Bernie in Trouble?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-06-2017, 06:32 PM
RE: Bernie in Trouble?
(25-06-2017 06:27 PM)GenesisNemesis Wrote:  I'm joking, hence the 1's. Big Grin

Ok, sorry, but in our current climate, and dealing with the countless people I do every day on line, text is hard to interpret sometimes.

I am sick of the economic right shitting on workers claiming that any question to the pay gap or cost of living means we advocate Stalin's Russia or Castro's Cuba.

Sorry about that. Glad to realize you were just joking.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Brian37's post
25-06-2017, 07:18 PM
RE: Bernie in Trouble?
(25-06-2017 06:32 PM)Brian37 Wrote:  
(25-06-2017 06:27 PM)GenesisNemesis Wrote:  I'm joking, hence the 1's. :D

Ok, sorry, but in our current climate, and dealing with the countless people I do every day on line, text is hard to interpret sometimes.

I am sick of the economic right shitting on workers claiming that any question to the pay gap or cost of living means we advocate Stalin's Russia or Castro's Cuba.

Sorry about that. Glad to realize you were just joking.

Yeah, I'm no friend of capitalism. :P

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2017, 07:52 PM (This post was last modified: 25-06-2017 08:53 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Bernie in Trouble?
Did Bernie ask the Russian oligarchs to fund him, after he took 6 major businesses into bankruptcy, and NO ONE would lend money to the shady crook who repeatedly walked away from his obligations, and then promise to change US policy to benefit those corrupt oligarchs ? If he did this, he's not even in the ballpark of the crookery and corruption of the Trump crime family.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Bucky Ball's post
25-06-2017, 08:00 PM
RE: Bernie in Trouble?
(25-06-2017 07:52 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Did Bernie ask the Russian oligarchs to fund him, after he took 6 major businesses into bankruptcy, and then promise to change US policy to benefit those corrupt oligasrchs ? If he did this, he's not even in the ballpark of the crookery and corruption of the Trump crime family.

Oh so if it's SANDERS, then you MAKE EXCUSES FOR HIM?? TYPICAL LIBERAL!!!1111

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like GenesisNemesis's post
25-06-2017, 10:26 PM
RE: Bernie in Trouble?
(25-06-2017 06:32 PM)Brian37 Wrote:  Ok, sorry, but in our current climate, and dealing with the countless people I do every day on line, text is hard to interpret sometimes.
Reminds me of a tee shirt I saw yesterday:

I SEE DUMB PEOPLE
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes mordant's post
25-06-2017, 10:32 PM
RE: Bernie in Trouble?
I never had any intention of voting for Bernie, but this would still be a tiny bit disappointing. He was the only potential candidate that had a chance that I actually liked as a person, even if I did find him a bit naive.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes yakherder's post
26-06-2017, 05:23 PM
RE: Bernie in Trouble?
One important point-- the article in the OP seems to be entirely based around the fact that the Sanders have hired lawyers. That's something you would have to be insane not to do, regardless of the truth or falsity of the allegations against you.

The probe stems from a long-running series of allegations by Brady Toensing, a Vermont attorney who was the chairperson of then-candidate Donald Trump’s campaign in the state in 2016.

Toensing claimed that Jane Sanders, when she was president of the now-defunct Burlington College, lied about pledged donations to the school in order to obtain a loan to purchase a $10 million property owned by the Catholic Diocese of Burlington as part of an expansion of the college.

In a 2016 letter to the U.S. Attorney for Vermont, Toensing wrote:

In 2010, Jane Sanders, then-President of Burlington College and wife of United States Senator Bernard Sanders, orchestrated the college’s purchase of the Diocese’s headquarters property for $10 million dollars. To finance the purchase, Ms Sanders sought approval from the Vermont Educational and Health Buildings Finance Agency (VEHBFA), which voted to issue tax exempt bonds for the transaction. Those bonds were purchased by People’s United Bank in the form of a $6.5 million dollar loan to the college along with a $3.65 million second mortgage from the Diocese.

