Bernie Sanders is a Communist and an Ignoramus

### He’s not actually democratic or socialist, either…
**(HNewsWire)** Sen. Bernie Sanders pointed the finger squarely at Republicans for kicking up a federal probe into allegations his wife fraudulently obtained a loan for the Vermont college she once led, saying Sunday the Republican National Committee is “very excited” about the controversy. The interview marked the 2016 presidential candidate’s latest effort to downplay the FBI investigation, which reportedly is looking at whether Jane Sanders committed fraud to get a $10 million loan for a Burlington College expansion. Asked on CNN’s “State of the Union” about the case, Sen. Sanders quickly pointed out how the allegations first surfaced. “I know this will shock the viewers — the vice-chairman of the Vermont Republican Party who happened to be Donald Trump’s campaign manager raised this issue and initiated this investigation,” he said. “… I think what you’re looking at is something that [the] Republican National Committee is very excited about.”

Bernie Sanders…

Sanders belief in communism is reflected in the Sanders platform. Even a brief glance reveals his plan to be hopelessly utopian and insane. It will extinguish freedom and shutter businesses and cause widespread suffering especially among the poor people he claims to want to help. It is a program for exporting the best and the brightest to places that appreciate them.

Sanders, like so many of his comrades on the Left, is committing a kind of fraud. It is time for this con man from Vermont, whose ignorance seems boundless at times, to be called out on it.
SANDERS PANS PROBE, BUT ALLEGATIONS ARE SERIOUS
The Vermont independent senator adamantly denied that he or his staff ever reached out to the bank in question to approve any loans related to the transaction – and defended his wife.
“My wife is perhaps the most honest person I know. She did a great job in Burlington College,” Sanders said. “Sadly we are in a moment where parties not only attack public officials, they have to go after wives and children. You know, this is pathetic and that’s the way politics is in America today.”

Left-wingers are students of George Orwell. They understand that language can be used for good or ill; to advance truth or mask it. To undercut the power that that emotionally charged word communism and its variants once had in this country when used by patriots to attack the nation’s foreign and domestic enemies, the Left over time reversed its polarity. Over and over and over again in the culture, leftists drove home the false notion that communists were boogeymen invented by those who wished to control the population through fear. Another way of putting it is to say that the Left marginalized its own word in order to protect the profoundly antisocial idea it represents.
The comments track with others the senator made last week dismissing the probe as a “pathetic” and political attack.
The Republican Sanders referred to in his CNN interview was Brady Toensing, a former Donald Trump presidential campaign official who wrote the original complaint. The complaint, however, raised numerous red flags about the application that might not be so easily ignored, including the sources she listed as proof of the school’s ability to repay.
The loan was arranged by Sanders’ wife when she was president of the now-closed college to acquire 33 acres of lakefront property to improve and expand the small, non-traditional school.
People close to the couple, including Sanders’ presidential campaign manager Jeff Weaver, have confirmed that the independent senator and his wife each have retained a lawyer in connection with the case.
Jane Sanders, college president from 2004-2011, structured the loan deal in two parts — a $6.5 million loan from People’s United Bank to buy tax-exempt bonds issued by a state agency that signed off on the deal and a $3.65 million second mortgage from the Roman Catholic Dioceses of Burlington.
To secure the money, Sanders submitted a spreadsheet that attempted to show the school had $2.4 million in confirmed pledges, grants and other funds to repay the debt.
The document — obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request and listed as exhibit B in the original complaint — showed the money would come from 40 separate entries.
However, each entry was denoted only by initials, under such categories as “friends” or “faculty and staff” and with no additional documentation, according to the complaint filed to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.’s office of the inspector general. Sen. Bernie Sanders pointed the finger squarely at Republicans for kicking up a federal probe into allegations his wife fraudulently obtained a loan for the Vermont college she once led, saying Sunday the Republican National Committee is “very excited” about the controversy.

The interview marked the 2016 presidential candidate’s latest effort to downplay the FBI investigation, which reportedly is looking at whether [Jane Sanders](http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/30/sanders-investigation-bernies-wife-attempted-to-evict-disabled-group-home-residents-report-claims.html) committed fraud to get a $10 million loan for a Burlington College expansion.

Asked on CNN’s “State of the Union” about the case, Sen. Sanders quickly pointed out how the allegations first surfaced.

“I know this will shock the viewers — the vice-chairman of the Vermont Republican Party who happened to be Donald Trump’s campaign manager raised this issue and initiated this investigation,” he said. “… I think what you’re looking at is something that [the] Republican National Committee is very excited about.”

SANDERS PANS PROBE, BUT ALLEGATIONS ARE SERIOUS

The Vermont independent senator adamantly denied that he or his staff ever reached out to the bank in question to approve any loans related to the transaction – and defended his wife.

“My wife is perhaps the most honest person I know. She did a great job in Burlington College,” Sanders said. “Sadly we are in a moment where parties not only attack public officials, they have to go after wives and children. You know, this is pathetic and that’s the way politics is in America today.”

