The Establishment's Sanders' Hysteria, False Consciousness - And Political -Ideological Ignorance

One example of the batshit insane hysteria surrounding Sanders, which conflated his democratic socialism with communism.

"Because we are perpetually battling for self-preservation. Life has become a kind of brutal combat to the death. For jobs, for healthcare, for money, for the tiniest shreds of resources necessary to live. We wake up and fight one another for these things, over and over again. That is what our lives amount to now — gladiatorial combat. Meanwhile, elites and billionaires sit back and enjoy not just the spectacle — but the winnings.  People who are battling for self-preservation can’t take care of anyone else. If I ask the average American to consider paying for their society’s healthcare,education, elderly care, childcare, increasingly, the answer is: LOL.   

What does the average American aspire to be, do, have? To be rich, powerful, careless, selfish, and dumb, now, mostly. We don’t, as societies or cultures, value learning or knowledge or magnanimity or great and noble things, anymore. We shower millions on reality TV stars and billions on “investment bankers.” The average person has become a tiny microcosm of the aspirations and norms of elites — they’re not curious, empathetic, decent, humane, noble, kind, in pursuit of wisdom, truth, beauty, meaning, purpose. We’ve become cruel, indecent, obscene, comically shallow, and astonishingly foolish people. That’s not some kind of jeremiad. It’s an objective, easily observed truth. "  -  Umair Haque, essay, 'This Is How A Society Dies'

"I personally believe Bernie is as far left as you can go, but hey, it's for the greater good!"   Jessica Slovak, an RN who caucused for Bernie Sanders 4 years ago, as reported in Denver Post, Sunday,  Feb. 16th, p. 5A.


"Someone has to stop Bernie Sanders!"  "No one is doing enough to stop Sanders!"   "Republicans are salivating over a Sanders' nomination!"   "Bernie is going to burn the house down!"

It appears now that the  mind virus of Sanders hysteria is almost as prevalent as Co-VID 19, the coronavirus. The litany of anti-Sanders complaints from the pundits, last night post-debate and in the papers, has my head spinning. Like, WTF happened to the WILL OF THE PEOPLE?  Does that not count any more in a supposedly democratic process?  If the votes and will of the majority of primary voters are with Sanders then what the hell are all these gloomy Gusses and Nervous Nellies yelping about?

Oh it's the socialism thing!  Americans are terrified of socialism and will never vote for a socialist candidate!  Says who?   And if there are Americans that "think" that way, 75 percent according to Claire McCaskill and one debate moderator (Chuck Todd) then it shows their political education is wanting and they need to be more fully informed. I would add that IF indeed so many 'Muricans are averse to the democratic socialism advocated by Bernie Sanders then they are victims of false consciousness.   And only such victims could be swayed during a hard campaign when Dotard begins to call Sanders a "communist".

How did so many become victims of this mindrot? I suspect much of the malady derives from the victims'  own economic and political ignorance.  For example, as a first test, ask ten Americans off the street what economic  class they belong to. Nine of ten, or more likely all ten, will say "middle class" - even if unemployed for a year, on food stamps, and about to have a home foreclosed.

A more concrete study of class in relation to income level was a (2003) survey conducted by The Economic Policy Institute. It asked generally where people thought they were in the economic spectrum: upper 1% (earning $320,000 year or more); upper 5% (> $80,000) or where?

A full 19% in this random survey claimed they were in the privileged class of the top 1%. A virtual statistical impossibility in any random study.  If those pathetic stats don't show clearly how too many Americans aspire to be "rich and powerful" - like the elites (as pointed out in the essay This Is How A Society Dies'  by Umair Haque (see top quote) I don't know what does.  Our very materialist aspirations corrupt and undermine our rational, realistic assessments of our own station.  And paves the way for the brutal, incomprehensible way we distrust and seek to denigrate others - especially immigrants - who threaten (we believe) a piece of our pie.  By extension it shows also how so many could have voted for a plutocratic con man swine like Trump.

In fact, internal survey cross-check questions on income category showed many of these working at a little above minimum wage, and even the highest were at barely $44,000/yr. Nowhere near the 1% threshold! Other commentators on this study (e.g. Froma Harrop, Ellen Goodman) pointed to this ignorance as a basis for supporting such crap as the Bush tax cuts, which overwhelmingly favored the rich elites. Thus:

A) They didn't know where they themselves fit, and indeed inflated their wealth and positions and

B) they actually believed they'd be millionaires one fine day and be able to partake of the tax cuts. (Or 'death tax' benefits).

In fact, they were deliriously out of touch with reality. As author Michael Parenti has noted ('The Dirty Truth') 94% of all wealth comes by way of inheritance, not paid work. So, they are fooling themselves. Unless they have a rich elder relative hidden away with a vast fortune, they'd be better off thinking they may have to work until they're 70 or 80 and even that may not be enough to stay in place.

But sadly, the Overclass and its minions (including the GOP Party, a basic "sub-division") consistently get working class folk to act against their own vested interests by distracting them with moralism ploys - raising "moral" issues like abortion, porn, gays and what not - just long enough so that many working class voters keep they're eyes off the ball when election day arrives. Then these workers wonder why they never get ahead. 

 Trump used the same ruse or con (in 2016)  in getting working class voters to believe he'd deliver millions of jobs for them, or let them keep old line,  retreating fare like coal mining.  They fell for this ploy hook, line and sinker and even appear in some states (e.g. Wisconsin)  prepared to fall for it again.  Guess they never heard of the old 'fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice, shame on you' etc. routine.

 The  combination of economic ignorance and falling prey to moralism ploys  has paved the way for Overclass propagandizers to succeed in sowing false consciousness.  First we need to know what false consciousness is.

'False consciousness' is the term given to a false information system that's been absorbed in part or whole, either osmotically or via direct mental ingestion, by the majority of a population. It has specific uses in our Corporatocracy to mislead a population about how things actually work, and also on the basic economic and other data which are used to formulate policies. I touched on a number of the inherent economic lies and disinformation ploys in my earlier blog:

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2011/09/economic-lies-distortions-and.html

But realize these distortions are just the tip of the iceberg.

For example, the effects of language and PR debasement of reality extend to the whole political system which can best be described as one of legally sanctioned, corporate-fuelled bribery. While citizens do get to vote every two or four years, in reality it's only to choose their next set of Overseers, errr....Overclass masters.

In the case of the current resistance to Sanders, it's clear a lot of it is led and promoted by cable news gasbags...errrr... anchors with nothing more edifying to do, e.g.

2020 Elections | Bernie Sanders | Media

The Resistance to Sanders Is Led by Cable News Anchors

Thus one reads from the above blog post:

"The real resistance by Democratic leaders, of course, is to its own base of anti-Establishment voters, candidates and office-holders, a resistance that's been too well documented to be repeated here. One of those candidates, Bernie Sanders, is right now making a credible threat to take over the Party in the name of that anti-Establishment base — an outcome that all donor-defending Democrats look upon with horror.

But what can they do, aside from the odd and opportune tilting of the balance? If they declare outright war — instead of the obvious but pretend-covert war they're now waging — they risk making a mockery of their own battle cries, Blue No Matter Who and Unity Unity Unity.

Enter the next line of defense, the Party-supporting mainstream press, including and especially cable news channels CNN and MSNBC. The real resistance for now against the Sanders-led revolt against the swamp in which they all swim has been handed off to Chuck Todd, Jake Tapper and all the colleagues and "analysts" who occupy million-dollar seats on TV's cable news stations."

Two other examples on display, this time from MSNBC,  of the anti-Sanders hysteria from the same piece:

"Chris Matthews waxed apoplectic about what electing a socialist could mean for America. “I have an attitude towards [Fidel] Castro,” he said. “I believe if Castro and the Reds had won the Cold War there would have been executions in Central Park, and I might have been one of the ones getting executed. And certain other people would be there cheering, OK?” Matthews’s colleagues pointed out that Sanders was more of a Danish type of socialist than a Castro type of socialist, but to little avail.

Two days later, James Carville, Bill Clinton’s former campaign guru, went on Morning Joe to rant about how a Sanders nomination would bring about the apocalypse. Literally. “The only thing between the United States and the abyss is the Democratic Party,” he said. “That’s it. If we go the way of the British Labour Party, if we nominate Jeremy Corbyn, it’s going to be the end of days.”

So when I hear comments like that offered by Real Clear Politics' pundit A.B. Stoddard last night, that "no one tried to stop Bernie", it tells me she has zero comprehension of the democratic process.  Also, that she is more an overclass tool than an objective observer. IF a majority of primary voters opt for Bernie then, why the fuss? That is the will of the plurality of voters at least for now,  so deal with it.

The hair on fire screeching by the cable gasbags is also egregious because it doesn't recognize that socialism isn't the problem - but rather the 'dog eat dog' form of capitalism that is holding away.  The one so many in our land now embrace, and described to a tee by Umair Haque in the top most quote.  The Democrats, supposedly the party of the little guy and greater social justice, had better grasp this and pull their heads out of their collective,  residual "overclass' asses before Super Tuesday.  By which I mean finally acknowledging Sen. Sanders has every right to be the front runner and without being vilified, i.e. being accused of "burning down the house", demolishing any chance to remove the human excrement from the WH -  or any other bullshit. Especially if he has a plurality of primary voters backing him.

Ezra Klein on Real Time a week ago put it best when he noted the best way to get the Trumpists and Repukes "on their back feet " in defensive mode.  That is, for the Dems to make their campaign about Medicare, Social Security and Trump's record in attempting to destroy them. This, coincidentally, is also Bernie Sanders forte given he is the best fighter for these already established and accepted forms of socialism.  Klein also agrees this motif- and Sanders' consistent associated refrains to do with it -  may be the best way to render Doturd a one term wonder.

Get the hell behind him, Dems, or get the hell out of the way!


See also:

2020 Elections | Bernie Sanders | Democrats

Sanders Gives the Democrats Legitimacy

And:

Bernie Sanders

Paul Krugman on This Bernie Sanders and Socialism Thing

And:

2020 Elections | Democrats

Here Are 3 Winners and 3 Losers from the 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary Debate

Trump Proves He's No Different From A Mafia Don After His Witness Intimidation Attack On Marie Yovonavitch

You can't make this stuff up even if you dreamed up the hokiest political thriller for a novel. A two bit, con man criminal and  human sewage - who somehow got shoehorned into the presidency  - but now finds himself in the cross hairs of impeachment, suddenly transmutes into his own worst enemy.  Even as Marie Yovanovitch was testifying about “the smear campaign against me,”  Trump hurled new insults at her on Twitter, in real time.

As I watched this brave professional's shoulders slightly sag and her complexion blanch at the insults, I realized then this animated 2-legged turd called Trump had finally succeeded in hanging his miserable ass in real time.  All the Republican efforts to defend this slime now went into the dumpster, i.e. in efforts to combat the narrative that Giuliani had mounted a smear campaign against her, given she left her post in April.  So how could she have first hand knowledge of the plan?   It was all "hearsay"  all over again.

And then Donny Dotard delivered his twitter smears before nearly 15 million live viewers, e..g.

“Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad. She started off in Somalia, how did that go? Then fast forward to Ukraine, where the new Ukrainian President spoke unfavorably about her in my second phone call with him. It is a U.S. President’s absolute right to appoint ambassadors.”

Forget about trying to twist the language into literal pretzels to now absolve him because of unclear "intentions" - those were supremely evident  for all to see - especially given Ms. Yovonavitch was in the middle of being asked about the smear campaign-  led by Giuliani, two of his associates — Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, who have since been indicted — and the right-wing news media.  Hell, even FOX News' Chris Wallace was taken aback ruminating on whether the Repuke defenders like Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan,  would be able to protect their master with any kind of straight face.  Another pundit on CNN said "It would have been better, more strategic, for Trump to have not interjected himself. The GOP planned defense that Yovonavitch could not have first hand knowledge was just destroyed in real time in an impeachment hearing."

But as Chris Matthews pointed out, this orange derelict is a guy who always wants to "punch back"at anything remotely threatening his fragile ego or wannabe autocracy.  After all, what was this POS doing during Monday's hearing? He was entertaining one of his favorite autocrats in the White House: Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

 As Nicole Wallace chimed in:

"Donald Trump is now squarely on the side of the corrupt actors in the Ukraine."

Justifiably then, Democrats accused the degenerate  presidential pretender of real-time “witness intimidation” and tampering,  suggesting it could form the basis for an article of impeachment.  Well, indeed it is impeachable and committed in front of millions on live television. At the very moment she was testifying about how Trump had denigrated her, the repulsive POS was assailing Ms. Yovanovitch, insulting her diplomatic career and reasserting his right to remove her, prompting Democrats to suggest he was trying to intimidate a witness.

Earlier Ms. Yovanovitch said she was "devastated"  when she came under fire from Trump’s  fake personal attorney and Trump's reprobate spawn Don Jr.  last spring.  But she then admitted she was even more stunned in September this year when she learned that Trump himself had disparaged her in his now-famous July 25 phone call with Ukraine’s president.

Again, let's remind ourselves all of this was out in the open, especially  given the transcript of the actual  referenced phone  call eventually made its way into daylight.   So the deflecting issue of "second hand" information and experience  ("She wasn't there for the actual phone call") was basically irrelevant - points I also made cogently in my post yesterday re: Jim Jordan's idiotic "it's all hearsay" babble.  

“It was a terrible moment,” she told the House Intelligence Committee on the second day of public impeachment hearings. “A person who saw me actually reading the transcript said that the color drained from my face. I think I even had a physical reaction. I think, you know, even now, words kind of fail me.”

In regard to the Reeps' claim that "a president can appoint anyone he chooses and you serve at his pleasure", Yovanovitch did not disagree - only observing he could have simply dismissed her from her position as opposed to also smearing her reputation, then insinuating his added  threats, i.e. she "was going to go through some things,”.   A comment that Ms. Yovanovitch told the committee had taken her breath away when she read a reconstructed transcript of the call.

But let's remind ourselves again this guy we have for a president is really little different from a Mob boss.  He believes he can dispense threats - not even veiled (like to the whistle blower)- and not have any kind of payback.  Worse, the maggot thinks he has "free speech" to bark out these threats when anyone with sense  - as former Sen. Claire McCaskill pointed out - knows that means you are not entitled to abuse that power. Like tweeting out witness intimidation in the middle of a damned impeachment hearing when the witness is there delivering her testimony.

What I liked most about the hearings, apart from Marie Yovanovitch's courage in the face of all those cameras and the intimidating circumstances, was Adam Schiff's willingness to bang the numerous Reeptard efforts to disrupt (with spurious 'points of order') into oblivion. 

Bang! Bang! Bang! 

Mr. Schiff's gavel repeatedly went down just before the witness read her opening statement - as Reep after Reep tried to sow chaos. 

'Moron of the day'  award today goes to Utah's  Reepo Chris Stewart as he opened his line of  supposed questioning by grandstanding, i.e. blathering:

"For three years we've heard these outrageous and frankly unbelievable accusations about Russian collusion that we now know are absolute nonsense! "

All of which is somewhat amusing - and pathetic - given the fact that less than four years ago he had compared Trump to Italian dictator Benito Mussolini.  This according to Richard Gehrke in The Salt Lake Tribune 2 days ago.. We also now know, after the Mueller report (Part I) release, e.g.

www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

 The accusations made weren't "nonsense"  at all. Indeed, the failure to launch a coherent and compelling impeachment proceeding at that time (largely owing to AG William Barr's whitewashing of the report using his own 'summary') - actually emboldened the Traitor-in chief to then use the subsequent  Ukraine bribery ploy to try to take down Biden.  If he got away with it once  with the Russkies (targeting Hillary Clinton)  he could do it again, right?  Only this time using Ukraine to dig up dirt on Joe Biden.. Same M.O.,  different country. Same objective: steal an election.

All in all it was a good day for the good guys and we can only look forward to the day, the hour, when the whole corrupt Trump Imperium collapses as even more professionals from the State Dept. and other agencies have their say.

Update: Nov. 16

As might be expected Trump's slimey toad enabler (William Barr)  has now seen fit to defend his master, invoking the discredited myth of the "unitary executive".  That is, that a president has almost absolute power and the Article I powers of congress are subjugated to the executive.  Thus, wielding this bunkum, he asserted at  a Friday  night Federalist Society spiel (NY Times today):

 "Trump’s opponents 'essentially see themselves as engaged in a war to cripple by any means necessary a duly elected government,'. 

 Uh no, you arrogant, obtuse, animated offal. We see it as a constitutionally sanctioned effort to check and remove a pestilence and traitor - who was NEVER "duly elected".  He was shoehorned into power with the help of Vladimir Putin and the Russians.  (Which the Mueller report makes clear and which you sought to dilute with your whitewash summary.)

MY advice? Go suck a raw root, Trump's toad.

The fat toad added: "While the president has certainly thrown out the traditional Beltway playbook and punctilio, he was up front about what he wanted to do and the people decided they wanted him to serve as president,”

No, Toady, I didn't "decide" nor did more than 67 million other people-  who voted against Trump-   so don't conflate "the people".  Especially  given the majority non-Trump voters led to his popular vote minority. So don't try to turn a turd into a Tootsie roll.   Now, go back to your toad hole and cease interjecting yourself into a justifiable process to correct what went awry back in 2016.  The swine has abused his powers with a clear bribe in order to damage Biden and help his reelection, and now he's got to pay!

See Also:

• William Barr is racing to deliver a report that blows up the impeachment inquiry--and everything else

Excerpt:

"Attorney General William Barr is racing to complete a new “report” before Thanksgiving. And if Barr’s very poor summary of the Mueller report threw Trump a lifeline by distorting the real findings of the special counsel investigation, this new report looks to be more like an atom bomb, designed to incinerate Washington by putting the whole Justice Department behind a conspiracy theory that rewrites history and declares open warfare on political opponents. And Republicans are already meeting with Barr to plan a “roll out” for this supposedly classified report in order to maximize its impact."

And:

Donald Trump

Trump Engaged in Witness Tampering During Ambassador’s Testimony

And:

Eric Boehlert

Impeachment Hearings Confirm Republican Party Is Detached from Reality. What Does the Press Do Now?

Yes, The Dems Blinked - But They Haven't Caved - Yet

Sen. Mitch McConnell wears a shit-eating grin after he got the better of Senate Dems again in the shutdown "compromise" yesterday.  The Resistance movement is not amused.

The stinging rebuke of Senate Democrats heard from Rebecca Traister on All In last night - along with Linda Sarsour, a major organizer of the Women's March -  still rings in my ears.  Both said bluntly that while they provided more than ample cover for the Dems to stand strong - via the massive marches over the weekend- they felt betrayed by the "cave in"  to the Republicans over the gov't shutdown. But it isn't just the organized women's protest movement. Across most of the  Left spectrum,  from Indivisible to Credo Action, to ActBlue,  progressives are still fuming over what they see as a betrayal.

Readers can decide for themselves.  But let's take a deep breath and look more objectively at what's gone down. Yes, the Dems did indeed blink in this standoff. By 'blink" I mean something analogous to a false start in football. Their "offense" appeared set to make the play of their lives but moved too soon against the Reepos  before  all the pieces - including strategy, narratives, responses - were in place. The giveaway was how they blanched - most of them  - in the face of the no holds barred blowback from the GOP rat brigade. That included the Twitter Troll in his deranged tweets, to Mick Mulvaney slamming Schumer for "lying" in his meeting with Trump, to, Bitch McConnell's fake outrage .

The savage attacks included a TV ad released on Saturday,  viciously slandering the Dems as enablers of murderous immigrants.  Never mind the ad was total unadulterated bullshit, it played to the xenophobic paranoia and fears of a certain mentally deformed segment of the populace. The Democrats, unable to think of an ad comeback or vigorous response, withered and blinked.  

A clear gauge of the false start was the failure to use videos of Mitch McConnell -on the floor of the Senate Friday night- making an objection to funding for military families after Sen. Claire McCaskill introduced the vote, see e.g.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pq5iWvIW7ao

A deft use of this travesty in ads ought to have been enough to have slowed down the Puke onslaught and bought more time for the D Senators to stand strong. But they didn't do it.

But this is still not a "cave in".  A  potential cave in (despite the Twitter Troll's tweets)  will be in 17 days when the shutdown looms again, given the only thing agreed to was two week plus reprieve. . Then, with barely a month before the Dreamers stand to be deported, the Dems will once more have a chance to show they really have spines of steel.. But if they cede the landscape to the Repukes - unwilling to use the only leverage available - then yes,  we can say they "caved".  And they will be pilloried nonstop by the Left base even more than they are now.

Now let's back up and briefly recount history up to now. Three days after Democrats rejected a stop-gap bill because it did not include protections for Dreamers, they yielded, ending the first government shutdown in a half decade.  In a 81-18 vote on Monday, Democrats approved a three-week spending measure in exchange for a commitment from Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, who pledged to bring up legislation that would extend protections to Dreamers, whose status was thrown into chaos when Trump cancelled DACA  in September.  The House passed the bill later on Monday, in a vote largely along party lines, but the House made absolutely no promise to vote on the Dreamers. So basically the Dems got a "half loaf" if that, or maybe the promise of a half loaf.

Is McConnell really to be trusted to keep his word, or are the Dems about to be played again?  As Chris Hayes put it on ALL In, "His words about having the intention to take up DACA leave lots of wiggle room".  You bet.  In the words of Sen. Kamala Harris who opposed the CR:

"I don’t believe he made any commitment whatsoever.  And I think it would be foolhardy to believe that he made a commitment.”

Sen. Harris is correct, because McConnell along with Tom Cotton,  is among the hard core anti-immigration enclave who want a clean immigration deal about as much as they want an Avian flu epidemic.  All Mitch the Bitch has done is: a) Manipulated the  Dems into showing their hand, that they have no real stomach or backbone for a prolonged shutdown, and b) Pushed resolution back another 17 days before he can again dare the Dems to find their balls and act - with  barely a month before massive deportations begin.

Personally, if I was a Dreamer, I'd be packing my bags right now. I wouldn't put one bit of faith or credence into anything the marshmallow- livered Democrats do or promise. Indeed, one Dem Senator (Peters)  appearing on ALL In  last night made no bones about the fact he believed that a shutdown was the worst thing and "nobody wins".   Then why initiate that action in the first place? If you knew all along you'd get weak knees then why do it? Did you not grasp there'd be harsh blowback from the Reptiles?

Well, the Dems - mainly the centrists - have plenty of excuses.....errr answers. Most weren't prepared for the incredibly aggressive attacks from the Trumpies and the Right including the insane ad I noted earlier.  Then as we moved into the 3rd day and the likelihood of extensive government furloughs the Dems got more and more terrified of getting bad PR. Many also believed the Repukes were winning the message battle and blame game and it might cost them votes in the fall.  (In fact, polls showed 39 % blaming the Dems for the shutdown, 38% blaming Donnie Dotard, and only 19 % blaming the GOP. Incredible - but as Bill Maher has observed, we have a politically semi-literate populace. Well, at least those who respond to polls!)

But never mind the questionable polls,  the real danger for the Dems is on their left flank and not being aggressive enough.  "Gosh! We really got no power, none at all! We re just a minority!"  Well, if you keep thinking like that you always will be! Also, if you decline to use the one thing (shutdown) that does confer power, come hell or high water, you've no one to blame but yourselves.

Dick Durbin - who tried last week to get a bipartisan deal done (with Lindsey Graham) tried to put this lipstick on the CR "pig":

“Parts of this were a victory in terms of moving to immigration for the first time in five years, with a deadline, with an understood procedure with the other side acknowledging this is about Daca."

This flapdoodle, however, didn’t satisfy many in the party’s activist base, who accused the blinking Dem lawmakers of betrayal.  As noted by Linda Sarsour and Rebecca Traister on All In last night the contrast was particularly glaring in the aftermath of the Women’s March, which saw tens of thousands of activists in cities across the country protest Trump and congressional Republicans. Many of the women carried signs in support of the Dream Act, legislative fix for the young immigrants.

Others carried signs with Trump shown in a toilet bowl, face ready for "dump" ville:


Reacting to the Dems' deplorable pussyfooting, Leah Greenberg, the co-executive director of Indivisible, said:

"Millions of people flooded the streets of every major American city to stand up to Trump this weekend, Your constituents want you to fight. How can you possibly not understand that?”

A sentiment echoed by Mss. Sarsour and Traister.   The problem, of course, is that the Dems have never possessed the necessary political DNA to fight, far less have an instinct to go for the jugular of opponents.  Frank Sharry, the executive director of America’s Voice, a national immigration advocacy group. put it this way:

“Last week, I was moved to tears of joy when Democrats stood up and fought for progressive values and for Dreamer. Today, I am moved to tears of disappointment and anger that Democrats blinked.”

I myself confess to misjudging the level of testosterone in the Dems, betting for sure the Repukes would blink first. I was wrong. Recall as long ago as August, 2002, Michael Tomasky observed in his article 'Dems Fightin' Words' ( The American Prospect) that by the mid-70s the Dems lost the ability to parry, thrust, fight and RESPOND!  The Dems basically agreed to eschew political point-making and "hard nosed", no-holds barred political partisanship.  They replaced it with wonkish, vanilla policy points, which appealed  to "reason" and "temperance" but did little or nothing for core partisans, the very people Dems need to get out to the polls each mid-term election. As Tomasky concluded:

"Apart from judicial battles, the Democrats don't have much fight in them."

Well, seems like they still don't. They still get too easily terrified of the "optics" and  instead of using their brains to craft powerful counter narratives they wimp out and piss their pants. They overthink the optics and lose the will to fight., terrified of falling poll numbers.  They fail to appreciate the real poll numbers they need to obsess over are from their Left base.

If I'd been  a Jew in Nazi Germany they'd be the last ones I'd want watching my back. They'd probably turn me over to the Gestapo the first time they were pressed hard by the same.

Charles Chamberlain, the executive director of the progressive organization, Democracy for America, said Democrats “stunning display of moral and political cowardice” jeopardizes the party’s chances of reclaiming the House majority in 2018."

This may well be true as it has the potential to dilute the once potent Left base turnout. After all, if our party is mainly full of pussies and Milquetoasts what's the point?  They will still get shit- hammered by the Reptile minority.

Again, this is not surprising when we study Democratic history after the Kennedy assassination. (And to put it bluntly, many of us believe the Dems lost their will and nerve in the wake of the 1960s political assassinations, e.g. of JFK, MLK, RFK and Malcolm X. These killings, most likely conspiracies all, rubbed out the entire left flank of the party). So now, as the authors of Banana Republicans put it, Democrats are more likely to see politics as a debate society contest while Republicans regard it as warfare.

Progressives and immigrant advocates are rightly doubtful the House will take up the measure to offer legal status to undocumented immigrants. House speaker Paul Ryan has not agreed to bring an immigration bill up for a vote and if he did the Freedom Caucus would be on his case.. Further, Republicans aren’t sure what Trump wants on immigration. They DO know what proto Nazi aide Steven Miller wants and he seems to be the master of Dotard - telling him what to do - along with the now useless Gen. John Kelly.

But never fear, folks and kiddies. There is still going to be a chance - maybe a slight one - for Dems to show they are made of sterner stuff. This will be once the February 8th deadline is reached. They now have the time to more firmly and intelligently plan a full strategy for a shutdown, including the necessary messaging when the furloughs of government workers begin.  If, on the other hand, they do nothing and simply collapse and punt with the deportation of hundreds of thousands at hand, then yeah  they caved.

One bad omen:   Republicans have insisted they should only consider legislation with the White House’s seal of approval.  According to top Dotard enabler Chuck Grassley:

“We should not spend our time on passing a bill that the president wouldn’t sign,”

Of course, this is stunning balderdash. As former GOP congressman Mickey Edwards noted last night on ALL In, there isn't a damned thing stopping Grassley or  McConnell from bringing a bill to the floor, voting on it then letting Trump sign it or not.  If not, the heat is on Dotard, as he welcomed ten days ago. The failure to even vote on a bill shows the GOP are also marching to the tune of Trump - and his Junior Nazi whisperer, Stephen Miller. 

From the looks of it nothing will get done. Here's a little help for the Dems come February 8th: Think of what McConnell and his REEPs would do if they were in YOUR  minority position.  Now, with that in mind, DO what they would! Easy peasy!

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/jefferson-morley/77402/4-hard-lessons-from-the-trump-government-shutdown

And:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-borosage/77398/the-shutdown-debacle-trump-and-the-politics-of-hate

And:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/william-rivers-pitt/77399/bellycrawling-through-history-with-schumer-and-the-democrats

Why This Government Shutdown Could Last Weeks

Sign for closure placed outside a gov't bldg.
One of the favorite depictions seen on signs of women marchers.

"As Lindsey Graham has been reporting, a 32-year old aide (Stephen Miller) is telling the President of the United States what to do.  Trump gives Minority Senate leader Schumer a number for agreement, Schumer accepts it - then it's blown up when Miller sees it. ...The real damage is that leaders across the world are seeing how weak, how pathetic  this President can be. He has to be the weakest in allowing a 32- year old to lead him around by the nose, and actually undercut him in negotiations with Senate leaders." - Joe Scarborough on MSNBC this morning


As the shutdown continues, most sentient beings in the capitol agree that if anyone apart from the Dotard gets the blame it is the 32 year old proto Nazi and Joseph Goebbels look-alike Stephen Miller, e.g.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgypWo0DCps

Miller's cynical manipulation of Trump was pointed out by Senator Lindsey Graham yesterday and repeated by Joe Scarborough in his statement this morning. Miller, the Goebbels wannabe, has had Trump's ear and been blowing up deal after deal, amendment after amendment - including an amendment proposed by Sen. Claire McCaskill to deliver emergency  funding to the military. But just as Dotard signaled possible agreement and an end to the shutdown, "Goebbels Junior"  nixed it. In other words, he barks "Jump!" and Dotard - like a beaten whelp- asks "How high?"  As Scarborough added:

"Would Barack Obama ever let a 32-year old staff member undercut him? Never! Never in a million years. Barack Obama was a strong leader. What we have here is a weak, weak uninformed leader - Michael Wolff was right.  We have such a weak leader that he lets 32 year olds lead him around and undercut him on negotiations."

This is why Scarborough could say that leaders across the world are seeing what a weak. pathetic putz we have for a leader. What a spineless, contemptible Pillsbury doughboy - all flab and no brain.

How is this germane? Because as long as Jr. Nazi Miller is driving Dotard, there will be NO deal, no end to the shut down. Further, the toxic rancor and rhetoric will accelerate.  How can it be otherwise when the man who purportedly should lead an end to this miasma doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground and has to consult a 32 -year old jackoff Nazi punk on when to take a dump.  For example, the tweet shown on Scarborough's show this morning had all the earmarks of a dumb puppet having his feeble brain "strings" pulled by Obersturmfuhrer Miller, e.g.

"The Democrats are turning down services and security for citizens in favor or services and security for non-citizens. Not good!"

But as Scarborough pointed out for the more feeble minded,  unsure of who to blame:

"Anybody who watched TV this weekend (e.g. C-SPAN) and saw the Senate in session saw that Claire McCaskill tried to pass an amendment that would allow for full funding of the military - Republicans stopped it. They tried to pass funding for the CHIP program, Republicans stopped it.  Tim Kaine tried to re-open the government for three days to get them the space to negotiate this week, but Republicans stopped it. Then Schumer and Trump came together on a deal for DACA - but Miller and the staff stopped it."

