Friday, June 26, 2015

Why Corporate Democrats and the Media Fear Bernie Sanders

The Ready for Warren group has endorsed Senator Bernie Sanders because he has more in common with Elizabeth Warren than any other presidential contender — by far. This may help account for Bernie having the largest crowds and the quickest rise in the polls.

But Progressives are still waiting to hear who Elizabeth Warren will officially endorse for President. An early endorsement by her for Bernie Sanders can put him over the top — and give him a lot more momentum going forward. But what's up between Hillary and Elizabeth? (link, link, link). But if Warren endorses Hillary Clinton, that would be the ultimate betrayal to Progressives — and most likely ruin Warren's creditability regarding her concern for the middle-class.

But so far, on his own, Senator Bernie Sanders has been on fire — and this may have corporate "Third Way" Democrats (The Major Democratic Party Political Machine) and many in the mainstream media worried, because now they have been attacking Bernie Sanders rather than their traditional political enemies, the Republican candidates.

You see this happening all the time, on the media's cable news shows and on their websites (with the exception of Ed Schultz on MSNBC). The "liberal" media wants Hillary Clinton. Period. And because the media is dominated by 6 corporations (controlling 90% of the news), this may help explain why they back Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders (and why we hear so little about Bernie on the local network's news as well) — because they are the CORPORATE media.

Why? One reason might be that Bernie Sanders might raise taxes on these media giants to help pay for things like infrastructure — because, unlike the corporate Democrats, Bernie doesn't hobnob with the media like other politicos and media elites — like they do at the Annual White House Correspondence Dinner. The media is supposed to be monitoring our politicians, not pampering them and partying with them like it's 1929. Bernie Sanders doesn't need to rub elbows with the rich and famous, unlike like Obama and Hillary.

And then there's Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri). She recently said Bernie Sanders was TOO liberal. McCaskill, one of 13 Democratic Senators who gave Obama fast track for trade deals that would offshore more jobs, had complained that the media was being too nice to Senator Bernie Sanders because they weren't calling him a "socialist" often enough. McCaskill must not read very much, because Sanders' political leanings as a "Social Democrat" or "socialist" is often mentioned by the media.

Bernie, who himself has never personally attacked Hillary Clinton or Claire McCaskill, said, “This is the first time I’ve had a colleague attack me. You’ll have to ask Senator McCaskill why.” Claire McCaskill was one of Hillary's first supporters to run for president, and maybe she wants a job in the White House — or as an ambassador — if Clinton is ever elected.

The video below, in Senator McCaskill's own words, aired on MSNBC's We Got Ed — hosted by Ed Schlutz on June 25, 2015 (and includes more on the polls too.)

MSNBC host Chris Matthews, who is also an ardent supporter of Hillary Clinton, jabbed his colleague Ed Schultz for “jumping up and down” for Bernie Sanders. But didn't Obama once give a thrill up Chris Mathews' leg? So who is he to talk?

Claire McCaskill's and Chris Matthews' negative comments about Sanders came after polls showed Bernie making big gains on Hillary Clinton. According to a new CNN/WMUR New Hampshire Primary poll, Clinton now only holds an 8-point edge over Sanders (43% for Clinton to 35% for Sanders). The Hill called this a "statistical tie". But on MSNBC, host Chris Matthews was touting a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll (by Hart Research Associates) that showed Clinton with a 75%-15% lead over Sanders. (Those numbers have been disputed.)

Is the pro-corporate media (with their pro-Hillary pundits) and pro-corporate Democrats afraid that Bernie Sanders might be our next President? And if so, why?

And then there's the very controversial TPP trade agreement. The mainstream media (with the exception of Ed Schultz on MSNBC) has been praising Obama's big win on fast track for trade deals. The corporate Democrats support it, and the corporate media calls those that oppose secret trade deals like TPP as "anti-trade".

Whereas people such as Ed Schultz and Senator Bernie Sanders agree with the majority of Americans polled, who oppose the fast tracking of the TPP trade agreement. When a CBS/New York Times poll asked whether respondents favored or opposed "giving the president authority to negotiate international trade deals that Congress can only approve or disapprove but not change," 55% opposed while 42% favored. We haven't heard about this on Fox, CNN or MSNBC — or if so, very little.

Other than just saying Obama had won a big victory on trade, when fast track recently passed in the Senate, very little was said about it on the cable news channels (again, with the exception of Ed Schultz). So clearly most of the "supposed "liberal" media and most of the non-progressive Democrats back the pro-corporate and pro-TPP Hillary Clinton. And because they're afraid of Bernie, they will want to paint him as an evil "socialist" rather than attacking "trickle-down" Republicans — because these "Third Way" pro-corporate Democrats have more in common with the GOP than they will ever be willing to admit publicity.

