I like Sen. Sanders a whole lot. He understands that it's better to have a Democratic Senator from a state like North Dakota, than a GOP one, even as that Dem. Senator may be a little out in right field. Sanders understands that he's part of a team, and that his causes can only win, if his team wins. The bluer-than-blue Congressman McDermott (D, WA, Sea) is in a similar vein.People's Weekly World had an article before the election about Sanders and how he was an effective politician because he put political realism above idealism and thus we needed to support Obama as the more progressive candidate instead of falling into the idealist/utopian trap of supporting an independent candidate with a maximalist program. Kind of ironic since Sanders is, you know, an independent.
Bullshit..to you AND my friend EatTheRich. And, Sen. Sanders would be the second to call bullshit on you two. Ask Sen. Sanders how he and his party have been so successful, and the first thing he'll tell you is how they've worked so well with the Democrats. Progressivism (progress) -contrary to some current popular wisdom - is about making good things actually HAPPEN. It's not about staking out a righteous fringe, such that when our politic doesn't go along, you can bloviate how smart you are and how evil, stupid, and corrupt everyone else is.That just means that despite his talk (some of which I agree with) Bernie is part of the problem.
And which politicians would that be?The problem with Sanders is his understanding of the English language.
“Through good times and bad, Social Security has paid out every benefit owed to every eligible American”
The fact is that the only reason that statement is true is that Social Security can lower what it owes. So while it may have paid-out every benefit owed. It hasn't paid-out every benefit promised. It is a very meaningless statement considering that Social Security can lower to zero the amount it 'owes'. People who would implement means-testing want to change what the system owes to zero.
So Social Security will pay-out everything it 'owes' forever. The problem is that politicians can change what it owes to zero.
To qualify, I know that Sanders isn't an official member of the Democratic Party. Neverthless, for all PRACTICAL purposes, he's a Democrat. I'm a member of the Democratic team. I like my team. My team is THE most popular one in America's (d)emocratic process. Sanders is an essential member of that team, as is say....Sen. Heitkamp of North Dakota.The Bolsheviks made good things happen, and they were able to do so because they didn't have opportunist alliances with bourgeois parties. Same with the Sandinista National Liberation Front (who made alliances but strategic ones) and the New Jewel Movement.
Are Sanders's politics actually effectual? Or does he cut a Cassandra figure as the left-wing conscience of the Senate?
BTW, I may not agree with him fully but I am still enjoying reading his historic filibuster of Obama's extension of the Bush tax cuts (published as The Speech).