The comments track with others the senator made last week dismissing the probe as a “pathetic” and political attack.

The Republican Sanders referred to in his CNN interview was Brady Toensing, a former Donald Trump presidential campaign official who wrote the original complaint. The complaint, however, raised numerous red flags about the application that might not be so easily ignored, including the sources she listed as proof of the school’s ability to repay.

The loan was arranged by Sanders’ wife when she was president of the now-closed college to acquire 33 acres of lakefront property to improve and expand the small, non-traditional school.

People close to the couple, including Sanders’ presidential campaign manager Jeff Weaver, have confirmed that the independent senator and his wife each have retained a lawyer in connection with the case.

Jane Sanders, college president from 2004-2011, structured the loan deal in two parts — a $6.5 million loan from People’s United Bank to buy tax-exempt bonds issued by a state agency that signed off on the deal and a $3.65 million second mortgage from the Roman Catholic Dioceses of Burlington.

-lkj

To secure the money, Sanders submitted a spreadsheet that attempted to show the school had $2.4 million in confirmed pledges, grants and other funds to repay the debt.

The document — obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request and listed as exhibit B in the original complaint — showed the money would come from 40 separate entries.

However, each entry was denoted only by initials, under such categories as “friends” or “faculty and staff” and with no additional documentation, according to the complaint filed to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.’s office of the inspector general.

But first, some background on Bernie, as he prefers to be called, is in order.

Sanders is on record endorsing plenty of dumb ideas. He wrote in the 1970s that the country was close to experiencing a nuclear apocalypse or “death by poison gas.” He claimed cervical cancer was caused by women not experiencing enough orgasms.

Like the anti-capitalist, anti-American magazine Adbusters, which gave birth to the ultra-violent small-c communist Occupy Wall Street movement, Sanders is opposed to economic growth if it increases economic inequality, at present the number one bugaboo of the Left. When he launched his campaign in May, this economic illiterate blamed the abundance of consumer goods for child hunger. “You don’t necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants when children are hungry in this country,” Sanders said.

He said he wants a “revolution” to reverse what he calls a “massive transfer of wealth” over the last generation from the middle class to the rich. He wants the U.S. to restore the confiscatory 90 percent personal income tax rate for top earners from the 1950s.

“What I think is obscene, and what frightens me is, again, when you have the top one-tenth of one percent owning almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 [percent]. Does anybody think that is the kind of economy this country should have?”

To people like Bernie, the economy is a plaything, a living entity that can be made subservient to government. Operating on the same assumption, communist countries created bureaucratically-administered “command economies” and millions of their subjects starved. The Soviet Union, which was supposed to live forever, disintegrated after just 74 years and all but a few communist countries followed it into the dustbin of history. Nazi Germany’s command economy didn’t save it either; the “Thousand Year Reich” perished after just 12 years.

Bernie’s first lie is that he is democratic. He specifically describes himself as a “democratic socialist,” as if the word democratic somehow makes his belief in socialism more noble. Left-wingers like Sanders play word games, misusing the word democratic deliberately and constantly. If they win, it is a triumph of democracy. If they lose, democracy has been betrayed, greedy capitalists rigged the election, the system is broken, and so on.

And the “democratic” Left won’t take no for an answer. Its activists try to implement their proposals by any means available, regardless of the will of the people as expressed at the ballot box. When leftists lost in California’s Proposition 8 election, the referendum affirming traditional, opposite-sex marriage, they challenged the results in court and publicly hounded those who had donated money in support of keeping marriage an exclusively heterosexual, binary institution. Eventually they prevailed.

Dramatic losses by congressional and state-level Democrats haven’t weakened President Obama’s resolve to preserve his command-and-control government health care scheme; in fact, the historic losses only emboldened him to unconstitutionally change the health care law repeatedly by executive fiat. Eventually he prevailed (or so it appears for now).

Even though the name of the Washington, D.C. football team, the Redskins, is not offensive to the overwhelming majority of native Indians and is not unpopular with Americans generally, the “democratic” Left is pressing on. These fanatical activists don’t seem to understand that the names of sports teams are intended to present a positive image. When those teams are named after a specific social group, it is intended to honor that group. That’s why professional sports leagues have been populated by teams such as the Vikings, Celtics, and Nordiques, and not by teams with names such as the Rapists, Idiots, and Boors. Yet leftists continually call for boycotts and now the Obama administration is telling the Redskins it won’t allow them to move from the Washington, D.C. suburbs to Washington proper unless the name is changed.

Sanders has words other than democratic in his tool box.

He takes the standard left-wing euphemism for government spending, “investment,” and goes a step further. The senator characterizes what he considers to be inadequate levels of government “investment” in a particular policy area as “deficits.” Is this redefinition of deficits imbecilic or diabolically clever? The jury is still out.

As ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, Bernie released a report in January titled “We Must Rebuild the Disappearing Middle Class.” In order to cut the so-called deficits he cares about, it will be necessary for the government to spend trillions of dollars more, for starters. In the report he states:

While we must continue to focus on the federal deficit, we must also be aware that there are other deficits in our society that have been causing horrendous pain for the vast majority of the American people. These are deficits in jobs, deficits in infrastructure, deficits in income, deficits in equality, deficits in retirement security, deficits in education, and deficits in trade. […] At a time when this country has an obscene level of income and wealth inequality, we need a budget that ends the outrageous loopholes that exist and asks the wealthiest people and largest corporations to start paying their fair share of taxes. At a time when real unemployment remains much too high, we need a budget that creates millions of decent paying jobs. At a time when our infrastructure is collapsing, we need a budget that rebuilds our crumbling roads, bridges, dams, levees, water systems, waste water plants, airports, and rail systems.

In other words, American consumers are spending their money on the wrong things, businesses aren’t meeting the real needs of the people, and the government, which is controlled by the big bad corporations, isn’t doing what Sanders thinks should be done.

Government, Bernie maintains, must drastically increase its expenditures on, well, everything. Because government spending shrinks economic activity overall, Sanders’s ideas, if implemented, would not help this allegedly disappearing middle class: they would disappear the middle class.

As the great economist Milton Friedman explained, the government obtains the money it wants to spend in just three ways: taxing, borrowing, or creating new money. Taxing and borrowing subtract from the economy by canceling out the simulative effects of the spending. Creating new money might boost economic activity to an extent but it feeds inflation, and if done on a large scale, leads to disastrous hyper-inflation, with its attendant images of wheelbarrows full of nearly-worthless cash. Ever-expanding government, no matter how it generates the money it claims to need, ultimately leads to ruin.

Bernie’s preferred method of generating revenue for the government is taxation. Boosting taxes beyond perhaps an optimal level, hurts the economy. Although pessimists say it may already be too late for the country, adding trillions of dollars to the nation’s umpteen-trillion-dollar debt will certainly doom future generations of Americans. The U.S. will be unable to repay the national debt no matter how high it raises taxes and when creditors lose their patience will be forced to inflate its way out or simply default. It is difficult to envision the United States surviving as a nation when its government eventually collides with economic reality.

But facts such as the horrendous track record of communist countries are not obstacles to the Left, so Bernie’s affection for a pie-in-the-sky theory popularized by Karl Marx remains undiminished.

To demonstrate that Sanders is a communist and not merely socialist, it is necessary to reflect on what these words mean. Many have said that a communist is a socialist in a hurry. That is one way of looking at it but it doesn’t answer the question of what communism actually is.

Communism is a political movement whose adherents believe that markets are fundamentally unjust and that revolutionary violence should be used to overthrow the existing order and attain a classless society.

Karl Marx thought of socialism as a necessary way station on the road to the supposed  utopia of communism. The question of socialism versus communism is a never-ending debate in academic circles, and it is one that is too involved to get into here. Suffice it to say that socialists and communists all want government or the collective to be master. They all subscribe to bad, un-American ideas, are all in the same ideological camp, and all tend to believe that the ends justify the means. In ideological terms, there is no bright  line or safe harbor that neatly separates socialism from communism. They overlap and blend into each other.

Communism, according to Marx, was a kind of heaven on earth and he was its foremost proselytizer. He argued that human beings could be changed and made to reject their natural, selfish, family-oriented impulses. When this happened, everything would supposedly change for the better. People would voluntarily work hard for a society filled with abundance so there would be no need for governments, taxes, armies, police, courts, and jails. In such a society the principle of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” would prevail.

But before this (impossible) idealized condition can be achieved, there has to be socialism. The working class, according to Marx’s theory, disgusted by the supposed evils of capitalism and the misery they feel it inflicts on them, transforms the capitalist nation in which workers are mercilessly exploited, into a socialist state. Under socialism, in theory the “means of production” — factories, raw materials, machines, the labor force and the system by which it is organized — are controlled by the people through a powerful government. The “relations of production,” that is, the relationship between those who invest in and control industries and those who work in those industries is forever changed. The government steps in on behalf of the people and imposes what some call “economic democracy,” theoretically giving workers control over their workplaces.

Obviously, someone who works for socialism is a socialist; someone who works for communism is a communist. (Someone who joins a political party that advocates communism is a Communist with a capital-C. Someone like Bill Ayers who believes in communism but hasn’t joined a party is a small-c communist.)

Read More At Front Page Mag

HNewsWire Contributed to this article


StevieRay Hansen the Shepherd, analyzing the news and the mainstream media, truth is the new hate speech, journalist are not journalist, their propaganda talking heads. As long as you want to be a part of the crowd, you will not understand the truth.
America is on the road to destruction and we are watching a nation ROT from the inside out.

Copyright 2017©HNewsWire.com

https://www.bing.com/

Comments