The loans were contingent on the college providing proof of a minimum commitment of $2.27 million in grants and donations prior to the closing…As the college president, Ms. Sanders submitted what she claimed was evidence of $2.6 million in confirmed grants and donations…
The letter claims, however, that the forthcoming funding cited in the loan application did not materialize.

At the end of the fiscal year 2011 (six months after closing on the loan), Ms. Sanders had collected only $279,000 in donations, which was less than 25 percent of the $1.2 million Ms. Sanders guaranteed to the bank that she would have collected in that year.

…By the end of fiscal year 2014, of the $2.6 million Ms. Sanders guaranteed to the bank as confirmed donations, the college had collected only $676,000, a shortfall of almost $2 million. As a consequence, the school failed to meet required loan benchmarks and defaulted on its loan from the Diocese.
Jane Sanders resigned as president in the fall of 2011, and the small liberal arts college shut down in May 2016.

The federal investigation could include an examination of actions taken by Bernie Sanders. According to Politico, a second letter sent to Justice Department officials in early 2016 alleged that the Senator’s office had improperly pressured the People’s United Bank to issue the loan at the heart of the case. However, the Washington Post reported that Bernie Sanders is not personally under investigation.

We requested comment from Bernie Sanders, through his U.S. Senate Office, and Jane Sanders, through her non-profit organization the Sanders Institute. Neither had responded by press time.

On 24 June 2017, the Vermont Senator played down the story in comments made to the Washington Post.

"This was a story that just, amazingly enough, came out in the middle of my presidential campaign, initiated by Donald Trump’s campaign manager in Vermont. That’s about it. I don’t think it’ll be a distraction."

In an interview with Vermont TV channel WATX in May 2017, Sanders called the allegations “nonsense,” but appeared to confirm the investigation and declined to comment any further.

Sanders: "This implication came from Donald Trump’s Vermont campaign manager, from Donald Trump’s campaign manager in Vermont. Let me leave it at that, because it would be improper at this point for me to say anything more."

WATX reporter Kyle Midura: "You've previously said it was nonsense."

Sanders: "Yes, it is nonsense. But now that there is a process going on, which was initiated by Trump’s campaign manager – somebody who does this all of the time, has gone after a number of Democrats and progressives in the state – it would be improper at this point for me to add any more to that."


http://www.snopes.com/2017/06/26/sanders...stigation/

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
08-07-2017, 06:43 AM
RE: Bernie in Trouble?
GOP Lawmaker: Allegations Against Jane Sanders Were ‘Hearsay’

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like unfogged's post
08-07-2017, 07:29 PM (This post was last modified: 08-07-2017 07:34 PM by WhiskeyDebates.)
RE: Bernie in Trouble?
(25-06-2017 06:17 PM)Brian37 Wrote:  
(25-06-2017 03:22 PM)GenesisNemesis Wrote:  That's what you get with SOCIALISM!!!1111

BULLSHIT....

Our species existed long before any written religion or nations. Our species has AWAYS socialized. If we didn't we would not be the successful species we are now. Our species socializes regardless of politics or religion economic views.

Government in our modern language era has ALWAYS socialized. Since our species learned how to farm we became more stationary, then our social norms became local and we ended up defending those local SOCIAL NORMS.

Russia and Iran and North Korea and Iran are no different than the west, in that their populations socialize and pool resources to keep stability.

THE bullshit mistake you are making is that you equate "capitalism" as being a form of government and it IS NOT.

China is a closed system compared to the west, but their Communist party CAPITALIZES off of the social attitude of selling cheap goods to the rest of the word through cheap labor. And do not blow smoke up my ass by saying American corporations don't try to reduce labor costs.

Gadaffi was a billionaire who owned stock in GE. Fidel Castro upon his death had an estimated personal wealth of $800,000,000 dollars.

WE ALREADY HAVE SOCIALISM IN AMERICA.

Since Reagan, the GOP has learned to sell the bullshit idea that if you just take less and let the rich write the laws everything will get better. Our "socialism" is at the corporate level. Corporate America socializes the wins among the top when they win, and socialize the losses on the tax payers when they lose.

