Not a surprise to most of us..

Look, I have a degree of respect for the people that backed Bernie Sanders.  At a minimum, these are people that recognized that something was terribly unwell with politics in D.C. and with the Democrat party.

The Bernie supporters that voted for Trump after the nomination was stolen from him, I respect more.  The Bernie supporters who then voted for the very woman that stole the nomination from Bernie..   Well, I’ve shown enough easily discoverable evidence that Hillary Clinton is a monster that should be launched into the sun that you can probably guess my opinion of Bernie supporters that voted for Hillary.

Bernie is not an “outsider”.  He’s not against the establishment.  His status as an independent is nothing more than a shrewd political move.  He endorsed Hillary Clinton despite his complete awareness of her monstrous nature and theft of the nomination.  He owns three homes.  He’s been parroting the Russian/Trump meme that he knows is not true.  He is not a socialist, he is a communist and there is a wealth of information available to prove it.

And aside from some token resistance under procedural grounds, he’s not exactly coming out strong against Trump’s foolhardy attack on Syria:

Bernie Sanders And “The Resistance” Slink Away On Syria – Michael Tracey

“Raising concerns” is not tantamount to an expression of clear, articulable opposition. One can support the Syria strikes, and yet be “concerned” about the second-order effect of them, and the escalated conflict that might result. (See Schumer, Chuck, who rushed to endorse Trump’s attack within hours, only to then follow-up later with expressions of “worry” as to the long-term consequences).

Similarly, Sanders expressed “concern” about the potential consequences of Trump’s attack, but not opposition to the act itself. Unlike Schatz, Paul, and Gabbard, he has not rejected on principle the utility of American military force in this circumstance. He merely wants Trump to “explain to the American people” what is to be achieved by the strikes, and to put forward a plan for a “political solution.” Neither of these demands constitutes first-order opposition to the strikes: They are second-order worries. Even Sanders’ procedural complaints don’t signify opposition — unlike Kaine, he doesn’t declare the strikes “unlawful,” he merely says that “Congress has a responsibility to weigh in,” which virtually no one in that body would disagree with.

Then, on Meet the Press this past Sunday, Sanders went further: “We eventually have got to get rid of Assad,” he told Chuck Todd, thereby endorsing the underlying logic of regime change. His only apparent recommendation is that this particular regime change be effectuated multi-laterally, i.e, the US should enlist some Middle Eastern autocrats to help out.

Advertisements