Tuesday, February 9, 2016

On The Fact That Willis Hart Apparently Does Not Give A Shit What The Truth Is Anymore (Re Him Falsely Asserting That It's A "Fact" That Bernie Sanders Has Never Had A Private Sector Job)

I'm not saying that the Libertarian blogger Willis Hart has EVER cared that much what the truth is, given the fact that he frequently sticks with information gleened from Conservative or Libertarian souces (information that is frequently wrong). That doesn't stop him from writing commentaries where he refers to "facts" (in the titles) that are often not facts.

But I found the following WTNPH post to be especially egregious. I mean, info concerning Bernie's employment could have been easily found. Willis- didn't have to guess. Or, I'm guessing he guessed. Because he's wrong - and the facts that prove this could have been easily located. So... he didn't look? (Or maybe he's lying).

Willis Hart: On the Fact that Bernie Sanders Has Apparently Never Had a Private Sector Job... Well that explains a lot (his lack of respect private property, free markets, entrepreneurs, etc.), hey, folks? (2/7/2016 AT 8:28pm).

False. Bernie Sanders has held private sector jobs.

[After] Sanders [graduated from] the University of Chicago [he was married and purchased some property with] some inheritance money from his father, who had died in 1963. [Following his divorce in] 1966... He bounced around for a few years, working stints in New York as an aide at a psychiatric hospital and teaching preschoolers for Head Start, and in Vermont researching property taxation for the Vermont Department of Taxes and registering people for food stamps for a nonprofit called the Bread and Law Task Force.

[After moving to Burlington Vermont] He worked some as a carpenter, although [a friend said] His carpentry... was not going to support him [because it was not good]. He worked as a freelance writer, putting intermittent pieces in the low-budget Vermont Freeman, a Burlington alternative weekly called the Vanguard Press and a glossy, state-supported magazine called Vermont Life.

"He was always poor", [said] another old friend... Sanders... was on unemployment for a few months in 1971. In 1977... he started a business... making low-budget films about people, places and events in Vermont and New England history that he felt were getting short shrift in the region's schools... His biggest project was "a 30-minute color documentary videotape"... about Eugene Debs... He priced it at $200 or offered it for rent for $35.

It was March of 1981 [that he became an] elected official, now making $33,800 a year [as mayor of Burlington], more than he ever had... (Bernie Sanders Has A Secret by Michael Kruse. Politico 7/9/2015).

What's the "secret"? According to a friend interviewed for the article I quote above, it's his person life. One source said "It's none of your f—-ing business" when asked a question about Sanders' personal life. Although, if he is the nominee, you can be assured that the Republicans will be all over this. Apparently Sanders did not do well in the public sector.

However, as the article notes, he DID have numerous jobs where his salary wasn't paid for with tax dollars. Sanders worked in the private sector until he was elected mayor of Burlington at the age of 39. Although he never did manage a Walmart, which Willis apparently believes is something the voters should require of a candidate before electing them president. Management in the private sector being a necessary qualification in the eyes of Conservatives.

But Bernie Sanders isn't running for president of the public sector, he's running for president of government. And Sanders ABSOLUTELY has proven to be successful in politics and doing the job he was elected to do. Whether it be mayor, member of the House of Representatives, or Senator. Which, not being a Conservative, makes him HIGHLY qualified in my opinion.

Anyway, my point is that Willis apparently simply does not give a shit anymore what the truth is. He just makes it up, apparently. Or gets it secondhand from some Libertarian or Conservative source (that's lying). Or maybe he heard it from Anthony Crispino.

Also, what's up with Willis' non sequitur (of him falsely believing Bernie Sanders never held a private sector job) meaning he has a "lack of respect [for] private property, free markets, [and] entrepreneurs"? Progressives respect these things very much. Although (as a Progressive myself), I'd say the "free market" Willis refers to doesn't exist. Markets are the creation of government (which sets and enforces the rules). Progressives believe in regulated markets.

Other than that caveat, I agree with the things WTNPH lists. Willis lies with his constant bashing of Progressives (Bernie Sanders, while he describes himself as a Democratic Socialist, is one of the founders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus). Progressives (and Bernie Sanders) believe in private property, REGULATED markets and entrepreneurs. However, as Willis revealed earlier this month, he thinks the ENTIRE Left is Communist. So that might (partially) explain this idiocy (the WTNPH post referenced above).

Seriously, I REALLY think the Hartster might be suffering from some kind of brain disease. Given his recent reliance on Black & White generalizations (a la 1970s wrestling analogies) that have him characterizing the (wholly Communist) Left as purely venal and Libertarians as purely virtuous... I wouldn't rule it out.

OST #106


  1. Will does seem to have crossed the line of no return.

    I am not a Sanders advocate preferring Johnson's libertarian politics but I left a comment on Contra O'Reilly pointing out Will's error. I'm sure it won't be published.

    Back to Sanders. If Cruz, Trump, or Rubio win the nomination I'll probably vote Sanders, just in case. Should Kasich by some remarkable miracle he gets my vote.

    Of course in deep blue MA, who will vote democratic for president it really doesn't matter

  2. Vote for Bernie in the primary. You won't be voting for him for president (only to be the nominee), and you'll be helping to prevent Hillary from winning in MA. In the General the Dem will likely win MA, as you pointed out.

  3. Can't. I'm not registered as republican, democrat, or independent. Therefore I cannot vote in the primaries in MA. only the general. Today was the last day I could have changed my status.

    BTW Dervish, I'm fully aware how the system works. I've been voting for 45 years, was once a vice chair of my town's republican committee, was a delegate at the state convention, and only changed my affiliation to a non party or independent affiliation 10 years ago.

    I see no reason to change as I do not support or actively engage with any party. I'll let the sheeple choose their candidate.

  4. The Primary is the only opportunity that you could have cast a vote that might have mattered. That's the way I look at it - living in a Red state. I just hope Bernie's still in it when it comes time for me to vote. Honestly though, I have no idea what his chances versus Hillary in TN might be.

  5. Hillary carries some baggage. I would not be st all surprised if in a moment of total honesty she said she wished now she had declined Secretary of State.

    Trust is an issue for most folks and HRC does not engender trust. Bernie Sanders, regardless of how one views his democratic socialist posistions is, at least IMO, far more honest than HRC.

    I like Kasich and believe he is also honest, as well as understanding the concept and importance of compromise.

    As for primaries, if MA wasn't so blue I might change my position. Rarely does MA go red in presidential elections. So, regardless who the GOP candidate is (unless another RWR type) MA goes democratic. I view the presidential primary here a waste of my valuable time.

    HRC must be running just a bit scared and Sanders likely knows it. Look for it to turn nastier. On the GOP side Trump will take care of insuring the nasty aspect is alive and activem


Comment moderation is not currently in effect.