Sen. Elizabeth Warren nails Crooked Donald

via of /nymag.com/thecut/2016/05/

It was to be expected that Sen. Elizabeth Warren would lead the charge for Democrats against the Crooked Donald Trump's usurpation of power for his fraudulent enterprises in America and elsewhere. Throughout his campaign, Crooked Donald insisted that the system was rigged against him; now we all know that, yes, the system was rigged, but it continues to be rigged in his favor as he pompously offers to help Hillary Clinton, the most honest among her opponents in the 2016 presidential campaign, restore her reputation.


In the video below, Sen. Warren details Crooked Donald's lies and other misleading statements that he made in the campaign and has since failed to live up to:

The déjà vu flavor of the love affair of Democratic Party lefties with Bernie Sanders

 (Credit: Reuters/Brian Snyder/Dominick Reuter/Photo montage by Salon) (Credit: Reuters/Brian Snyder/Dominick Reuter/Photo montage by Salon)

The current infatuation with Bernie Sanders by the ultra left wing of the Democratic Party has a déjà vu flavor to it. Back in August 2008, I noted here at Katalusis:

Barack Obama gained the rabid support of the Democratic Party’s left wing by promising among other things to first unify the nation and then ride forth to bring peace and harmony to the entire world. He assured his followers that no experience was required to perform this miracle; he would accomplish the feat solely by virtue of his singular personality. As Oprah so eloquently introduced Obama at a rally in South Carolina during the Democratic primary, “He’s the one we’ve been waiting for.”
So far the presumptive nominee, also known as “the one,” has not been able to unify his own party ahead of its national convention this August in Denver – even though his coronation is slated to occur before 75,000 onlookers seated in the Mile High Stadium at Invesco Field.

There are, of course, obvious differences between 2008 presidential candidate Barack Obama and 2016 candidate Bernie Sanders, a registered independent and self-described socialist, currently seeking the Democratic Party nomination. Age and political experience, for one thing – in those respects, Sanders far outweighs the One in his 2008 heyday. But it must be said that Sanders may even surpass Obama in the promises the Vermont senator makes to score big on major Democratic Party issues on foreign policy, environment, same sex marriage, health care, and the economy.

Adding to the déjà vu experience, Sanders, like his predecessor, is taking aim at frontrunner Hillary Clinton. In an attempt to bring giddy left wing Democrats back to earth, a reminder is in order: as soon as Obama secured the Democratic Party nomination, the candidate who presented himself as above politics, suddenly lunged to the center. Obama’s supporters explained their idol’s about face was necessary in order for him to defeat John McCain in the general election.

Does anyone reading this now care that soon after he took office, President Obama, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize for his good intentions, ordered drone invasions of other nations. Keep in mind that our president has seemed unconcerned that innocents, who were not on his secret “kill list,” often died at his behest; they just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

All of the above is to suggest that if he succeeds in winning the Democratic Party’s nomination, Socialist Bernie Sanders may have to do as Obama did in the summer of ’08. Can’t you just see it? Sanders planting his feet firmly on centrist ground and disavowing his long history as a Socialist. “Well,"  his supporters will justifiably ask, “How else can Bernie win the general election?”

Let me suggest here that the Democratic Party might well stick with Hillary Clinton this time around. With Hillary, what you see is what you get, and no about faces will be required in order for her to win the GE. See, folks? What Hillary has got in full measure is authenticity and unlike Obama and Sanders, she doesn’t claim to be above politics.

What's wrong with having two smart people in the White House?

In 2008. a Clinton supporter responded to a criticism of Hillary's run for the Democratic nomination by asking her detractor: “What would be wrong with having two smart people in the White House?”

That question is equally relevant in the 2016 campaign as evidenced by Hillary's in-depth research on policy matters. After reading the article below, one might even wonder who is the smarter of the wedded pair: Hillary or Bill? Personally, I'm very comfortable with the notion of Bill and Hillary discussing national concerns at the dining room table in the White House. Surely the United States would benefit from their combined leadership:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Earlier this year, Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign lost count of its experts.

In the months before she began her second run for the White House, Clinton spent hours quizzing economists, lawyers, educators and activists about everything from executive compensation to the latest research on lead paint.

By last fall, the number of experts she had interviewed hit two hundred and her team stopped keeping track.

"It was like I hadn't left Harvard," Roland Fryer, an economist at the university, said of his meeting with Clinton to discuss successful charter school practices. "It was like talking to a colleague and debating over a cup of coffee."

The Democrat isn't an incumbent, and even with competition that's resolute but still far from offering a serious primary challenge, Clinton has a luxury few candidates enjoy: time to hit the books. The results have started to emerge, and Clinton plans to add to them by releasing a new domestic policy proposal nearly every week this summer.

To be sure, politics are at play as Clinton shapes her agenda. She is sidestepping foreign affairs, which has consumed much of the early debate among Republican White House hopefuls eager to paint the former secretary of state with President Barack Obama's record on the world stage.
She is not yet offering specifics on subjects where consensus among Democrats and independent voters will be harder to find: trade, limits on executive pay, regulating the country's finance industry, raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour.

What Clinton debuts in the coming weeks will form the core platform of her campaign and, should she win the nomination and the presidency, her administration. It's an agenda Clinton describes as that of a "pragmatic progressive," centered on families and focused on economic growth, innovation and income inequality.

Read more: