Suggestion for Bernie

as not being sane, by any measure; I'm not sure it would advance Bernie's
cause for him to state his case that way.

Mainly, I'd be concerned that it would trigger a barrage of red herrings and
distractions from his focus on breaking up biggest most corrupt banks, lifting
SS cap, rebuilding infrastructure, etc. He's had to work very hard to stay "on
message" as the media keeps trying to pull him into saying something, anything
but what his actual message is, and needs to be.

We must break apart the "Greed is Good" brainwashing. Re-define it as a mental illness/addiction that society understands.

We need a societal change so we don't raise our children to worship disturbed Banksters, but shun them.

Society has accepted Casino gambling addictions as a illness needing treatment, so why not somehow piggyback with this?

We have Capitalism as unsustainable, Democratic Socialism as the right way. Why should we only break up the banks and let all the mentally disturbed people with money start-up new scams.

So how do we make greed an illness requiring treatment?

This safe-way concept is great for conservatives looking over there shoulders but not for a revolution. His message can and will expand so why not include a piece of this?

to a point. Bernie probably would agree too .. over a beer,
but probably not wise to say it on the M$M evening news.

Ruining the American economy is not a sane act; Play with the wordage on this until it plants a seed.

Crazy (unbalanced), greedy Banksters; Play with the wordage on this until it plants a seed. Bernie already uses "greedy Banksters"

Banksters are gamblers, who gamble with American lives; let's work on this one.

etc.

.."Sanders blistered what he called 'a casino-type capitalism', which is out of control, where the people on top have lost any sense of responsibility for the rest of the society." He praised the contributions made by innovators and entrepreneurs but said in some sectors, such as banking, the biggest firms had amassed so much market power to inhibit competition. One top priority, he noted, would be changing the campaign finance system that had developed since the Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court freed wealthy donors of some constraints previously in effect."
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/05/26/bernie-sanders-questions-morality-of-us-economy.html

So, yes. I don't think Sanders disagrees with you, nor to I, when it comes to being disgusted by the speculative casino-like machinations of Wall St.

Beyond that -- in terms of publicly labeling Wall St. greed-heads as dangerous psychopaths who will be provided with gambling addiction treatment services, psycho-meds, etc. -- not so much.

I think it's totally A-OK for us to agree to disagree.

I've heard through a local Sanders supporter that the Clinton campaign is doing that. If so, that's one thing she is doing right.