HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Bernie Sander's Stated Li...

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 12:10 PM

Bernie Sander's Stated Litmus Test For His SCOTUS Picks "Vote YES Overturn Citizens United"

It IS A Matter of TRUST. It is NOT about what they say, but rather what they do or have done...

Because in an election often what one candidate says is echoed by the other... Bernie takes a position... Hillary softly copies it in order to say that we do not differ on that issue.

In this circumstance which is common to THIS campaign, the thinking voter should rely on a candidate's history of keeping his or her word as a proper means of grading the veracity of a given candidates rhetoric/promises.


Bernie emphatically states that "Any candidate that he puts up for The Supreme Court of The United States MUST

publicly be unequivocal in their support to overturn Citizens United."

Hillary... ahhh... not so much... more fluff and promises amendment to overturn.... that would fall under the purview of Congress though she "ECHOES" what Bernie says on SCOTUS appointments.

The question then is one of integrity and the ability of a candidate to keep ones word over time is it not?

So who do you Trust to follow through on Campaign Finance Reform and Citizen's United if elected?

Bernie Sanders
• Collective Actions PAC

• BillionairesForBernie

$8,795

Unaffiliated super PACs are different. The two pro-Sanders super PACs -- Collective Actions PAC and Billionaires for Bernie -- have no ties to Sanders or his campaign.

In fact, Sanders team has asked the unaffiliated super PACs to cut it out. Sanders’ lawyers "have told them to stop," said Michael Briggs, communications director for the Sanders campaign, referring to a cease and desist letter sent to one that formed recently.

Hillary Clinton
• Faith Voters PAC

• Balance of Power

• BillForFirstLady2016

• Priorities USA Action Affiliated Super PAC

$15,674,490

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/sep/30/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-only-presidential-candidates-withou/

Clinton’s pledge to use opposition to Citizens United as a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees echoes the stance taken by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who is challenging her for the Democratic nomination.

“If elected president, I will have a litmus test in terms of my nominee to be a Supreme Court justice,” Sanders said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday. “And that nominee will say that we are all going to overturn this disastrous Supreme Court decision on Citizens United because that decision is undermining American democracy.

"I do not believe that billionaires should be able to buy politicians.”


Can we say a Direct Quote of Bernie Sanders from Hillary Clinton? Yes we can... Yes We Can!

WOW... From The Candidate MOST Favored by.... BILLIONAIRES? By The Numbers... $15,674,490

The point is "How does someone wrap their mind around supporting a candidate whose very words are antithetical even hypocritical (when you look at the CA$H), to her past actions not only with regard to SCOTUS appointments, but in so many other ways as well.

Campaign Finance is just ONE example of many, where flexible rhetoric/promises is what people have come to not only expect from Hillary Clinton but for her supporters to accept or just look the other way.

Hillary ALWAYS has to leave a door open.

The fascinating aspect in all of this is how her supporters have been deluded into accepting such a low bar for integrity from a Presidential candidate that they support. Is it just her pure celebrity? Her actual performance history? What is it?

When you look at her history from a reality based standpoint, cognitive dissonance coupled with celebrity and some degree of nostalgia would appear to provide at least a partial answer?

Thoughts?




36 replies, 2918 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 36 replies Author Time Post
Reply Bernie Sander's Stated Litmus Test For His SCOTUS Picks "Vote YES Overturn Citizens United" (Original post)
CorporatistNation Dec 2015 OP
saltpoint Dec 2015 #1
CorporatistNation Dec 2015 #2
saltpoint Dec 2015 #4
CorporatistNation Dec 2015 #7
saltpoint Dec 2015 #10
Betty Karlson Dec 2015 #17
chervilant Dec 2015 #3
CorporatistNation Dec 2015 #5
99Forever Dec 2015 #6
seabeyond Dec 2015 #8
CorporatistNation Dec 2015 #9
seabeyond Dec 2015 #11
Dont call me Shirley Dec 2015 #20
JudyM Dec 2015 #22
seabeyond Dec 2015 #23
ViseGrip Dec 2015 #28
JudyM Dec 2015 #34
ViseGrip Dec 2015 #25
LWolf Dec 2015 #12
CorporatistNation Dec 2015 #27
brooklynite Dec 2015 #13
Sheepshank Dec 2015 #30
Cassiopeia Dec 2015 #14
CorporatistNation Dec 2015 #15
Amimnoch Dec 2015 #16
Tanuki Dec 2015 #18
CorporatistNation Dec 2015 #21
JonLeibowitz Dec 2015 #26
Uncle Joe Dec 2015 #19
ViseGrip Dec 2015 #24
NCTraveler Dec 2015 #29
firebrand80 Dec 2015 #31
Sheepshank Dec 2015 #32
seabeyond Dec 2015 #33
Gothmog Dec 2015 #35
CorporatistNation Dec 2015 #36

Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 12:16 PM

1. I stand with Ruth Bader Ginsburg and

Bernie Sanders on Citizens United.

Send it packing and tell it to never show its face at our doorstep again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to saltpoint (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 12:17 PM

2. That IS The POINT! A Corporatist Policy That Legalizes The Hijacking of OUR Political System

from US by The Corporation... Bernie Sanders REPRESENTS US... NOTH THE CORPORATION!!!! Again, WHO do you TRUST?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Reply #2)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 12:19 PM

4. Justice Ginsburg is physically frail

and small of frame.

But her mind towers over the conservative majority, on this issue and on others.

I wish she were in her 40s so she could serve much longer. The country would profit from her extended tenure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to saltpoint (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 12:25 PM

7. Hence, All The More Important That Bernie Prevails in THIS Primary!

As Bernie has a proven record of keeping his word...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Reply #7)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 12:44 PM

10. He does. I think he's refreshing

as hell and that if the mainstream media have downplayed his campaign, the generic polling may also have misread his support.

He's a good human. And in politics, a good human's not so easy to find.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Reply #2)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 02:41 PM

17. No corporatist will be trusted; that much is clear. eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 12:18 PM

3. Cognitive dissonance, celebrity AND gender...

A video of HRC's "lies" has gone viral, yet not one of her supporters from this forum has discussed with me what we must do to prevent the Republicans from successfully derailing her campaign using this and similar videos. If she wins the nomination (and, IMHO, that's a BIG if), we will have to contend with these and other issues, including the surveys that show that over 60% of those surveyed associate the word "liar" with HRC. That's just not going to garner support in the GE.

On the other hand, quite a number of people have become energized and engaged by Bernie Sanders' campaign. Senator Sanders has changed the political dialogue in our nation, and for that he has my undying gratitude. His awareness of the destructive and stultifying radical income inequity inflicted upon the vast Hoi Polloi by a handful of corporate hedonists (which for years has been a near constant concern for me and countless other US citizens, forced into marginalized existences by the corporate juggernaut) gives me hope that our nation can recover from this inequity, and provide a meaningful future for our younglings.

I consider this election the most critical one in my lifetime. Our younglings deserve a better future than the one we have thus far -- through action AND inaction -- bequeathed to them. I think Senator Sanders has a clear grasp of what needs to change, and I join the millions of other members of the vast Hoi Polloi in supporting him for our next President of these United States.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink




Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 12:33 PM

8. I would like to hear that he has the same type of litmus test for women's rights. This is why I

 

do not have the same kind of faith in him picking a Supreme Court Justice. Citizens United is so forefront in his consideration with nigh a thought to women's issues, issues that are killing women, I am concerned he may over look it in order to get a judge that will well and securely overturn Citizen United, without much issue for women's lives.

I have yet to hear the dire need that our issues as even a little as important as the $.

Firstly.

Second. Obama and Clinton have been making this statement about overturning Citizen United well before it was ever mentioned by Sanders. It is a Democratic issue. Not a Sanders issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 12:43 PM

9. Watch a Couple of Bernie Speeches, Just Heard Him Discuss Women's Issues in a Recent Speech

There is NOOOO Difference on this issue and Bernie's INTEGRITY e.g, keeping his word is BEYOND REPROACH. Citizen's United is NOT a Democratic Issue but an American Citizen's Issue. The Trump Supporters and Indy's want this decision overturned. Again, the REAL issue is TRUST and INTEGRITY.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Reply #9)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 12:49 PM

11. Citizens United is a Democratic issue that has been discussed by our Democrats well before Sanders

 

ever spoke up.

