francis-at-the-vatican
longship
(40,416 posts)You are not doing yourself any good here.
What is it with you that you have to twist and spin so much? Why this issue? What bone do you have to pick that you have to parrot the same post over and over again when you have been shown cited reportage that fleshes out the facts that you conveniently ignore?
It's pathetic.
Just stop.
Thank you.
My best to you.
longship
(40,416 posts)You have zero contribution other than parroting the same lame meaningless post, falsified over and over again.
If this is what kind of smarmy rubbish Hillary Clinton stands for, I want nothing to do with it.
I suppose you call this candidate advocacy.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)That quote is in response to a question on the airplane: was the meeting political? He hastened to say otherwise. That is all it means. Sanders was an invited guest in the papal residence.
arikara
(5,562 posts)During their meeting:
This is taken from the article in Haaretz, entitled Pope Suggests Critics of Sanders Meeting 'See a Psychiatrist'
http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.714722?utm_source=dlvr.it
Bernie did not "lay in wait" for the pope, nor did he "ambush" the him in front of the bathroom or whatever other silliness some morons are going on about. No, Bernie isn't the one making shit up.
Disqualify him, defeat him and unify the party later.
I think you people will find if you manage the first two the vile way you are going that you won't have any luck with the third.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)CorkySt.Clair
(1,507 posts)uponit7771
(90,348 posts)CorkySt.Clair
(1,507 posts)uponit7771
(90,348 posts)krispos42
(49,445 posts)"Jeez, why do people keep trying to debunk my lies?"
uponit7771
(90,348 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)The parrot speaks.
Of course, you know the response, the entire quote. You just ignore it and squawk another, "Polly wanna cracker!"
No cracker for you today.
Sorry.
My best.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)It is always good to see you, my friend. Thanks for stopping by. I fear that I have stepped in it but good this time.
Hope you are well.
Thanks for the kick.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)it is kind of funny actually. She likes milk too. She tried ice cream this morning.
islandmkl
(5,275 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)CorkySt.Clair
(1,507 posts)And stating that Berners are starting a lot of the Vatican threads isn't a lie, it's a fact.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Every single talking point that the Clinton digital response team has put forward--has been debunked.
We find it a shame when people lie--and act like middle-school bullies and liars.
You want to post lies? You will be called out.
That's why.
uponit7771
(90,348 posts)RedFury
(85 posts)1monster
(11,012 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Bitter folks.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Bernie was invited to the Vatican. He spoke at the conference and was even asked questions by participants. He spoke, as an authority on income inequality and social justice and he represented the Democratic party--and our country--very well.
He was invited, by the Pope's personal secretary to meet the Pope briefly. And they did meet and exchanged pleasantries.
Those are the facts.
Yesterday, your ilk must have started 20 threads on Bernie's Vatican City visit. All of them negative. All of them charging that Bernie horned in on the Pope and forced a meeting. Another bald-faced, desperate lie--in a long string.
We're really bugged by liars, but we're not bitter. We're positive and proud of Bernie. Your sour-grapes brigade has spent an entire weak acting like playground bullies--tearing down, mocking, lying, making shit up. That's the epitome of bitter.
CorkySt.Clair
(1,507 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)bitter if she is indicted.
It's highly likely that her aids are being interviewed by the FBI this week.
I do not believe that she will be the nominee.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,168 posts)to debunk your lies.
CorkySt.Clair
(1,507 posts)TheCowsCameHome
(40,168 posts)Your side looks really stupid, though.
longship
(40,416 posts)It was the Hillary supporters who posted all the made up shit. "Bernie invited himself!" (No he didn't!) "He wasn't going to speak." (Yes he did!) "He didn't get to meet the Pope." (For Christ sakes, he was staying at the Pope's residence. How does he not get to meet the Pope, you blinkered idiots?) "He ambushed the Pope by jumping out of the bathroom." (What a stupid, fucking claim! Do you honestly think any sane person would believe that?)
My opinion is that discussion is close to useless. But we should try.
However, both sides have to please stop this craziness. And I mean, both sides.
Thank you.
longship
(40,416 posts)CorkySt.Clair
(1,507 posts)Makes a lot of sense.
longship
(40,416 posts)Or I try not to, and will gladly stand corrected if I do.
That is the difference.
What Hillary supporters have been posting here since Bernie announced his Vatican visit is nothing short of despicable. I have never seen such made up rubbish in a rather long time.
The extent that they are not ashamed of their behavior is the extent to which they deserve no respect here. Hence this thread.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)are of no value. You have to pummel the living fuck out of liars. It's the only way to deal with dishonest people who are pressing their dishonest agendas. You have to make it hurt. You have to expose them as the liars they are. Thanks.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)Thank you for saying it.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)LAS14
(13,783 posts)"...which even Pope Francis says was not political."
The problem is with "agrees." It's clear that the Pope was trying to correct the inevitable misperceptions on the part of many that he found Sanders important enough to "have a meeting." If the Sanders campaign didn't understand that it could be perceived as political, they are incompetent and we wouldn't want someone who hired them appointing our cabinet. If they did understand then they should be ashamed for putting the Pope in an awkward position.
And in case you haven't seen it.
Response to LAS14 (Reply #11)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
LAS14
(13,783 posts)... engaged in by the Sanders campaign. Shame on you.
Response to LAS14 (Reply #24)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
libodem
(19,288 posts)Just radiate from this guy. I sure respect him. Not all the doctrinal junk but the kindness and innocence.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)The Pope was asked by a Reuters reporter if the meeting with Sanders was an endorsement of Sanders, or was in any way political.
The Pope said that he greeted Bernie and that they "met." He added that anyone who tried to make this political, was needing psychiatric help.
That was not a shot at Bernie. Bernie is the guy who was invited to the Vatican. Bernie was the guy who was touted in the Vatican press release about this conference--as the first name mentioned in the list of attendees. Bernie was the guy who spoke at this conference and was asked questions and revered as an authority on a "moral economy." According to The New York Times, the Pope's secretary arranged for Bernie and the Pope to meet--at dinner the night before they met.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/us/politics/bernie-sanders-pope-francis-vatican.html?_r=0
It doesn't exactly sound like the Pope has too many problems with Bernie! LOL
He is well aware of the highly charged political nature of the visit--not due to Bernie. But due to the foam-at-the mouth bullshit spewed by the Clinton camp.
The Pope was clearly rebuking those voices, who can't seem to shut the hell up about an event, a conference and a meeting between Bernie and the Pope--of which they know nothing about. Making shit up. It's what you do.
You keep pushing your silly talking points. We'll keep refuting them. Because you don't know what you're talking about, and it's just so damn easy to expose how weak, envious and petty the Clinton sour-grapes digital response team is.
longship
(40,416 posts)Okay, with a doughnut.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Thank you!
Debunking this bullshit is so very easy.
And these jerkstores deserve to have every last lie debunked, in spades.
I doubt the Pope approves of lying.
Cheers and thanks for the coffee/donut!)
LAS14
(13,783 posts)I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder, but the Pope sure sounds like he wants to distance himself from the Sanders "meeting."
Faux pas
(14,686 posts)that he's made it to the world wide stage. Sour grapes only hurt the ones who eat them.
QC
(26,371 posts)Old Codger
(4,205 posts)So deeply ensconced in their little bubbles that they cannot and/or will not come out, some are determined that this will be the time for the first female pres that they cannot see beyond that, others are probably actual 1%ers and still others (an I am not sure that this is not the biggest part) are actually paid shills. Actually I would really like to know that this is true as it would ease my mind as to the mental acuity of the general population and the inane crap that is getting posted in resistance to true sanity...
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Jitter65
(3,089 posts)awkward position. It could be taken several ways but from what the Pope said and how that video is interpreted, the Pope is trying to save face for Bernie.
longship
(40,416 posts)It was brief, yes. But as Bernie was already staying at the Papal residence, it was easy to set up. At dinner, word was passed that Francis would be leaving early in the morning. If Bernie was available, Francis would like to greet him.
It was simple. See? No muss. No fuss. No dirty pans to clean. And no fainting couches needed by idiot Clinton supporters who spin everything Bernie does as something negative.
Amazingly, they even spun a little birdie as a bad thing. A brief greeting with a Pope apparently is an extraordinarily bad thing.
How can people who think like that live with themselves? I'd be going crazy.
uponit7771
(90,348 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)What is it with you on this topic.
First, nobody gets to meet or greet the Pope or President Obama or the Queen of fucking England without permission and previous arrangement.
NOBODY!
So get back onto your fainting couch and live with the facts -- presented more than once to you here -- that Bernie met the fucking Pope briefly by previous and mutual arrangement.
Get the fuck over it. What in the Sam Hell is your issue here? Stake your claim.
Are you saying that Bernie did not meet the Pope? Well, that would be wrong, because he did, and it was pre-arranged as would be necessary. After all, this was in the Pope's residence. Do you think the Swiss Guards let just anybody in there? Without invite?
You guys are wearing me out with your rubbish. Do you actually believe what you are posting?
uponit7771
(90,348 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)One doesn't meet and greet the fucking Pope by accident!
It happens on purpose. And guess the fucking what... It is because the Pope wants it! That is why -- as you have been told multiple times here -- Pope Francis arranged the meeting the evening before for early morning before he departed for Lesbos. It happened at the Papal residence, which I might add one does not gain access to unless one is invited. The Swiss Guard would likely insist!
You have worn out your arguments here. You have nothing.
Please stop wearing us all down with your rubbish.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)There is no "awkward position." You said it "seems like" Bernie put the Pope in an awkward position. It "seems like" to you--and one one else. You're imaging things. Hint: Just because you imagine something (like a sparkly unicorn) that doesn't make it real. K?
No one who was there that day, at the Vatican--feels as you do.
The Pope's personal secretary let Bernie know the night before the meeting happened--that a meeting would happen, according to the New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/us/politics/bernie-sanders-pope-francis-vatican.html?_r=0
The Pope's personal aid and close friend Monsignor Sorondo helped to arrange the meeting, according to Vanity Fair
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/us/politics/bernie-sanders-pope-francis-vatican.html?_r=0
And lastly, according to YOU, it "seems like Bernie put the Pope in an awkward position" and that the "Pope is trying to save face for Bernie." I don't have a link because you made that up out of thin air.
No offense, but I think we'll trust the Vatican officials and the people who were ACTUALLY there. But thanks for your engrossing input and unicorn journalism.
blm
(113,081 posts)even if it is your intent.
Many HRC supporters think the exact same thing as you do, but, about most Sanders supporters. When you frame your post in this manner, it hurts those of us Sanders supporters who truly are trying to be unifying forces against the pro-active DIVIDERS targeting the Dem sites.
longship
(40,416 posts)And let's start with Bernie and Pope Francis which seems to be so important.
Bernie was invited to the Vatican. Check
Bernie spoke at the Vatican. Check
Bernie met the Pope at his residence and spoke briefly with him by previous arrangement by the Pope. Check
Now that we've settled that...
Then, indeed. We can proceed.
I will ignore the rubbish about the little finch, which also seems to upset Hillary supporters so very much. Let's call that diplomacy. It's a start.
Maybe we can discuss issues, respectively of course.
blm
(113,081 posts).
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Some people think if they just find the right "gotcha", the right meme, the right line of attack, they'll finally be rid of the pesky Senator from VT.
They don't really have anything else to do with themselves.
longship
(40,416 posts)It really is pathetic. I hate to characterize what's going on here, but it borders on the ridiculous.
A little bird put the Hillary group into apoplexy.
Then, OMFG, a Vatican invite!!!! We're gonna have to make all sorts of shit up about that!!!! And they did and they are.
In what kind of Rovian nightmare are they living? What kind of candidate makes for such unethical and twisted supporters whose main campaign methodology is making shit up?
I just do not understand. It seems like déjà vu all over again, take me back to George W. Bush in 2000.
What do they think they can gain?
I know... It's her turn! Arrogance! Hubris!
Always a bad sign. Sick of this shit.
My best to you.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)They don't actually care whether the attacks have any real sticking power. The point is to churn them for a couple days and then move on to the next one.
It's kind of a gish gallop tactic. Just keep throwing shit out there. Really the point, all along, has been to steer the conversation away from actual issues that matter to voters, because on that field Sanders consistently wins.
longship
(40,416 posts)Distraction.
It is the blatant dishonesty that gets me though. Why that way? Why?
I call it Rovian. That's what is is.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Talking about Hillarians of course...
Nothing George W Bush did was ever wrong or bad until on Jan 20, 2009 he became George W Who?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)etc.
And it dials into my biggest problem with her campaign.
