Polls in Wisconsin are starting to show a tie. But it would appear that Gwen (The media did a great job reporting WMDs in Iraq) Ifill and Judy Woodruff couldn’t seem to find many Sanders supporters to occupy the seats of the latest Democratic debate. Pretty quick I found myself paying more attention to the audience than the debaters because I noticed something didn’t seem right — there appeared to be very few Bernie supporters there.
I’ve seen all the debates and been to a few Bernie rallies and I know precisely what will rouse his peeps up out of their chairs. It never fails.
But tonight, one would think that the Democrats of Wisconsin just weren’t interested in Bernie’s economic populism. In fact, one would think it just fell flat.
Except that it never falls flat. In every crowd I’ve seen, and in every debate, Bernie’s message of jobs for our people, free college, health care for all, and banksters going to jail, wins the day.
Every single time.
Until tonight. Tonight, Bernie seemed to be surrounded by enemies. It reminded me of Kennedy’s last visit in Dallas, when he was speaking to local business men who hated him and supported Johnson. Except the people in Dallas were warmer. And a lot less canned.
It was almost comical to watch the spectacle. Hillary’s really been impressive in previous debates with a glow about her and a big smile that projected “winner.” But tonight she more resembled the orphanage scold from Oliver Twist, projecting anger, condescension and even hatred towards her opponent. She scored some points, but not without once again betraying her uninspiring position as the ‘No’ candidate.
But being the Debbie Downer didn’t stop her devoted fans from cheering like she had just saved a baby dolphin from the fishing nets.
“Every economist I’ve talked to said we can’t afford your single payer health care plan Senator….”
“Hooray, Cheers, Hell yeah, we can’t afford it!!!!”
It was silly. And yet, whan Bernie would pitch a zinger, “Crickets.”
Public television and radio have long been one of the best weapons unleashed upon the American Left. I know, I used to be an avid viewer/listener.
Unfortunately, and I’m ashamed to say this, it took me watching McNeil Lehrer, and All Things Considered, and all the other Public broadcasting news outlets reporting on the criminal, constitutional crisis inducing, presidential election stealing era of George W Bush as though it were business as usual, nothing to see here, move along, before I realized that these guys are not what they seem. They’re clearly here to deceive liberals, To normalize the monstrous. To rationalize the unspeakable. And most importantly, to condition liberals to care about everything but what Wall Street is doing to our economy. Oh, and that war is necessary.
Gwen Ifill once hosted a big show on whether the TV media was negligent in it’s coverage of the selling of the Iraq war.
But guess what the verdict was? That’s right, according to Gwen and Company, the TV news media did a fine job of covering the lies that lead to the passage of the vote that started the Iraq war.
I remember it well. It was one big, bizarre, ass kiss to CNN, MSNBC, ABC and CBS.
So I almost opted out of the debate tonight. I figured they would try and fuck Bernie Sanders in ways the other networks would never attempt, under the cover of liberalism, but even I was surprised at how blatantly they did it.
Not only was the audience rigged, with most like a bunch of part operatives from who knows where, but it struck me that some of Hillary’s answers flowed so quickly and seamlessly from the question, that I suspect she had them up front.
If that sounds far fetched, please keep in mind that she’s been busted feeding the press questions before.
The excerpt below is from emails acquired by Gawker in which a Clinton campaign PR hack Philippe Reines “blackmails” a reporter Marc Ambinder into writing favorably (and disturbingly precisely) about a Hillary speech.
On the morning of July 15, 2009, Ambinder sent Reines a blank email with the subject line, “Do you have a copy of HRC’s speech to share?” His question concerned a speech Clinton planned to give later that day at the Washington, D.C. office of the Council on Foreign Relations, an influential think tank. Three minutes after Ambinder’s initial email, Reines replied with three words: “on two conditions.” After Ambinder responded with “ok,” Reines sent him a list of those conditions:
From: [Philippe Reines]
Sent: Wednesday, July 15 2009 10:06 AM
To: Ambinder, Marc
Subject: Re: Do you have a copy of HRC’s speech to share?
3 [conditions] actually
1) You in your own voice describe them as “muscular”
2) You note that a look at the CFR seating plan shows that all the envoys — from Holbrooke to Mitchell to Ross — will be arrayed in front of her, which in your own clever way you can say certainly not a coincidence and meant to convey something
3) You don’t say you were blackmailed!
One minute later, Ambinder responded:
From: Ambinder, Marc
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 10:07 AM
To: Philippe Reines
Subject: RE: Do you have a copy of HRC’s speech to share?
got it
Ambinder made good on his word. The opening paragraph of the article he wrote later that day, under the headline “Hillary Clinton’s ‘Smart Power’ Breaks Through,” precisely followed Reines’ instructions:
When you think of President Obama’s foreign policy, think of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. That’s the message behind a muscular speech that Clinton is set to deliver today to the Council on Foreign Relations. The staging gives a clue to its purpose: seated in front of Clinton, subordinate to Clinton, in the first row, will be three potentially rival power centers: envoys Richard Holbrooke and George Mitchell, and National Security Council senior director Dennis Ross.
I’m sorry. But this is not just going to be Hillary versus Bernie. This is going to be the entire establishment against Bernie. He’s going to need our help.