Democratic Party liberals have made quite a show of their desire for Bernie Sanders to leave the presidential race so that, the story goes, Hillary Clinton can focus her energy solely on the looming threat of Donald Trump.
"In fact, this form of liberalism — one that has, over the past several decades, moved ever closer to the open arms of business — has often made these problems worse."
Not to mention the open business of arming many of the most objectionable regimes in the world.
Seems to me some of these top down "liberal think tanks " should be reclassified as stink tanks as they are full of poop
Democratic party regime change fanatics believe US propaganda about endless war etc. Their party amounts to 30% of the voting public.
Bernie attracts most of the 40% of independents, almost half of the democrats, and maybe one fourth of republicans.
The New York Times is petrified because Bernie supporters outnumber all other political parties combined and this has happened despite corporate propaganda outlets very low and negative coverage of his modern campaign.
The real question is, Will Bernie seize this opportunity? Modern students of democratic theory see autonomous democracy as separate from government and telling government functionaries what to do. More than one path to the presidency is still open for Bernie Sanders.
Bernie may actually be the last gasp of democracy at the national level in the USA. The fact that his popular movement drew so many new people into the electoral process, willing to play the game one more time, was surely noticed by the MSM, both major corporatist parties, and the PTB (Powers That Be) as in... the banks, the big corporations, the military and "security" alphabet organizations, etc. They will never let it happen again. Martial law will be declared first.
Schmitt sez: Sanders is "still running the Windows 95 version of progressive politics ..."
... in a piece written with a charcoal stick on a wall of the cave known as the New York Times.
" Bernie may actually be the last gasp of democracy at the national level in the USA."
Why is it that so many people are incapable of seeing beyond the candidacy of one man?
Surely you're aware that there are others who have been saying the same things as Sen. Sanders and more for many decades. Socialists, Social Workers', Green Party, and others have been trying to get this message out since before I was born (in the last FDR administration.) Ralph Nader, Dennis Kucinich and JIll Stein are a few of the more recent advocates for the kinds of policies Sanders has been espousing.
There have always been and there will always be candidates like Sanders, yet they are always written off as losers and spoilers, and those of us who support them by voting are told we are "throwing our votes away," or helping to elect the horrible Republican opponent.
So now, along comes a Democrat saying all the things some of these others have been saying for nearly a century, and suddenly we have the last chance to save democracy?
I think what you really mean is that Sanders has given us the last chance to save the Democratic Party.
Well, some of us have believed for a long time that there is nothing there worth saving. Maybe it's finally time to move on, and unite all those who are really progressive either under one of the existing banners, or even a new one, but one that is independent of the corporations and the billionaire-run war machine. That could be the Greens or someone else, but it will not be the Democrats.
It's time to stop believing that only a Democrat or a reformed Democratic Party can save us and take this energy in a new direction.
Bernie has thrown open the gates of the castle and let the peasants in. He has exposed the depth of conspiracy and corruption both in the party and in this election. If he wasn't as visible as he is I would worry about his physical well being. These people don't play and now that they are exposed they are more dangerous.
It's starting to show up everywhere that the elections was stolen, even on Yahoo front page. This isn't over no matter how much Hillary would like to act as if it is. With all this coming out about her their plans are getting disrupted and they have no one left but Bernie if she goes down. Not a welcome prospect for their neoliberal plans.
We'll see a lot of these hit pieces about Bernie, they are the only way they can hit back. I am anxiously awaiting Wikileaks emails and the FBI to do it's job.
This failed attempt to discredit Bernie by the NY Times is in keeping with keeping the 1% happy ( ads for 20,000 watches and expensive clothing/trips are nauseating)
The NY Times is complicit in the promotion of illegal invasions/wars---remember Judith Miller?
The NY Times is complicit in the killing of life on this planet due to human induced climate change----here are 2 of many examples:
p.s. and don’t forget Paul Krugman
Keen analyses, Caroline & Jackie.
I thought the following 2 insights from this well-written article should be repeated:
"Self-styled progressives are willing to go to great lengths to defend status quo liberalism — represented by think tanks like the Center for American Progress — from its critics on the left, often resorting to misrepresentations, baseless character assaults, and outright falsehoods in the process."
I've been pointing out for some time that just as it no longer became necessary to ROB a bank to gain access to phenomenal sums (since one could set up a bank, and through that agency print money OUT of thin air); In parallel, rather that oppose those who represent genuinely Progressive values, insidious political operatives have used that "brand" to self-identify and thus destroy it by essentially robbing it of meaning.
When food is no longer food and so-called free elections are controlled spectacles, what can be genuinely termed authentic? So much is facade, smoke and mirrors, counterfeits, and "substantially equivalent" to... as the gen- tech promoters argue.
"And tirades, I think, is an accurate portrayal, as many of the critiques put forward by the anti-Sanders crowd are not critiques at all. Rather, they are polemics filled with musings on the motives of Sanders and his supporters — musings that are rarely grounded in data."
The character assaults on Sanders are to be expected. What they portray is precisely what happens to truth, fairness, and accuracy in reporting when a nation's media comes under private corporate control. It's no different than what many of us were taught as school-children when Russia's press was then mocked.
It patently obvious what goes on here. Ms Clinton is one of the most terrible candidates ever to be offered up by the powers that be in a US election. She is a cesspool of rot and corruption. Any that care to scratch beneath the surface will see she is greedy,dishonest , a warmonger, holds the bulk of her supporters with contempt, is a tool of the 1 percent and a sociopath. Now there certainly examples of other bad candidates from Reagan to Obama, from Bush to Nixon , but their own flaws and failings were hid away in the election campaigns. They were not as obviously on display and none of them were under criminal investigation at the time.
The contrast of a Sanders against her helps to reveal this plethora of flaws in her character making her totally unsuitable to lead. In order to deflect the attention away from her, the media tries to diminish Mr Sanders.
Don't forget they were cheerleaders for the Iraq war also - pushing every mistruth to come from the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld gang.
It's still going on. They don't show trending but Clinton, who is now 10 points ahead, has been creeping down while Sanders slowly moves up.
The NYT and WAPO (if still credible ) might better spend their time looking into the files of hacked DNC emails and files. Hopefully someone will publish Wikileaks findings.
"I think what you really mean is that Sanders has given us the last chance to save the Democratic Party." No way is that what I mean. Neither of the two corporatist parties is ever going to be anything but an empty vessel devoid of any real populist appeal. It was Bernie's campaign that showed how rigged the system is against change. The Democrats were definitely running scared, though, and will NEVER let it happen again. They will conspire with the MSM to suppress all future challenges to the New World Odor. Like I said, there will be martial law before anyone like Bernie is elected president.
I'm reminded of how the Republicans closed down the election of Bush Gore in 2000. One more nasty habit the Clinton establishment adopted. Just as the Republican Party is not the party of Lincoln; the Democratic Party is no longer the party of Roosevelt.
Yes . . thus the reference to Judith Miller (but one example as you point out) who is now happy in the welcoming arms of Fox News.
I think the women (and men) models the Times uses for their "designer clothing" ads are about 17 years old and most anorexic. It's all interrelated; rampant capitalism, empire (and with that regime change/war),objectification, greed ------all epitomized by the NY times.
Then we have Bernie: calling out the crisis that is AGW, income inequality, evils of wall street, oligarchy all while proudly sporting a messy "doo" and wearing a suit (while everyone else was in tuxes) to the white house correspondents dinner!
Ooops. Missed that.
The NYT is making a false claim that Sanders or his supporters are "preventing Clinton from focusing all her energy on Trump" seeing how we have all witnessed her focusing solely on Trump for at least the past three weeks. She hasn't let Sanders thwart that effort so far and there is no evidence that she will allow Sanders to thwart her focus on Trump in the future.
I think your point (ny times as cheerleaders for war)needs to be repeated -----so thank you!!