And... As a woman that is watching our women and girls attacked to the point of jailed and dying, you are damn right I want to hear a statement from him that his concerns at LEAST reach a litmus test, too, especially as he panders for the Teabagger, Libertarian, Republican vote.

87% of the nation wants Citizens United overturned. Not 87% of the nation is on the side of women, hence needing a strong Supreme Court appointment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 03:06 PM

20. Bernie was talking against CU when the case started. He has been supporting women's rights since

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 05:48 PM

22. Do you think that a judge wanting to overturn CU would possibly *not* be pro-women's issues as well?

I want to see judges who will be in both progressive camps and believe that actually overturning CU is a more progressive stance that will likely therefore encompass the women's issues. I'm an ardent feminist, but I am also concerned with the broader issue of restoring real democracy. Know what I mean?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #22)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 06:04 PM

23. Yes. I think there will be candidates that look at this issue more progressively and be able

 

to not see the finer laws in social justice issues to be a core concern or interest for them. Yes. I want to hear that women issues are a litmus test for any candidate. Yes, I do not have the confidence this is a priority for Sanders regardless of his consistent vote when issues are presented to him. He has made clear over the last eight months where his priorities, concerns and interest lie. So, yes, I want verbal confirmation it is that important, as important as Citizen United, that he has a litmus test.

Why was it necessary to say this one out loud?

Yet not a mention for our women's issues?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #23)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 10:20 AM

28. When this battle comes as it will only with Bernie, the masses will tell congress as thier elections

 

will be looming.....every two years folks! Why so much focus on president, while saying they never matter cuz of the congress...yet they are the least 'sexy' race for voters. This is a media propaganda tool, to make the presidential election the big kahuna. It's not.

Do you ever see the usage, or excitement here on DU in a non presidential race? No, you don't and those races are the most important.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ViseGrip (Reply #28)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 11:33 AM

34. Disagreeing with you: there's a lot of interest in congressional races on DU!

There are more folks here during the presidential races and everyone's choosing among the same folks, certainly. But we watch the congressional races closely as well.

Stick around a couple of years and you'll see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #22)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 08:45 PM

25. Both issues boil down to reason...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 01:10 PM

12. If only I thought

she would stick to those positions that she "softly copies" if elected.

I'm not that gullible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 11:21 PM

27. It Is OUR Solemn Responsibility To Attempt To "Inform" The Gullible

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 01:17 PM

13. FYI Hillary Clinton made a CU Court pledge two weeks before Bernie...

...I was there, and I asked her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 10:25 AM

30. Largely ignored, for an inconvenient truth

 

She is no friend of Citizens United. She is embroiled in a law suit with the group, she has pledged that a SCOTUS nomination will have to be in favor of reversing CU earlier SCOTIS decision.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 01:33 PM

14. Hillary Clinton is not a risk we can afford.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cassiopeia (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 01:38 PM

15. AGREED... Her Word Is As Strong Wet Tissue Paper

We Need Integrity in The WH... Bernie offers US THAT!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 02:17 PM

16. Ironic considering both Ginsburg and Breyer were Clinton appointees.

 

Loving all of the aplomb afforded to Ginsburg above, when she was appointed by none other than Bill Clinton.

Sanders has nothing on Clinton when it comes to SCOTUS appointments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amimnoch (Reply #16)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 02:49 PM

18. Even more ironic in that the Clintons were the original targets of Citizens United

and that the infamous Supreme Court case came about as a result of a shadowy right wing anti-HRC movie that was scheduled to air during the 2008 primaries. HRC has consistently denounced Citizens United. I'm surprised everyone doesn't know that.
http://www.businessinsider.com/ap-citizens-united-struggle-is-deeply-personal-for-clinton-2015-9

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amimnoch (Reply #16)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 03:09 PM

21. Bill Clinton Was The Harbinger of The DLC... Which Has Now Matured to A Terrifying Degree...

Hillary cannot be trusted as is demonstrated by her history both past and current. She says whatever is politically expedient at any given time. Making a statement of prerogatives about what would constitute a good candidate for SCOTUS or for Any other position or policy carries no credibility specifically related to her "flexibility" when it comes to "taking" a position on ANYTHING.

Does anyone really believe that she is against the TPP or Keystone XL? I'll leave it there for now only after I mention

Her landing in Bosnia ... "Under Sniper Fire..." and being named by her Mother after Sir Edmund Hillary... who just happened to climb Mt. Everest... SIX FUCKING YEARS AFTER... AFTER... Hillary was born...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amimnoch (Reply #16)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 09:12 PM

26. You're comparing with someone who actually had the opportunity to appoint to SCOTUS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 03:02 PM

19. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, CorporatistNation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 08:44 PM

24. ^^^this^^^ thoughtful post!

 

Thanks CorporatistNation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)


Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 10:49 AM

31. A Judge isn't supposed to comment on a case that may come before them

If a Supreme Court Justice made public statements that they would rule a certain way on a case before they even heard the evidence, that Justice would have a duty to recuse himself/herself from the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 10:52 AM

32. Bernie is good on support. He co-sponsors a lot of bills

 

unfortunatley, he doesn't ever get much done. The typical politician who is big on rhetoric.

Hillary has a plan of action to get rid of Citizens United. Contrary to the lack of homework you did on your OP...Hillary has promised that she would employ the same "litmus" test well prior to Bernie's announcement (funny that Bernie uses the same language) and then go further into talking about Constitutional Amendments.

You would have done better to do some homework before speaking out on what you think Hillary is willing or not willing to do when it comes to leveling out the financial politicial playing field. The multi year, on going law suit with the group pretty much ensures that she has no love for the group or what disasterous effects the SCOTUS decision has had on Democracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 11:27 AM

33. Yes. I trust Clinton more to get it done. Nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Original post)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 11:46 AM

35. Hillary Clinton’s litmus test for Supreme Court nominees: a pledge to overturn Citizens United

The only way to get rid of Citizens United is to make sure that a Democrat wins in 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/05/14/hillary-clintons-litmus-test-for-supreme-court-nominees-a-pledge-to-overturn-citizens-united/

Hillary Clinton told a group of her top fundraisers Thursday that if she is elected president, her nominees to the Supreme Court will have to share her belief that the court's 2010 Citizens United decision must be overturned, according to people who heard her remarks.

Clinton's emphatic opposition to the ruling, which allowed corporations and unions to spend unlimited sums on independent political activity, garnered the strongest applause of the afternoon from the more than 200 party financiers gathered in Brooklyn for a closed-door briefing from the Democratic candidate and her senior aides, according to some of those present.

"She got major applause when she said would not name anybody to the Supreme Court unless she has assurances that they would overturn" the decision, said one attendee, who, like others, requested anonymity to describe the private session.

If the make-up of the court does not change by 2017, four of the justices will be 78 years of age or older by the time the next president is inaugurated.

Clinton’s pledge to use opposition to Citizens United as a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees echoes the stance taken by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who is challenging her for the Democratic nomination.

If the Democrats nominate a candidate who is not viable in the general election, then the GOP will control the direction of the SCOTUS for a generation and Citizens United will indeed be locked in. Right now, it would take the swing of one justice to get rid of CU

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #35)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 11:16 PM

36. Hillary Clinton Being Charactterized As Viable in 2016 is Very Much Open to Dispute...

when the reality of her record is honestly taken into account.

It would be inconceivable to consider Hillary as anything but the Most Polarizing figure in contemporary American politics would it not?... Wait for the Whitewater, Vince Foster up to and including having to put back all the items that she was moving out of the WH in 2001. The list is far too lengthy to enumerate here.

Hillary, a former member of WalMart's Corporate Board... If you want a Democrat to win then a reality check is called for.

Who could deny that Hillary has a longstanding history of having issues with "Getting her facts straight," while also demonstrating what can only be described as having a triangulating character when it comes to taking a political position and sticking to it.

As I noted in the original post, "It is one thing to say something, to softly echo another candidates stated position in order to ameliorate the differences in your platform. But it is something else altogether to have earned the trust of those whom you would deign to serve, based on your record of trust and integrity in the past." That is the difference!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread