Hillary's Campaign Repays Bernie For His Positive Message About Her With Typical Clintonian Smears And Innuendos

A few days ago, Rima Regas, writing for Alternet, exposed the ugly truth about the media's relationship with the Bernie Sanders campaign, namely that the mainstream media undermines him at every turn. It will only get worse as more Americans find out about him and his program (primarily via word-of-mouth). Regas asserts that the media is colluding with the Clinton machine. I wouldn't doubt it, not for a moment.

When analyzing the quantity and content of the vast majority of what is said and written about Sanders, his campaign platform, and appearances, one finds a running theme across the so-called liberal media. The New York Times has been called out by more than one analyst, myself included, for its complete lack of serious coverage of Bernie Sanders.

Since joining the staff at the New York Times, Maggie Haberman has written about Sanders on fewer than a handful of occasions, while she has written about the other candidates in the race more often. While it is understandable that Hillary Clinton would be the subject of more numerous articles, it makes no sense for Martin O'Malley to have more articles written about him than Sanders, given the pecking order that emerged right from the start, yet that is what has transpired so far.

In articles that address various aspects of the Democratic side of the primary, Senator Sanders' ability to succeed is always described in doubtful terms, even as Hillary Clinton's troubles in the polls are being described. The New York Times has published fewer than a dozen pieces that are Sanders campaign-specific and each is problematic in the way he is portrayed. Most often, Sanders' age and hair are highlighted, and the incorrect moniker "socialist" is applied. (Socialist and Democratic socialist are not interchangeable terms.)

While the age of a candidate might matter to some when thinking about a candidate's experience or mental capacity, Bernie Sanders is 73, only six years older than Hillary Clinton. His mental capacity has never been a subject of contention. One can only conclude from the repetition of negative references, that writers are attempting to condition readers into thinking of Sanders as the "unkempt" elderly stereotype.

...The most harmful way anti-Sanders media bias has been manifested is by omission. In this respect, the New York Times is joined by the vast majority of the mainstream media in not typically reporting on Sanders, especially on policy. Overall there is  a version of a “wall of silence” built by the media when it comes to serious reporting and analysis of his policies; or when analyzing or reporting on the policies of his opponents, a failure to mention Sanders' in contrast, especially when his is the more progressive position. This behavior hasn't gone unnoticed by readers. You can see numerous complaints from readers about the Times organization's bias toward Sanders. You see it in the New York Times comments section, on the Facebook pages and comments sections of all the major publications, and just about everywhere else. Readers complain about the lack of substantive coverage as well as the bias in what little is published. The Times' Jason Horowitz' piece, "Bernie Sanders Draws Big Crowds to His 'Political Revolution'" drew over 1600 comments, double what the most popular columns usually fetch, with most in protest over the obvious bias of the piece and the Times' egregious lack of coverage of Bernie Sanders news.

Bernie Sanders' campaign has centered around economic justice and his plans to reform banking, taxation, trade, stimulate the economy, promote manufacturing at home, and institute jobs programs. I've yet to see side-by side comparisons of the top two Democratic candidates' prescriptions for the US economy. Most economists and economic writers chose to publish pieces on the Clinton economic plan before she gave her speech. Few wrote about it after, and with reason: The speech didn't deliver much in the way of specifics, and was vague about policies that the voting public expects. Sanders' version of an economic plan has yet to garner serious analysis and discussion. Both Clinton and Sanders base their economic prescriptions on economist Joseph Stiglitz' most recent work, Rewrite The Rules. Paul Krugman has, on three occasions, talked up Hillary Clinton's economic platform, specifically on wages, without so much as mentioning Sanders. Clinton favors a minimum wage of $15 per hour in New York City, and $12 an hour nationally. Sanders has called for the minimum wage to be raised to $15 an hour for everyone. The Times had reported, in May, that Stiglitz' work would likely greatly influence Clinton's platform. If it has, one wouldn't know it, judging by subsequent writings.

While news outlets were reporting on the disruptions of Sanders by the Black Lives Matter movement, few followed up on the story as Sanders began to respond positively. Sanders gave a major speech to the Southern Christian Leadership Conference on July 27. It received very little attention from the press. And within a week, Sanders delivered his answer to Black Lives Matter, by way of a plan. The New York Times has yet to make mention of Sanders' plan for racial justice, link to the senator's website, or publish it outright in an article. And the media has ignored the fact that the racial justice plan has received praise among a number of Black Lives Matter leaders, including activist Deray McKesson... The attacks on Sanders began with a curious refusal to give him any credit for taking part in the civil rights movement, and have been followed up by pieces designed to paint him as dispassionate about human rights and racial justice. Few are those who cite Sanders' longstanding near-perfect rating by the NAACP and ACLU, or mention those, like Senator Cory Booker, who have spoken up in defense of Sanders' lifelong record with the African-American community.

If Politico's Annie Karni is to believed, there's worse headed in Bernie's direction than being ignored by a thoroughly discredited mainstream media. Her article over the Labor Day Weekend, "Hillary Clinton's proxies ramp up attacks against Sanders," is pretty blatant. Daniel Malloy, governor of Connecticut, Texas New Dem Rep. Joaquín Castro (whose unimpressive twin brother Julián was rumored to be on the VP short list), right-leaning Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill and, of course. New York's slimy criminal governor, Andrew Cuomo, are all out on the road knocking Bernie. Cuomo, a DINO who is despised by progressives and good government types and beloved by the banksters, told the media on Thursday, "I don’t think there’s any comparison between Hillary Clinton’s credentials and qualifications and positions, and Bernie Sanders'. I do not see that as a close call."

Bernie's campaign has been unique in that he never utters a negative word about his opponents-- not the Wall Street-owned Clinton nor the buffoonish O'Malley, who, after a career as an aggressive centrist and corporatist, is trying, unsuccessfully, to mimic Bernie's decades in politics. But the Clinton machine is "unleashing the hounds." 

In June McCaskill ran to MSNBC's Republican morning show to argue that Bernie is too liberal to be elected. “I very rarely read in any coverage of Bernie that he’s a socialist,” she said, something she reiterated last month on CNN: "I think the question that some of us have is can someone who has said, 'I'm not a Democrat,' has chosen the title of socialist, is that person really electable?" 

Last month, as Bernie started gaining more and more traction with Democratic voters in key states, Clinton headquarters started pushing surrogates to ramp up the attacks, and even gave the duller ones verbal lines to use against him.

In Iowa, Castro raised questions about Sanders’ relationship with an important voting bloc, the Latino community. “Sen. Sanders has not reached out to the Hispanic caucus in Congress, has not reached out to me,” he said. “He has not visited Texas or the Rio Grande Valley… That’s a bit of a concern.”

...“It’s an anathema to my own, I don’t understand it,” Malloy in August told New Hampshire voters of Sanders’ record on guns and his vote against the Brady Bill. “[Clinton’s] position among the Democrats is a lot more popular than his position. There’s a difference.”

In Sanders’ inner circle, the attacks are seen as a sign of Clinton's weakness. “Secretary Clinton’s campaign is getting a little nervous and sending out these surrogates from the establishment to say things about Bernie, but Bernie is determined to keep the campaign focused on the issues,” said Sanders’ spokesman Michael Briggs.

...“When you’re facing a challenger who is surging and has low negatives, the notion that you would try to put a little cloud over his image makes a lot of sense,” said Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion. “To have Hillary do it would be beyond the pale. But you can’t let Bernie jog around the track by himself picking up support.”

Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf added, “When you attack someone in politics it is a sign of fear. Whether coordinated or not, these supporters of Hillary Clinton now attacking Bernie Sanders are obviously worried about Clinton's future as Sanders popularity and voter interest in him rise.”

Sanders is closing in on Clinton’s lead in Iowa, trailing her by just seven points in the most recent Bloomberg Politics/Des Moines Register poll, 37% to 30%. In New Hampshire,Sanders topped Clinton 44% to 37% among likely Democratic primary voters, according to a Franklin Pierce University/Boston Herald poll.

...On a conference call with reporters Thursday, campaign chairman John Podesta said the time for talking about Sanders would be closer to the first debate in October.That will be “the moment where those issues and the differences between the candidates will certainly be front and center and will be put before Democratic voters in the primary,” he said.

No need to wait. These graphics are very clear about the differences between the two candidates:

This one you have to click on to read carefully

Sunday Morning Update: Bernie Increases Lead Over The Establishment Candidate

This morning the NBC/Marist poll shows Bernie increasing his lead over Clinton in New Hampshire and continuing to catch up with her in Iowa-- whether Biden gets in the race or not.

Bernie Sanders has jumped out to a nine-point lead over front-runner Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, and he's gained ground on her among Iowa voters in the Democratic presidential race, according to a pair of brand-new NBC News/Marist polls.

In New Hampshire, the Vermont senator gets the support of 41 percent of Democratic voters, Clinton gets 32 percent and Vice President Joe Biden gets 16 percent. No other Democratic candidate receives more than 1 percent.

Without Biden in the race, Sanders' lead over Clinton in the current survey increases to 11 points, 49 percent to 38 percent.

In Iowa, Clinton maintains her previous advantage over Sanders-- but her lead has declined from 24 points in July (49 percent to 25 percent) to 11 points (38 percent to 27 percent); Biden sits at 20 percent. View the full New Hampshire poll here.

And the full Iowa polling is here.

Let's make this the most consequential race since FDR beat the corrupt, grasping banksters in 1932. You can do your part right here.