That's why: Always vote for Progressive Democrats if you are an average American worker who wants to save and create jobs, and wants to reform the tax code to tax the very rich and large corporations their fair share. Otherwise, just vote for Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush — and get the same old B.S. we've had for the past 30 years or more (Obama caved to the corporations on the TPP trade deal and the Republicans in Congress killed any chance of raising the minimum wage or reforming the tax code).

Media Coverage for Bernie Sanders

L.A. Times: What does Bernie Sanders think of the media’s performance so far this campaign? Barely adequate. The huge speaking fees Bill and Hillary Clinton have accepted? Wrong question, he says; you should be asking why anyone pays them. How about primary debates? Sanders says the entire system should be redesigned to bring Republicans on stage with Democrats ... Sanders went on to express irritation with the way journalists slap the "socialist" label on him, as if his embrace of policies common in the democracies of western Europe makes him a radical outlier. “It is not a radical agenda. In virtually every instance, what I am saying is supported by a significant majority of the American people. Yes, it is not supported by the Business Roundtable or the Chamber of Commerce or Wall Street" ... He suggested that if the media are going to refer to him as socialist, journalists also should affix the label of “capitalist” with every mention of his rivals."

Bill Moyers and Company: "Bernie Sanders’s positions are quite mainstream from the point of view of the stances of the American public in general. Of course, the 1 percent, for whom and by whom most mainstream media report, are appalled and would like to depict him as an outlier."

PoliticusUSA: "Bernie Sanders confirmed that the television networks didn’t want him on their shows because he is a liberal ... It took Bernie Sanders years to get on Meet The Press. Sanders and all other liberals have basically been told that they aren’t welcome on network television. They are rarely invited on the Sunday shows. The Sunday program would rather have John McCain on for the nine thousandth time to babble about why more Americans have to be sent off to war than give liberals a voice in the nationally televised political discussion ... The truth is that the broadcast networks don’t want to hear from liberals. They are owned by corporations. Corporations sponsor the Sunday morning news programs. They don’t want to give airtime to the political leaders who express the real feelings of ordinary Americans. Bernie Sanders is a threat to the billionaire and corporate oligarchs, and his determination to tell the truth kept him off of network television for years."

In this very short 42-second clip at YouTube, Bernie Sanders is interviewed by Bill Moyers and exposes the corporate media’s not-so-secret dirty agenda — that they waste the American people’s time with gossip and distractions, while doing the corporations bidding and avoiding the most important conversations facing America: shrinking wages, jobs being shipped overseas, rising inequality, etc. ((Full interview here))

Can Bernie Win the White House?

Washington Post (June 2015): "The real-world surveys show that the overwhelming majority of presidential candidates are running negative favorability scores. Quinnipiac has Bernie Sanders at +1 overall, although that's partly because 62 percent of Americans say they haven't heard enough about him to form an opinion. The closest Republican is Marco Rubio — the same number of Americans [+ 1 and -1] say they view him positively as those who view him negatively, meaning his score nets out to exactly zero. Clinton and Obama are tied at -4. And it's all downhill from there."

In These Times (June 2015): Good News for Bernie Sanders, Poll Shows 47% of Americans Would Vote for a Socialist

WashingtonBlog (June 2015) “Sanders would probably be able to crush any Republican except perhaps Rand Paul, if he were to win the Democratic primaries. He is already surprising on the upside (though pundits haven’t yet caught on that Hillary’s a dud), and so I am now predicting that Sanders will win, first, the Democratic nomination, and then the White House."

PoliticusUSA (June 2015): Poll Finds 80% Of REPUBLICANS Agree With Bernie Sanders On Citizens United

PoliticusUSA (May 2015): Bernie Sanders Has More Support Than Every 2016 Republican Candidate In New Poll

As an aside:

Huffington Post: “The newest hire for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign is a Washington lobbyist who lobbied the State Department (then led by Hillary Clinton) on behalf of the company seeking to build the Keystone XL pipeline."

As an aside:

From a recent poll on Ed Schultz's website: "Who Do you Trust and Favor More? Bernie Sanders or Claire McCaskill?"

Bernie Sanders or Claire McCaskill?


  1. The Democrats and Republicans were evenly divided on TPP and Fast Track — so why has the media been saying that, on this issue, there was a huge divide among the Democrats? Basically, most Democrats were AGAINST TPP and Fast Track and most Republicans were FOR it.

    I crunched some numbers:

    The same percentage of Republicans in Congress (in the House and Senate) who voted FOR fast track and TPP is the same percentage of Democrats who voted AGAINST it; it's only because the GOP had a majority of members in Congress that they won the vote in both the House and Senate.

    81% of all Republicans in Congress (Senate and House) voted FOR fast track and TPP.
    80% of all Democrats in Congress (Senate and House) voted AGAINST fast track and TPP.

    The Break Down

    SENATE: 87% of Republicans and 28% of Democrats voted FOR fast track and TPP. (including Independents)
    SENATE: 75% of Democrats voted AGAINST fast track and TPP. (including Independents)

    HOUSE: 77% of Republicans and 15% of Democrats voted FOR fast track and TPP.
    HOUSE: 19% of Republicans and 85% of Democrats voted AGAINST fast track and TPP.


    54 Republicans
    44 Democrats
    2 Independents
    100 total votes

    The Senate vote was 60-38 to pass fast track and TPP.

    Of 54 Republican votes: 47 voted "yea" for fast track and TPP, while 5 voted voted "yea", and 2 didn't vote.
    Of 44 Democratic votes: 13 voted "yea" for fast track and TPP, while 31 voted voted "nay".
    Of 2 Independent votes: 0 vote "yea' for fast track and TPP, while 2 voted "nay".


    246 Republicans
    188 Democrats
    434 total votes

    The House vote was 218-208 to pass fast track and TPP.

    Republican votes: 48 voted "nay" for fast track and TPP, while 190 voted voted "yea".
    Democratic votes: 160 voted "nay" for fast track and TPP, while 28 voted voted "yea".

    Below are the Democrats who voted FOR fast track and TPP in both the Senate and House:


    1) Michael Bennet (CO)
    2) Maria Cantwell (WA)
    3) Ron Wyden (OR)
    4) Tom Carper (DE)
    5) Chris Coons (DE)
    6) Dianne Feinstein
    7) Heidi Heitkamp
    8) Tim Kaine (VA)
    9) Claire McCaskill (MO)
    10) Patty Murray (WA)
    11) Bill Nelson (FL)
    12) Jeanne Shaheen (NH)
    13) Mark Warner (VA)
    — Ben Cardin (MD) Changed his vote to nay, but supported the bills.


    1) Debbie Wasserman Schultz FL (DNC Chairperson)
    2) Earl Blumenauer OR
    3) Gerry Connolly VA
    4) Jim Cooper TN
    5) Henry Cuellar TX
    6) John Delaney MD
    7) Eddie Bernice Johnson TX
    8) Ron Kind WI
    8) Rick Larsen WA
    10) Susan Day CA
    11) Sam Farr CA
    12) R Hinojosa TX
    13) Gregory Meeks NY
    14) Scott Peters CA
    15) Jim Costa CA
    16) James Heinz CT
    17) Jared Polis CO
    18) Kurt Schrader OR
    19) Mike Quigley IL
    20) Terri Sewell AL
    21) Suzanne Bonamici OR
    22) Suzan DelBene WA
    23) Ami Bera CA
    24) Beto O'Rourke TX
    25) Derek Kilmer WA
    26) Brad Ashford NE
    27) Kathleen Rice NY
    28) Donald Beyer VA

  2. Blow-hards and liars (and especially blow-hards who lie a lot) get much more coverage by the mainstream media than other serious political candidates.

    Washinton Post: Chris Christie is being taken seriously by the mainstream media

    After 14 years of watching Christie, a warning: He lies

  3. PDATE

    Thomas Baekdal: In US and Europe, we are currently experiencing an increase in people fearing for their own safety, causing virtual security apps to prosper (like this one), and the reason can only be attributed to the media's almost 'reality show'-like focus on all the bad things that happens. But if you look at the crime data for people being assaulted in the US, you will find that you are 23% safer walking the streets of the US today than 10 years ago. And it's not just for assault. You are 28% less likely to be raped. Your car is 41% less likely to be stolen, and you are 9% less likely to be robbed in your home. We are creating irrational fear through the media. A level of fear that simply wouldn't exist if the media instead focused on covering crime based on the overall trends. The world we live in today is much safer than anything we have ever had. But the media insist that everything is going to shit. And our politicians are trying to win votes based on those same fears.

    PR people often use the non-fact-checking British press to plant positive stories about their clients, which then become the basis for fact-checking (based on ‘published reports’) in the U.S.”

    Where our media is headed.

    In December 2014, Vox re-published 88 old stories on their website. They got 500,000 readers.