Listen moron, after WW2 we had unions, investment, and higher taxes in the rich, and THAT created Americas economic boom.

So when you say socialism hurts us, I AGREE, CORPORATE SOCIALISM DOES.

There was a reason the founders wrote the First Amendment, it was intended to be AN ANTI MONOPOLY LAW.

So all I am hearing is "Unless you let the rich dictate to us and write all of our laws, you are a COMMIE'

Nope fuckface, that is not what the left wants and that is not what western pluralism means.
[Image: Boy-That-Escalated-Quickly-Anchorman.gif]
That's a whole lot of unprovoked ranting stupidly for a single sentence.

Let's say he was being serious, he wasn't clearly, but let's say he was. What did he actually say?

"That's what you get with SOCIALISM!!!1111"

A single sentence, just one. And from that, you were able to ascertain that he:
  1. Is trying or will try to claim American corporations don't try to reduce labor costs.
  2. Is a moron.
  3. Is a fuckface.
  4. That he has in any way expressed what the left wants.
  5. That he thinks capitalism is a form of government.
  6. That he thinks the rich should write all our laws.
  7. That the rich should be able to dictate to people.
  8. That if you don't agree with him you are a communist.

All of that from a single fuckin' sentence. Please tell me how the absolute motherfucking hell you got all of that from a single fucking sentence.

I have said it before and I will say it again Brian: you are an irrational, aggressive, dangerously hyperbolic, bigoted, hysterical bully. You think that anyone who disagrees with you, even if it's a single sentence, is deserving of abusive language and toxic behaviour and should be shouted down and you have done this again and again and again here.
If you, as an individual, are so incapable of rational and reasonable political discourse that a person can not utter a single fucking sentence you disagree with without you vomiting abusive and caustic shit on them, while jamming a half dozen strawmen into their mouths as you did above, then you should probably remove yourself from the discourse because you are harmful to open discourse. The toxicity you have displayed again and again and again on this forum is not only vulgar in the extreme it is damaging to free and reasonable debate and you consistently drag everyone down when you open your mouth on politics.
The number of reasonable threads you have entered on this forum that you have perverted into polarised shouting matches is not in single digit territory. Take a fucking breath, calm the fuck down, and talk to other adults like a fucking adult and not a petulant child throwing a temper tantrum 'cause people don't agree with you. You do not help your position when you act like a cunt.


I like debating, it's honestly one of my favourite hobbies, and if you were LITERALLY ANYONE ELSE on this forum I'd sit down go through what you just wrote point out where I think you are wrong, how you are wrong, and why I disagree with you int hose areas where I do. But I won't with you. Why the fuck would I? There is no value in trying to have a discussion with a person as hysterical and irrational as you and you have seen some of the insane people on this forum I have debated. You are the single most unhinged member on this form and we have people who think they are gods in waiting.

Jesus fuck I should not have to say this to another goddamn adult, let alone for like the 4th fucking time. Censored

Edit: I've been accused of the whole "angry atheist" shit in many of my debates but I can't think of a time I've actually been legit angry. I am angry now. This fucking shit is exactly why it's almost impossible to have any kind of substantive conversation on politics, and it pisses me off.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WhiskeyDebates's post
08-07-2017, 07:52 PM
RE: Bernie in Trouble?
(08-07-2017 07:29 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(25-06-2017 06:17 PM)Brian37 Wrote:  BULLSHIT....

Our species existed long before any written religion or nations. Our species has AWAYS socialized. If we didn't we would not be the successful species we are now. Our species socializes regardless of politics or religion economic views.

Government in our modern language era has ALWAYS socialized. Since our species learned how to farm we became more stationary, then our social norms became local and we ended up defending those local SOCIAL NORMS.

Russia and Iran and North Korea and Iran are no different than the west, in that their populations socialize and pool resources to keep stability.

THE bullshit mistake you are making is that you equate "capitalism" as being a form of government and it IS NOT.

China is a closed system compared to the west, but their Communist party CAPITALIZES off of the social attitude of selling cheap goods to the rest of the word through cheap labor. And do not blow smoke up my ass by saying American corporations don't try to reduce labor costs.

Gadaffi was a billionaire who owned stock in GE. Fidel Castro upon his death had an estimated personal wealth of $800,000,000 dollars.

WE ALREADY HAVE SOCIALISM IN AMERICA.

Since Reagan, the GOP has learned to sell the bullshit idea that if you just take less and let the rich write the laws everything will get better. Our "socialism" is at the corporate level. Corporate America socializes the wins among the top when they win, and socialize the losses on the tax payers when they lose.

Listen moron, after WW2 we had unions, investment, and higher taxes in the rich, and THAT created Americas economic boom.

So when you say socialism hurts us, I AGREE, CORPORATE SOCIALISM DOES.

There was a reason the founders wrote the First Amendment, it was intended to be AN ANTI MONOPOLY LAW.

So all I am hearing is "Unless you let the rich dictate to us and write all of our laws, you are a COMMIE'

Nope fuckface, that is not what the left wants and that is not what western pluralism means.
[Image: Boy-That-Escalated-Quickly-Anchorman.gif]
That's a whole lot of unprovoked ranting stupidly for a single sentence.

Let's say he was being serious, he wasn't clearly, but let's say he was. What did he actually say?

"That's what you get with SOCIALISM!!!1111"

A single sentence, just one. And from that, you were able to ascertain that he:
  1. Is trying or will try to claim American corporations don't try to reduce labor costs.
  2. Is a moron.
  3. Is a fuckface.
  4. That he has in any way expressed what the left wants.
  5. That he thinks capitalism is a form of government.
  6. That he thinks the rich should write all our laws.
  7. That the rich should be able to dictate to people.
  8. That if you don't agree with him you are a communist.

All of that from a single fuckin' sentence. Please tell me how the absolute motherfucking hell you got all of that from a single fucking sentence.

I have said it before and I will say it again Brian: you are an irrational, aggressive, dangerously hyperbolic, bigoted, hysterical bully. You think that anyone who disagrees with you, even if it's a single sentence, is deserving of abusive language and toxic behaviour and should be shouted down and you have done this again and again and again here.
If you, as an individual, are so incapable of rational and reasonable political discourse that a person can not utter a single fucking sentence you disagree with without you vomiting abusive and caustic shit on them, while jamming a half dozen strawmen into their mouths as you did above, then you should probably remove yourself from the discourse because you are harmful to open discourse. The toxicity you have displayed again and again and again on this forum is not only vulgar in the extreme it is damaging to free and reasonable debate and you consistently drag everyone down when you open your mouth on politics.
The number of reasonable threads you have entered on this forum that you have perverted into polarised shouting matches is not in single digit territory. Take a fucking breath, calm the fuck down, and talk to other adults like a fucking adult and not a petulant child throwing a temper tantrum 'cause people don't agree with you. You do not help your position when you act like a cunt.


I like debating, it's honestly one of my favourite hobbies, and if you were LITERALLY ANYONE ELSE on this forum I'd sit down go through what you just wrote point out where I think you are wrong, how you are wrong, and why I disagree with you int hose areas where I do. But I won't with you. Why the fuck would I? There is no value in trying to have a discussion with a person as hysterical and irrational as you and you have seen some of the insane people on this forum I have debated. You are the single most unhinged member on this form and we have people who think they are gods in waiting.

Jesus fuck I should not have to say this to another goddamn adult, let alone for like the 4th fucking time. Censored

Edit: I've been accused of the whole "angry atheist" shit in many of my debates but I can't think of a time I've actually been legit angry. I am angry now. This fucking shit is exactly why it's almost impossible to have any kind of substantive conversation on politics, and it pisses me off.

I have him on ignore for this reason, and other heinous behavior concerning his stance on guns. Shit, I just dropped that dime, didn't I?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: