[Balco10]

I like this Dwight poster.
Cruz for 2017....

[TheGuesser]

Lots of Bernie's ideas are great, and most people would support them. Support the middle class, grow the middle class and everyone prospers, stay out of the lead in other Country's internal battles, etc. But when those same people are told Bernie is a Socialist, they'll recoil from his ideas, simply because of that label, because the media has them trained.
It's like when Obamacare was introduced. There were surveys which showed when people were presented with what was in Obamacare, and it was called Affordable Care, they supported them. When those exact same ideas were presented and called Obamacare, they rejected them.
The best Bernie's campaign can hope for is to keep Hillary from straying where she wants to go, to the right. So far, he is doing a good job on that.

[ericc]

nitwit, how has that whole trickle down thing worked out? you sound like a right-wing drooler.

thanks for bringing up greece. thats what happens when you deregulate finance and turn wall st loose- they crash the economy. then look what happened- they go with extreme austerity and penetrate things up even worse.

get a clue dumbass. the "free market" is a complete penetrating fallacy.

wonder if this moron knows that in california pre-reagan, anyone could go to a state university for free. taxing the rich, educating people and investing in infrastructure isn't some "socialist scheme", you moron.

That "state university for free" thing is interesting. How did that work? Why would anyone ever stop that and why don't they have it everywhere?

[DwightShrute]

maybe dwight hasn't heard. why do you think you haven't heard the phrase "obama's economy" lately? maybe that's because according to every metric that conservatives use to gauge the economy, things are good.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/01/oba...y-2015-update/

Yes I have heard the phrase "Obama's economy". Who hasn't?

Here are some other phrases I've heard:

• "Santa Claus is comin to town" - I made a list of shit I wanted along with my fellow kindergarteners, addressed it to Santa at the North Pole and handed it to my teacher. I was pretty good that year. Maybe I wasn't as good as I thought I was? Did the teacher get the address wrong? Still one of life's true mysteries.
• Tooth Fairy - I did lose a tooth and I woke up to find a two dollar bill under my pillow. WTF? How did that get there? To this day, I am skeptical about the tooth fairy but that doesn't explain how the money magically appeared while I was sound asleep.
• The Moon is made of cheese - I am 99% sure that it isn't.

Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group If you wanted to use a devious method to deceive people who are trying to differentiate between truth and lies on the Internet how would you do it? If you were extremely devious and had no conscience, you might set up a Web site with some official and unbiased sounding name that claims to be the encyclopedia of truth to be used as a tool for anyone who has the same biased view and wants to make believe to "back it up" with what they would like you to think is "indisputable fact." That is exactly what Web sites like factcheck.org are. They are biased, politically motivated propaganda Web sites, manned and funded by biased political organizations who set up the sites for the sole purpose of deviously "backing up" the political arguments of those who hold the same views that they do. It's kind of like you have a friend who is in on your lie, and you use him to back up your story and don't tell anyone else he is your friend. Just because they use a name that implies unbiased assessments, doesn't mean that they provide them. You can call your Web site anything you want. I can set up a web site called thetruth.org or realfacts.com or stopthelies.org and post any kind of biased political propaganda I want on it. The name means nothing. And in the case of sites like factcheck.org, the name is intentionally misleading and deceptive. But it isn't the only so called "fact check" site that is a fraud. There are others. Think about it. Would you rely on any particular Web site to get the "truth?" Anyone honest would tell you that you should NOT rely solely on them to get your facts. You should get them by considering many different and sources, with different points of view and opinions and arrive at what you believe to be the truth by using your own God given senses. Only con artists purport to be the de facto source of truth. If you look behind the scenes at these phony "fact check" sites, you find that they are funded by organizations with political biases. You must always ask yourself. Who is writing about this so-called "truth." Who funds the site and pays their expenses. What are the origins and history of the funders and who are they associated with. In the case of factcheck.org they receive their funding from the liberal Annenberg Foundation. The Annenberg Foundation was originally founded by Walter J. Annenberg, a conservative who supported Ronald Reagan. However, when Walter Annenberg died, his family took over the management of the foundation and it took a turn to the far left and has ties to radical left individuals such as Bill Ayers and his friend and fellow left wing radical collegue Barack Obama. How is factcheck.org associated with these people: To start, Ayers was the key founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was a Chicago public school reform project from 1995 to 2001. Upon its start in 1995, Obama was appointed Board Chairman and President of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Geesh, that alone connects all three. Well, it branches out even more from there. Ayers co-chaired the organization’s Collaborative, which set the education policies of the Challenge. Oddly enough, Obama was the one who was authorized to delegate to the Collaborative in regards to its programs and projects. In addition to that, Obama often times had to seek advice and assistance from the Ayer’s led Collaborative in regards to the programmatic aspects of grant proposals. Ayers even sat on the same board as Obama as an “ex officio member”. They both also sat together on the board of the CAC’s Governance Committee. Obama and Ayers were two parts of a group of four who were instructed to draft the bylaws that would govern the CAC. Keep in mind that the “A” in CAC is for Annenberg, the owners of FactCheck.org. The funding for Ayer’s projects and those of his cronies was approved by Board Chair, Barack Obama. http://theswash.com/liberty/who-fact...-factcheck-org And by the way, you can find confirmation of the above from many different sources. This is just one. The left leaning bias of the Annenberg foundation has been well established and recognized for many years. Don't believe ANYONE who tells you they have the "facts," and that you shouldn't listen to anyone else. Honest people encourage you to listen to many points of view and decide for yourself. They don't try to prevent you from hearing other points of view. That's the kind of thing that happens in totalitarian societies. A dictator tells you not to listen to anything except the state sponsored sources of information. Only one version of "the truth" is allowed, the dictators "truth." They try to shut off access to anything except the propaganda sources controlled by the dictator and soon the false "truth" is the only "truth" that anyone can hear. Always consult different sources and make your own decisions. Only a con man tries to get you to ignore other sources and only listen to what they have to say. Don't allow these devious people to shut off your mind and fill it with their one sided propaganda. Don't allow them to prevent you from listening to other people's versions of the truth. Anyone who tries to do that is a fake. And most importantly, don't take what any so called "fact check" Web site has to say as "truth." When you drill down to the who actually owns this type of site, you will invariably find connections to the political left. Creating these sites is a tactic the political left likes to use to fool people with gullible minds. Don't be gullible. Consult many sources, with differing points of view, and make up your own mind. Anyone who encourages you not to do that or to rely solely on a so called "fact check" site is a fraud.

1. Study Finds Fact Checkers Biased Against Republicans ...
   www.usnews.com/.../study-finds-fact-checker...
   U.S. News & World Report
   May 28, 2013 - The last is especially interesting since the way fact-checking has been... that PolitiFact.org, one of the nation's leading "fact checkers," finds that ...

Is Fact Checking Biased? - Patheos
www.patheos.com/blogs/.../2012/11/is-fact-checking-biased.html
Patheos
Nov 28, 2012 - CFC is dedicated to providing a conservative alternative to enormously liberal-biased fact checking sites like snopes.com, factcheck.org, and .


The Ten Worst Fact-Checks of the 2012 Election - Forbes
www.forbes.com/.../the-ten-worst-fact-checks-of-the-2012-electio...
Forbes
Nov 5, 2012 - My first interaction with a fact-checker serves as an indication of how ....of the FactCheck.org review, which claims that things are looking up .





http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandimic...please-anyone/

[muldoon]

http://theswash.com/liberty/who-fact...-factcheck-org

And by the way, you can find confirmation of the above from many different sources. This is just one.

Hope so. That link isn't exactly...working

[itchypickle]

Just caught part of her latest 'launch' of her campaign. How many does she need...keeps reinventing it each time.

[Jayvegas420]

90% of your countries population would have their interests better represented by Bernie Sanders while only 10% of you county will have their interests represented by dems or reps.
How does it make sense that Sanders will lose by a landslide. What's wrong with you fukks?

[scumbag]

Lots of Bernie's ideas are great, and most people would support them. Support the middle class, grow the middle class and everyone prospers, stay out of the lead in other Country's internal battles, etc. But when those same people are told Bernie is a Socialist, they'll recoil from his ideas, simply because of that label, because the media has them trained.
It's like when Obamacare was introduced. There were surveys which showed when people were presented with what was in Obamacare, and it was called Affordable Care, they supported them. When those exact same ideas were presented and called Obamacare, they rejected them.
The best Bernie's campaign can hope for is to keep Hillary from straying where she wants to go, to the right. So far, he is doing a good job on that.

naw bro, the best bernie can hope for is to wake the halfwits in the underlined up. eventual these dumb penetrates are going to wake up the the fact that they aren't conservatives, they're democratic socialists too.

we aren't going to hear cries of socialist in the democratic primary. those won't come out until the general. the socialist thing won't "hurt" him until he beats hillary (if he beats hillary).

if your argument is that the fascists ability to control the narrative, through their control of the media, will make it impossible for bernie to win a national election. combined with the fact that the right will spend billions on 30 second attack ads, while bernie might spend 25 million on positive ads about his agenda. i wouldn't disagree.

i'm concerned that bernie could lose to some idiot like scott walker. but the way i see it: if he's got enough juice to get through clinton in the primary, the republicans don't stand a chance.

bernie is it to win it. he's not trying drag clinton left. nobody in their right mind is going to thing that if clinton raises 2b to get elected she's actually going to govern in the interests of working people.

don't forget: the people are hungry for real and substantial change. bernie represents that.

[stevenash]

Carly can run circles around Bernie.

[scumbag]

Yes I have heard the phrase "Obama's economy". Who hasn't?

Here are some other phrases I've heard:

• "Santa Claus is comin to town" - I made a list of shit I wanted along with my fellow kindergarteners, addressed it to Santa at the North Pole and handed it to my teacher. I was pretty good that year. Maybe I wasn't as good as I thought I was? Did the teacher get the address wrong? Still one of life's true mysteries.
• Tooth Fairy - I did lose a tooth and I woke up to find a two dollar bill under my pillow. WTF? How did that get there? To this day, I am skeptical about the tooth fairy but that doesn't explain how the money magically appeared while I was sound asleep.
• The Moon is made of cheese - I am 99% sure that it isn't.

Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group If you wanted to use a devious method to deceive people who are trying to differentiate between truth and lies on the Internet how would you do it? If you were extremely devious and had no conscience, you might set up a Web site with some official and unbiased sounding name that claims to be the encyclopedia of truth to be used as a tool for anyone who has the same biased view and wants to make believe to "back it up" with what they would like you to think is "indisputable fact." That is exactly what Web sites like factcheck.org are. They are biased, politically motivated propaganda Web sites, manned and funded by biased political organizations who set up the sites for the sole purpose of deviously "backing up" the political arguments of those who hold the same views that they do. It's kind of like you have a friend who is in on your lie, and you use him to back up your story and don't tell anyone else he is your friend. Just because they use a name that implies unbiased assessments, doesn't mean that they provide them. You can call your Web site anything you want. I can set up a web site called thetruth.org or realfacts.com or stopthelies.org and post any kind of biased political propaganda I want on it. The name means nothing. And in the case of sites like factcheck.org, the name is intentionally misleading and deceptive. But it isn't the only so called "fact check" site that is a fraud. There are others. Think about it. Would you rely on any particular Web site to get the "truth?" Anyone honest would tell you that you should NOT rely solely on them to get your facts. You should get them by considering many different and sources, with different points of view and opinions and arrive at what you believe to be the truth by using your own God given senses. Only con artists purport to be the de facto source of truth. If you look behind the scenes at these phony "fact check" sites, you find that they are funded by organizations with political biases. You must always ask yourself. Who is writing about this so-called "truth." Who funds the site and pays their expenses. What are the origins and history of the funders and who are they associated with. In the case of factcheck.org they receive their funding from the liberal Annenberg Foundation. The Annenberg Foundation was originally founded by Walter J. Annenberg, a conservative who supported Ronald Reagan. However, when Walter Annenberg died, his family took over the management of the foundation and it took a turn to the far left and has ties to radical left individuals such as Bill Ayers and his friend and fellow left wing radical collegue Barack Obama. How is factcheck.org associated with these people: To start, Ayers was the key founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was a Chicago public school reform project from 1995 to 2001. Upon its start in 1995, Obama was appointed Board Chairman and President of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Geesh, that alone connects all three. Well, it branches out even more from there. Ayers co-chaired the organization’s Collaborative, which set the education policies of the Challenge. Oddly enough, Obama was the one who was authorized to delegate to the Collaborative in regards to its programs and projects. In addition to that, Obama often times had to seek advice and assistance from the Ayer’s led Collaborative in regards to the programmatic aspects of grant proposals. Ayers even sat on the same board as Obama as an “ex officio member”. They both also sat together on the board of the CAC’s Governance Committee. Obama and Ayers were two parts of a group of four who were instructed to draft the bylaws that would govern the CAC. Keep in mind that the “A” in CAC is for Annenberg, the owners of FactCheck.org. The funding for Ayer’s projects and those of his cronies was approved by Board Chair, Barack Obama. http://theswash.com/liberty/who-fact...-factcheck-org And by the way, you can find confirmation of the above from many different sources. This is just one. The left leaning bias of the Annenberg foundation has been well established and recognized for many years. Don't believe ANYONE who tells you they have the "facts," and that you shouldn't listen to anyone else. Honest people encourage you to listen to many points of view and decide for yourself. They don't try to prevent you from hearing other points of view. That's the kind of thing that happens in totalitarian societies. A dictator tells you not to listen to anything except the state sponsored sources of information. Only one version of "the truth" is allowed, the dictators "truth." They try to shut off access to anything except the propaganda sources controlled by the dictator and soon the false "truth" is the only "truth" that anyone can hear. Always consult different sources and make your own decisions. Only a con man tries to get you to ignore other sources and only listen to what they have to say. Don't allow these devious people to shut off your mind and fill it with their one sided propaganda. Don't allow them to prevent you from listening to other people's versions of the truth. Anyone who tries to do that is a fake. And most importantly, don't take what any so called "fact check" Web site has to say as "truth." When you drill down to the who actually owns this type of site, you will invariably find connections to the political left. Creating these sites is a tactic the political left likes to use to fool people with gullible minds. Don't be gullible. Consult many sources, with differing points of view, and make up your own mind. Anyone who encourages you not to do that or to rely solely on a so called "fact check" site is a fraud.

1. Study Finds Fact Checkers Biased Against Republicans ...
   <cite class="_Rm" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 33); font-style: normal; font-size: 14px;">www.usnews.com/.../study-finds-fact-checker...</cite>
   U.S. News & World Report
   May 28, 2013 - The last is especially interesting since the way fact-checking has been... that PolitiFact.org, one of the nation's leading "fact checkers," finds that ...

Is Fact Checking Biased? - Patheos
<cite class="_Rm" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 33); font-style: normal; font-size: 14px;">www.patheos.com/blogs/.../2012/11/is-fact-checking-biased.html</cite>
Patheos
Nov 28, 2012 - CFC is dedicated to providing a conservative alternative to enormously liberal-<wbr>biased fact checking sites like snopes.com, factcheck.org, and .


The Ten Worst Fact-Checks of the 2012 Election - Forbes
<cite class="_Rm" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 33); font-style: normal; font-size: 14px;">www.forbes.com/.../the-ten-worst-fact-checks-of-the-2012-electio...</cite>
Forbes
Nov 5, 2012 - My first interaction with a fact-checker serves as an indication of how ....of the FactCheck.org review, which claims that things are looking up .





http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandimic...please-anyone/

yes the real unemployment rate is higher, but it's always been higher. it's not higher now than it was under reagan or GWB.

if the source is so biased maybe you could find some lies instead of copy and pasting some stupid shit about bill ayers.

[scumbag]

Carly can run circles around Bernie.

why do you like this clown? she was a shitty CEO who outsourced jobs and fired thousands of people while giving herself raises to buy yachts.

But those who watched what Fiorina did to HP – mishandling the $25bn acquisition of Compaq, getting ousted by the board in 2005 with a $21m golden parachute, repeatedly being named one of the worst CEOs in American corporate history – say those supposed accomplishments are already coming back to “haunt” her run for the White House.
“She put herself ahead of the interests of the company and I fear she would do the same as president,” Jason Burnett, a grandson of the late HP co-founder David Packard and a member of the Packard Foundation board of trustees, told the Guardian. “I don’t want her to do harm to this country.”

Under Fiorina, HP revenue more than doubled – from $42bn in sales to $87bn – but net earnings fell to $2.4bn from $3.1bn.The Unlocking Potential Project, Fiorina’s new initiative to help close the gender gap and recruit more independent women backers, describes her achievements at HP as including “market leadership in every market and product category and quadruple cash-flow”. But HP stock tumbled 50% during her tenure – and leaped 6.9% the day after her departure.
Burnett, the Packard grandson, said those financial realities create a dilemma for an ardent advocate of a free market advocate: “What can she say? The market was mistaken?”

One intoned: “As CEO of HP, Carly Fiorina laid off 30,000 workers. Fiorina shipped jobs to China. And while Californians lost their jobs, Fiorina tripled her salary, bought a million-dollar yacht and five corporate jets ... Carly Fiorina. Outsourcing jobs. Out for herself.”

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...ewlett-packard


and what are her positions? let me guess- more tax cuts for the "job creators" and deregulation.

[scumbag]

That "state university for free" thing is interesting. How did that work? Why would anyone ever stop that and why don't they have it everywhere?

how it worked: they taxed rich people so that every citizen of california could go to a public university if they were accepted academically.

why they stopped it: reagan the oyster came in- fired people, called for tuition, lost the battle and instead hiked up fee's to the point where the fee's cost as much as tuition in many states- then by the mid 80's they finally got tuition reinstated.

some argue that he did it at the behest of hoover who saw these college kids as subversives and didn't think they/we should foot the bill to educate people they saw as "revolutionary types".

[Dr.Gonzo]

The working-class has been divided and conquered. We've been divided on all these stupid issues; gays, race, religion, classism among ourselves (which is penetrating moronic). and when you people buy into this shit and vote against your economic interests, you empower the ruling elites, you're basically an uncle tom, the lowest form of life. working-class people, don't be economic uncle tom's, support Bernie.

I find this assertion to be incoherent with the positions of the new left, they are all about identity politics.

Many within the Republican Party have attempted to remove race as a factor and they have been rebuked by the new left, apparently it is racist to say race doesn't matter.

[Dr.Gonzo]

Hilliary will win

Too many lazy , minorities and poor people in usa that like to be controlled

It's a pity Chris Hitchens is dead.

He hated the Clinton's and would have buried her.

[Bluehorseshoe]

He was great on "Face The Nation" just now. He was on Bloomberg TV yesterday and the interviewer asked him "Isn't it true you're for redistribution of wealth in this country?" He responded "You mean like the wealth going from the Middle Class to the top 1%? If so, I'm not."

[itchypickle]

It's a pity Chris Hitchens is dead.

He hated the Clinton's and would have buried her.

There are a few lying in wait to drop bombshells when the timing is right. Saw an interview with Kim Dotcom on Bloomberg's sit down show last week and he made a passing comment about his circle of friends and other hackers....Wiki and Julian Assange have more cables and documents of hers that they didn't dump yet and he seemed legit in his confidence that those guys would target her during the campaign. We shall see.

[DwightShrute]

I like this Dwight poster.
Cruz for 2017....

you are obviously a very highly intelligent person

[stevenash]

Bernie hates rich people.
Bernie wants to take rich peoples tax money and give that money to people that do not pay taxes.

[sourtwist]

Bernie hates rich people.
Bernie wants to take rich peoples tax money and give that money to people that do not pay taxes.

If anyone didn't know what socialism is

[stevenash]

Bernie made a little over 1.8 million for making speeches.
That's a lot of money for talking.
I wonder how much of that speech money he made went to poor people.

[GIVEMETHEMONEY]

yes the real unemployment rate is higher, but it's always been higher. it's not higher now than it was under reagan or GWB.

if the source is so biased maybe you could find some lies instead of copy and pasting some stupid shit about bill ayers.

Thanks for doing this homework scumbag.

See I give credit where credit is due.

[Jayvegas420]

Yea Bernie's corrupt.
1.8 million is a lot compared to the amount Hillary & rep candidates will funnel out of their super pacs .... In Addition to the money they make from speaking appearances.

[scumbag]

Bernie hates rich people.
Bernie wants to take rich peoples tax money and give that money to people that do not pay taxes.

you're a penetrating idiot.

[scumbag]

Bernie made a little over 1.8 million for making speeches.
That's a lot of money for talking.
I wonder how much of that speech money he made went to poor people.

cite dumbass.

[scumbag]

If anyone didn't know what socialism is

we had socialism in the 1950's? you penetrating clown.

maybe you clowns haven't heard- americans support taking from the super-wealthy and using the money for public investment (aka "redistribution of wealth).

[scumbag]

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) netted of $1,867.42 for two paid speeches and a television appearance last year, according to according to financial disclosure reports.
Overall, he had a minimum net worth of $169,025 in 2014, including at least $25,002 in *********** debt, according to recently released financial disclosure reports tallied by The Hill.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/...d-less-than-2k


hey everyone- nash is a lying-ass ************.

[sourtwist]

we had socialism in the 1950's? you penetrating clown.

maybe you clowns haven't heard- americans support taking from the super-wealthy and using the money for public investment (aka "redistribution of wealth).

Yo mama must have beat the shit out of you

[DwightShrute]

Yo mama must have beat the shit out of you

or not enough

[sourtwist]

Lol... I've never seen someone with so much anger and frustration. Definitely some deep rooted issues.

[scumbag]

Yo mama must have beat the shit out of you

keep that oysters name out of your mouth roosterlicker.

[scumbag]

Lol... I've never seen someone with so much anger and frustration. Definitely some deep rooted issues.

i've never encountered such a dullard.

[sourtwist]

Honestly, I've never heard anyone in my life call anyone an oyster. A couple fruitcakes around here throw it around every day. What the fukk?

[sourtwist]

Add dullard to that list

[scumbag]

sourtwat- how does it feel being the elites useful idiot. you have no business supporting conservative economic policy but you drink that shit up over "baby killing" "dem gheys" "dey gonna take my guns". you're a penetrating dumbass. you should support bernie but won't because "socialism".

is there any fascist kool-aid you won't drink? you penetrating simpleton.

[scumbag]

Honestly, I've never heard anyone in my life call anyone an oyster. A couple fruitcakes around here throw it around every day. What the fukk?

see how dumb you are? you probably think i called you a roosterlicker too?