Along the way between Bill losing his first re-election campaign as Governor and around about '96, they decided that they had to ape the political instincts and behavior of the lee atwater crowd, while reflexively repudiating anything that could be seen as divisively "left", meanwhile no diminishment of the concerns of the Democratic base, no "triangulating", "centrist", "politically astute" move was too noxious to embrace.
The worst part is, it was a response to a very specific set of circumstances and a political reality which was unique to that particular era, but they imagine it to be a capital-T Truth for all time.
So it's not just offensive and dispiriting, it's also outdated, bad politics too.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)When you're more used to making excuses for rats than shooting at them, it's not so simple.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)progressives. The reason they can't is due to their endless EMPTY spinning.
Bernie has the RIGHT to speak to the pope, has the RIGHT to attend the conference,
has the RIGHT to follow his message which he has had FOREVER about greed and
income inequality. Try and remember Clinton supporters, Bernie is NOT OFF
SCRIPT. This is his thing, big hearted, Mr EQUALITY....FOREVER, that is Bernie Sanders.
Good luck, I give you credit for trying.
longship
(40,416 posts)I cannot understand what Hillary supporters think that they can gain by this warped, twisted strategy. It makes absolutely no sense to tell outright lies about Bernie's Vatican invite when any rational person knows that it is going to be covered by every major journalist on the planet. Their lies will be called out.
So how do they think that they will get away with it? It's simple. They won't! So why do they persist in repeating the fucking bald-faced lies?
I just do not understand.
It is certainly not a way that I would promote my candidate.
Lying for Hillary. Somehow that fits. Poor Hillary supporters. Living with lies. I only hope we all don't have to live with that. What's worse, what if the polls are correct and she loses in November?
Poor us.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)called her campaign out recently. He repeated this position on Face the Nation and I expect
him to continue to do so. I get pissed off and worried when I see her surrogates
in the press slime him, here on DU they just repeat it.
We're going to try our best to win this for him and they are really worried,
all we heard from the beginning, its over for Bernie. But here we still stand!
longship
(40,416 posts)Do they really think that we are too ignorant to know the facts? Like Bernie invited himself to the Vatican? Or that Bernie ambushed the Pope to get a meeting?
What kind of fucking babbling idiots post things like that?
I guess that would be Hillary supporters. I feel sorry for them if they feel that they need to do such things to win.
BUT WHY???? What do they gain by such flagrant falsehoods? Who would be convinced when the lie is exposed, as it inevitably will be?
WHY?????
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Clinton's lies did not work against Obama, thankfully.
If you look at it from their perspective, they want to win and she lost once
before..that's what worries me about their campaign. Twice will mean they're
finished..politically, there will be no come back. So they're full throttle and
lets remember, they never and I do mean never thought Bernie would be a
threat to her.
longship
(40,416 posts)When Bill imposed himself -- illegally -- into MA polls, I knew that Hillary was pulling out all stops. Now I don't think Big Dawg's sleazy stunt made any difference in the MA primary. But it was as sleazy as it could get. If I were MA AG I would have slapped him hard, albeit quietly. But he would know that if he tried that in any other state, I would not be so quiet.
Electioneering at the polls is universally illegal just about everywhere. Yes, they show an elected official voting for themselves on Election Day. That is universally forgiven. But a candidate's spouse, a former POTUS, with a bull horn out in front of a voter precinct with Secret Service blocking traffic and voters' access to the polls is a different story.
My MA AG would be on the phone with Big Dawg pretty damned quickly. "Sir. You are breaking the law. You need to move your campaign stop away from the polling station and you need to do so now."
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)They keep shifting, and often, if you look at their narratives from the beginning
they're kind of all over the place. Which is another indication how surprised they
were at his success and especially how much money he can raise...the good faith
he created with the American people, young and old has thrown them for a loop.
longship
(40,416 posts)After MI (my home state) I no longer trust the polling. Granted NY is a closed primary, but things are really screwy right now politically. Hillary's negatives are rather large; Bernie's still positive by 9 points (that's national).
The thing is, if Hillary gets the nomination I don't know if she can carry the independent voters in November, which you should know... That means she loses. Bernie carries the independents in all polls, by rather wide margins.
I am very worried about this year's election. We could be utterly screwn.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)NY or its over, well, I don't think so. We've been hearing its over from day one.
Except he'll win Vermont! lol
In solidarity, for the win!
longship
(40,416 posts)Which means no Hillary (she doesn't win).