And so it's gone and so it goes. But do not look for daylight, as long as extremists are dictating terms to the alleged "leader of the free world" and his GOP cohort.

Let's not candy coat it: things are getting ever nastier in the home of the brave and the land of the free. The ongoing shutdown, itself a sign of the current levels of polarization and division,  descended to new lows over the weekend. This followed the incessant lies from the Trumpies- fanned by Miller and  his Right wing hack allies and followers.. Not to mention putting out a despicable TV ad released on Saturday, which said Democrats were: “complicit in every murder committed by illegal immigrants”.  You think the Dems will be inclined to deal with these asswipes now? Including agreeing to a short term (3 week) CR by noon today? If so you probably also believe in unicorns.

This is how low the current shutdown dialogue has taken us and it is bound to go to ever lower depths as the shutdown continues. And yes, this could last for weeks even as the mainstream media continue to breathlessly gasp about the "blame game".

Look, there is no "blame game" other than in pundits' feverish brains.  Graham and Scarborough nailed WHO is to blame and the Dems have nothing to do with it. As I posted previously this is all on the Repukes (wifey hates that term, but too bad, I'm sticking with it until they prove they can cease "re-puking" unworkable positions.)  -as The Denver Post reported yesterday (p. 11A) have now fully lined up with the extremist Right anti-immigration faction to try to disparage DACA  and the Dreamers. 

The Post didn't mention it but Lindsey Graham did later, that Stephen Miller is the extremist "avatar" keeping Trump on the path to refusing every offer made by the Dems -including even providing significant funding for his goddamned stupid wall.  These extremists are the ones pushing the GOP to yield no ground for any compromise - say to put DACA on the table - for any continuing resolution (CR) or other bill to break the shutdown logjam. 

This is why NO deal will manifest today, so don't hold your breath. The Dems - as part of any short term CR (until Feb. 8th) insist that the DACA issue be integrated into any future bill. The Democrats, in contrast to Trump, have consistently  made it  clear there can be no deal without DACA included. This is given 800,000 kids or young adults would otherwise be sent back to countries they've never lived in by March.  Further, the Democratic base and resistance is fully behind this stance. To cave now, or show cowardice in any form,  will definitely earn the Ds  resounding midterm losses as the base abandons them in November. So, they had better stay strong  and avoid bringing a mere knife to a gun fight. We want Uzis or AK-47s!

How low have things gotten in the meantime? Just look at that reprehensible ad released on Saturday, which said Democrats opposing Trump's hardline immigration agenda were “complicit in every murder committed by illegal immigrants”.  Marc Short, the White House director of legislative affairs, told NBC’s Meet the Press “that ad was produced by an outside group and not those of us in the White House”unfolds"   Never mind, Trump still approved of it, including  a picture of Dotard giving two thumbs up and his voice saying: “I’m Donald Trump and I approve this message.”

Bernie Sanders condemned the ad, saying, on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday:

“It is really unbelievable and so sad for our country that we have a president of the United States who says such nonsense and such outrageous statements,”

You own it, fat boy, so deal with the fallout, which is primarily bad faith, lack of trust. The Dotard, with his balls locked up by the extreme Right, can't be expected to broker any reasonable end to the shutdown. Indeed, yesterday this turd tried to short circuit the process by appealing to his Repuke tribe to use the "nuclear option".  Such a move would allow Republicans to pass legislation without Democratic support, by lowering the majority needed to pass a bill to just 51 votes.

What was especially gratifying to see, was all the News shows  yesterday that repeated Fox and Friends footage from 2013, when Republicans in Congress drove the last government shutdown, over healthcare reform.  There, captured for posterity, was Donnie Dotard himself, bloviating:

“Well, if you say who gets fired it always has to be the top.  I mean, problems start from the top and they have to get solved from the top and the president’s the leader. And he’s got to get everybody in a room and he’s got to lead.”

Donnie Dotard thought at the time he was too clever by half, given his critique took a shot at then President Obama.  But he couldn't have known that 4-plus years later his words would apply to him. I mean HE is now the guy at the top, or is supposed to be. HE is the one who is supposed to make the hard decisions to solve the shutdown - not let Right wing crazies bend his ears to keep it going.

As Sen. Chuck Schumer said in a Senate floor speech Saturday,  he had “essentially agreed to give the president something he wants” – funding for a border wall – “for something we both want”, status for Dreamers. Adding:

"It was now up to the president to end what he repeatedly called “the Trump shutdown."”.

But see, given Dotard's balls are in hock to Herr Miller and the extreme Right, he can't. He is essentially a political eunuch - having neutered himself - by ceding so much power to his junior aide Miller and the FOX et al crazies. Crazies (like John Birchers) who, merely 50 years ago, were rightfully scorned and relegated to the margins of American political status. While today, idiotic voters - hankering for an authoritarian white Master - have given them center stage.

So much for being the leader. Flush this presidential turd down the political toilet as numerous depictions portrayed in the Women's marches across the nation. 

What's even more incredible than a U.S. President being led by the nose by a proto-Nazi punk?  Well, the answer is how many - who were ready to disown "the Donald" and  toss his fat ass into a mine shaft three months ago - are now prepared to follow him into hell over this shutdown and his anti-immigration stance.

Again, don't look for anything to come of the D-R confab a few hours from now, to try to get a 3 week reprieve. . Until and unless the Repukes detach themselves from the Right wing extremists - especially Stephen Miller - there will be no end to the shutdown.

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/bruce-ticker/77340/blame-only-republicans


Update: 2: 20 p.m. MST

As per the latest news it appears a temporary agreement - for a 3 week reprieve on the shutdown  - has been reached after all. This was after the Republicans made a "pledge" to consider DACA as part of any new spending bill. Before anyone gets all hyped up and overly positive let's bear in mind we've been down this road before - in December -, when Dems got a similar "pledge" from Bitch McConnell,  then were stabbed in the back. (Why many Left groups are saying the Dems caved.)  Personally, my bet is we will be right back where we are now come Feb. 8th. I could be wrong, and pigs could also fly and unicorns frolic in Rocky Mountain National Park..

Bottom line is there is a window to work things out during which the U.S. government will be open for business. But this depends on the good faith of the GOP (and especially Dotard and 'Mitch the Bitch')  to see the DACA aspect through and not screw over the Dems again. If I were a gov't worker, I'd start salting away money from now in case you face a much more prolonged furlough after February 8th.

On the actual positive side, the CHIP program as a result of today's CR vote, gets funding extended for another six years. Maybe that is worth caving for now.

Sanders' Socialism Makes Its Imprint On Dems With Consensus to Expand Social Security

Bernie discussing Social Security expansion one year ago.

Despite the existing and persisting hysterical calls of Trumpites to "send Sanders to a Socialist country", and conflating his democratic socialism with the National Socialism of Hitler- Bernie has left his mark. According to a New York Times piece (June 19, p. 14), 'Driven By Campaign Populism, Democrats Unite on Social Security Plan'):

"President Obama, Hillary Clinton and other Democrats are rallying around proposals to expand Social Security and increase benefits, a sea change after three decades dominated over the program's rising costs. The Democrats' new consensus was driven by the populist election year politics of Senator Bernie Sanders and by a realization that many workers have neither significant pensions or any significant retirement savings."


In other words, one of Bernie's socialist platform cornerstones - expansion of Social Security as opposed to cutting it to "make it better" - has now come front and center for at least one political party. This means they will also be prepared to defend the proposal as it wends its way into the Democratic Party 2016 platform.

Of course, what many of the anti-socialist yappers tend to forget or ignore is that Social Security is indeed a socialist program. For example, it increases benefits disproportionately for lower earning  workers, enabling them to secure more in retirement benefits than if their earnings were integrated into a linear scale. Thus, a $12,000/yr. earner who puts in at least his 40 quarters will eventually receive (by age 70) far more by proportion than a $100,000  a year earner who puts in the same time or even double that.

Now, with Social Security expansion, the benefits to lower wage workers and those who have suffered by virtue of not having pensions, or years of littler or no earnings will be even greater if monthly benefits are increased. This, as opposed to enduring a Repuke plan of Social Security cuts to fix it. (Or, as one wit once observed: "Cutting off a runner's leg to make him faster".)

Recall the last momentous change to the system was in 1983 when Allan Greenspan - at the behest of a bipartisan commission - pushed through a plan where spending was trimmed, taxes were raised and the eligibility age (for full benefits) was advanced, i.e. to 67 for all those born after 1959.

But now all that's changed and even a once Neoliberal-tilting President appears to be on board. As the Times noted, back in 2011 and 2012 Obama seriously considered proposals (at the behest of his "Debt Commission") to curtail Social Security's benefits by cutting cost of living increases using the chained CPI. See e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2011/07/chained-cpi-yes-for-chainsaw.html

But now Mr. Obama appears to have touched base (finally!) with his inner Socialist, asserting in a speech in Elkhart, Indiana on June 1:

"It's time we finally made Social Security more generous, and increased its benefits so that today's retirees and future generations get the dignified retirement they've earned,"

This is momentous stuff right out of Bernie's playbook and contradicts all the naysaying we heard last year, from the likes of Claire McCaskill.   As noted by Nancy J. Altman of Social Security Works:

"Senator Sanders...has transformed the debate so that expanding Social Security today is a central tenet and consensus of the Democratic Party."

Indeed. The Times (p. 17) observes that among the plans for expansion being considered we have:

- An increase in benefits for widows and those who take time out of the paid work force to care for sick family

- Increase benefits for everyone but with extra help for those considered most vulnerable (e.g. that $12,000 /year worker with three kids)

- Increase the COLA to reflect the fact that older Americans tend to use more health care.

Bear in mind that non-increases in the COLA for several of the last 6 years have effectively meant an increase in Medicare premiums - given the premiums are deducted from one's Social Security check. Hence, without increases in the COLAs the non-increases translate to cuts - since the Medicare premium never decreases.

The only fly in the ointment left is Mr. Obama's seeming Jekyll-Hyde Neoliberal persona which often appears to act contrary to what he says. We already observed it in the case of speaking like a global warming aware Prez - but then approving offshore oil drilling, first in the Arctic now in the Gulf and off the Atlantic.

In the case of Social Security, while he delivered a terrific June 1 speech the Times points out the Senate Dems are "digging in against a Republican nominated by Mr. Obama to serve a second term as a public trustee of Social Security".

Huh?  The guy, Charles P. Blahous III, is definitely no friend of S.S. expansion given he has "undermined public confidence in the program by exaggerating its financial problems".

Worse, this character was one of George W. Bush's architects for Social Security privatization.

We can safely say then that unless: a) Obama retracts the nomination, or b) the Senate Dems pull his plug, the agenda to expand Social Security won't be going anyplace fast.

Still, it's a sign of victory for Sanders' democratic socialism that the Dems have embraced his expansion proposal - even if thus far mostly by talk as opposed to doing the walk.

Btw, what does Donald Drumpf propose? Well, according to his 2000 book, 'The America We Deserve', Social Security is a "Ponzi scheme" and needs to be privatized. Imagine, if you will, how that would have worked out if Bush Jr. had succeeded in doing that ca. 2006 with the financial crash ahead in 2008. The losses and mass poverty in the wake would have been staggering and the system might never have recovered.

Yeppers, we need Drumpf, aka Trump, like a hole in the head.

Bill Maher Needs A Few Clues About Socialism - And Millennials

Maher grins like a shit-eating rat as he tries now to 'shiv' socialism.

After giving a solid takedown of run- amuck capitalism in an earlier show, Bill Maher ran off he rails Friday night dumping on millennial pro-Socialists asserting "they are getting too used to getting too much shit for free". How so, Bill, when most are coming away with enormous college debt? Well, someone IS getting lots of free breaks - but it isn't millennials!

As a socialist I also found repulsive his claim that they (millennials) are "romanticizing" socialism, making me now wonder if his HBO (Time-WARNER) corporate overseers got to him and ordered him to back off the initial remarks and  bark a new script: "The Neoliberalism is all we can afford" version. The one that's dunned and dinged the middle class the past three decades even though many aren't aware of it because they don't grasp the differences between a Neoliberal and classical liberal.

First, let's remind ourselves what Maher said when he had his head screwed on straight:

""America's real religion is capitalism, and like any religion it needs a devil. And that devil has always been socialism....Republicans think if you allow a little socialism it will spread out of control. But actually it's capitalism that has spread out of control. It's eaten our democracy and it's eating our middle class - our health care system, our prison system, our news media. It's even eaten our food system so a lot of our food is no longer something that should be eaten

Capitalism is a shark, or a tidal wave...an unthinking force that devours everything in its path. Socialism is capitalism's 'lap band' - something to prevent it from eating almost everything"  -

To reinforce those points I incorporated Maher's 'New Rules' end monologue into a post on the savagery of current capitalism especially in the medical arena, noting that spiking prescription drug prices no longer even bears any relation to the laws of supply and demand. See e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2016/06/the-most-savage-aspect-of-capitalism.html

But Maher's main grousing about "freebies" concerned millennial backers of Bernie's proposal of free tuition. One would have hoped before Bill teed off he'd at least have checked  The Wall Street Journal article from  (Feb. 24, p. A6) that dealt with Sanders himself  benefiting from a free tuition plan at Brooklyn College in 1959. We learn, in fact, that:

"Eighteen year old Bernie Sanders didn't pay for tuition for his freshman  year and neither did 8,000 other undergraduates."

We further learn that "New York City's public colleges didn't charge for  tuition back then for students who attended full time during the day."

How  on Earth could this be achieved? The answer was also embedded in the piece, which provides a perspective on the history of free tuition though it is inappropriately titled 'Sanders's Free Tuition Failed Cost Test In The Past'.  On the contrary, free tuition succeeded in passing the cost test in the past precisely because "free tuition colleges flourished at a time when student enrollment was small."

In other words, when college was still regarded as the province of the select, academically able - it was workable. It isn't now because virtually everyone considers college  the only ticket to a better life. But this is belied by the facts that: a) Many incoming students require remedial courses (e.g. in math, English)  just to get on a basic academic footing - driving up costs, and b) a large number (in some cases nearly 60 percent) drop out but still have massive loans to pay off.  Both these problems and expanding college costs could be managed in a Sanders-type free tuition program by reducing the total population enrolling using qualifying markers.

These are the sort of nuanced aspects that elude those who bash democratic socialism. It also eludes them when any mention is made of having a single payer, 'Medicare for all' system which Sanders has also proposed. But as my wife learned, now engaging in the effort to get an analogous system passed into law here in Colo., the costs automatically plummet - sometimes as much as 85% - when insurance companies are factored out of the system. The reason is that these parasites are the ones responsible for the gigantic administration costs which programs like Medicare don't have.

Anti-Medicare for all yappers, like Claire McCaskill last year, also seem to forget that enrollees would not get carte blanche free services. They'd have to pay a standard Medicare -scale premium each month as well as copays for prescription drugs and at least one fifth of the cost of medical operations, interventions - from prostate cancer treatments to gall bladder removals. In addition no dental expenses or eye problems, glasses would be covered.

 Back to Sanders' free college tuition proposal. Short of prospective students running the qualifying test gauntlet the most affordable way to implement such a system would be by use of community colleges as opposed to four-year universities. This would provide a much more accessible route for many not able to get into trade or vocational schools, and also cut costs immensely. (And look, let's be clear when Bernie proposed his plan he never intended it to mean free tuition at selective schools like Harvard or Princeton, he meant for public institutions)

While he mentioned 4-year colleges, it does make more sense to implement the program by using two year schools first and then see where that goes. If a success, then limited 4 -year colleges can be brought into the mix.  But I absolutely reject the notion that even that tuition can't be paid for! Sanders proposed a tax on all stock trades,  transactions but even a limited version - say for all hedge fund trades - could work wonders in bringing in the necessary $$$.

 In line with this it makes eminent sense to make more use of the community college system and tailor HS guidance counseling to seriously consider the A.A. degree as opposed to pushing unqualified students into 4 year schools.  In his Dec. 14, 2014 piece on community colleges used for Voc-tech preparation,  Denver Post education columnist Dick Hilker quoted Rhonda Bentz (Colorado's media and government relations director) :

"the Voc-Technical route is the educational system's best kept secret. Students come for two year degrees and then get real jobs."

As Hilker goes on to note:

"In other words there are solid alternatives to spending big bucks at Big State U. to major in Tibetan Culture or Music Appreciation before winding up as a clerk at Mega-Mart."

A brutally frank observation, but one which no rational person can dispute.

What does this all add up to? Well, that lenders need to be much more rigorous in terms of lending qualifications. It makes no sense to loan to those who are much more likely to struggle in completing a 4 -year degree, and also have trouble repaying the loan. If anything is being "romanticized" then it's not socialism per se but overblown expectations of 4-year degrees for the bulk of students who'd do much better with just A.A. degrees.

 All this means getting rid of the fanciful expectation that "college is for everyone". It therefore implies the corollary that free college tuition cannot be for everyone.  Of course, Sanders's Policy Director (Warren Gunnels) during the campaign was not fond of this solution because, well, it lacks the "broad appeal" of just making tuition free to everyone without qualification. That implied Bernie wouldn't get as many young backers, but then it also meant his campaign would have been more grounded in reality and less liable to attacks by fiscal critics- and comedian schmucks (like Maher)  who brand it a "freebie".

  I also don't buy Gunnel's worry that if the policy isn't broad most people will treat it as a special "welfare program". Exactly the converse is true. Only IF the program implemented is initially limited (e.g. to 2-year colleges) and has markers of fiscal responsibility - including holding students accountable in their performance- will it not be seen as "welfare" - as Maher seems to believe it is.

 It won't be because in order to qualify the recipients will have to demonstrate decent academic requirements like at least a 3.0 grade average and a minimal SAT score , say in the upper quartile.  The last is especially more justified now as SAT standards have been melted down to the point there's no longer even an essay portion, guessing is no longer penalized and the multiple choice options have been reduced to 4, from 5. I mean, cheese Louise! But then the SAT is no longer even regarded as a scholastic aptitude test, see e.g.
http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/08/why-so-many-past-aptitude-tests-are-no.html

 In addition, if high standards aren't kept up, judging the GPA after the first semester or more likely the first year, then the recipient stands to lose the free tuition. So in other words we have a meritocratic tuition program, not simply a mindless 'gimme' free for all

This is how Bernie's free tuition program could work, and though its expectations have been  dramatically lowered from the stratosphere, they are more in line with fiscal and educational reality.  It can also be more aggressively defended as a practical solution and not just socialist jabberwocky or inflated political promising.

The bottom line is that no free tuition program should be expected for students not academically inclined in the first place, or who need remedial courses just to catch up with peers. Or those likely to drop out before completing their degrees.

In the meantime Maher needs to STFU about Millennials grafting for "free stuff" and examine the practical basis of how such a system could be expedited with minimal damage to the economy. It is feasible but there must exist a will to do it!