Sanders joins Trump in telling the media to go to hell

Mar 2012
61,496
42,710
New Hampshire
Where are those medical records you promised to show us, NBC News’ Chuck Todd asked last weekend on “Meet the Press.“ Sen. Bernie Sanders sounded polite enough, as he exhaled a puffy cloud of obfuscation.

It was not hard to translate Sanders’ word cloud: Go to hell, Chuck.

A lot of that going around these days. Go to hell is what President Donald Trump said in response to his own reneged pledge to release his tax records, to inquiries about the details of his own health records, to criticism to this week’s decision by the leadership of his Justice Department to intervene in sentencing recommendations by line prosecutors in the case of Trump friend Roger Stone.

A much larger question is raised by Sanders’ willingness to tell Todd—and the rest of us—to pound sand, seemingly confident in his belief that there is not much price to be paid for doing so.

Sanders’ evasion highlights the dilution of mainstream media’s institutional power. There has been no aspirant or occupant of the White House during the modern presidency who has not wished to say "Go to hell" to uncomfortable inquiries about health, finances, or aspects of personal lives that affect public duties. Trump and Sanders are hardly the first to do so. But the reason most politicians have historically resisted the impulse is that it came with a high cost: It was unpleasant and politically expensive.

 

HayJenn

Former Staff
Jul 2014
74,679
66,899
CA
Good for him. Too many are corrupt and arrogant.
I don't think you understand again

Sanders is now acting like Trump.

From the link


Sanders’ reversal on health records—in the fall he pledged he would “certainly” release “comprehensive” health information before votes were cast—is notable in at least three respects. One, it shows how pervasive the Trump precedent is. Even politicians who stand against him on every issue, and who speak solemnly about the need to restore norms shattered during this presidency, are ready to follow trails he has blazed in taking flight from public accountability.


When I mention editors of an earlier generation who used their agenda-setting power on behalf the public interest, I am thinking of people like Robert G. Kaiser, who started at the Washington Post in 1963 and, for much of the 1990s—a long time ago, in media terms—was its managing editor. He is just a year younger than Sanders and said he was taken aback by his renege on health records. (Sanders told Todd once he begins releasing medical records “it never ends.”)

“What are the chances that what he is hiding shows him to be unusually healthy and ready to go four or eight years at top speed? “ Kaiser asked. “I'd say, in logic, they are zero. He's holding stuff back because it will cause him political problems—isn't that by far the safest presumption? The most logical?”

He agrees that institutional media power has been diminished but cautions against “exaggerating our power in the ‘good old days.’" But, he said, there is no doubt the Trump precedent is spreading: “To a much greater extent than I would like, he has changed the standards of the culture — very much for the worse.”

In other words, Trump has managed to hide things over and over. Things that the public should know about. And that is dangerous. Say Sanders wins, then goes on to hide everything. I suspect you would NOT be happy with that.
 
Feb 2010
35,671
26,126
between Moon and NYC
Where are those medical records you promised to show us, NBC News’ Chuck Todd asked last weekend on “Meet the Press.“ Sen. Bernie Sanders sounded polite enough, as he exhaled a puffy cloud of obfuscation.

It was not hard to translate Sanders’ word cloud: Go to hell, Chuck.

A lot of that going around these days. Go to hell is what President Donald Trump said in response to his own reneged pledge to release his tax records, to inquiries about the details of his own health records, to criticism to this week’s decision by the leadership of his Justice Department to intervene in sentencing recommendations by line prosecutors in the case of Trump friend Roger Stone.

A much larger question is raised by Sanders’ willingness to tell Todd—and the rest of us—to pound sand, seemingly confident in his belief that there is not much price to be paid for doing so.

Sanders’ evasion highlights the dilution of mainstream media’s institutional power. There has been no aspirant or occupant of the White House during the modern presidency who has not wished to say "Go to hell" to uncomfortable inquiries about health, finances, or aspects of personal lives that affect public duties. Trump and Sanders are hardly the first to do so. But the reason most politicians have historically resisted the impulse is that it came with a high cost: It was unpleasant and politically expensive.

Meh...we may be over-analyzing Bernie's message here.

My suspicion would be that the Sanders campaign took a close (private) look at these medical records that are in question. And they determined that letting them go public would be worse for the candidate's chances than it will be keeping them secret. Something in there (the doctor's records) is either not good or is exploitable to make it look bad.

They just made a calculated decision. Pretty basic campaign strategy stuff.

..
 

HayJenn

Former Staff
Jul 2014
74,679
66,899
CA
Meh...we may be over-analyzing Bernie's message here.

My suspicion would be that the Sanders campaign took a close (private) look at these medical records that are in question. And they determined that letting them go public would be worse for the candidate's chances than it will be keeping them secret. Something in there (the doctor's records) is either not good or is exploitable to make it look bad.

They just made a calculated decision. Pretty basic campaign strategy stuff.

..
I kind of think the public has a right to know if he is in good health or not

We already know that Trump has lied about his medical records, time and time again.
 
Feb 2010
35,671
26,126
between Moon and NYC
I kind of think the public has a right to know if he is in good health or not

We already know that Trump has lied about his medical records, time and time again.
A "right" to know?? Nope, don't think so.

But if Sanders declines to release any particular information, then thoughtful voters should take that into consideration when they go to cast their ballot.


(Not unlike The Donald and his pesky tax returns...)

..
 
Mar 2012
61,496
42,710
New Hampshire
I kind of think the public has a right to know if he is in good health or not

We already know that Trump has lied about his medical records, time and time again.
I wouldnt say we have a right to know. It would be nice and transparent, but certainly not critical. Thats why there is a VP. I would prefer a generalized medical statement that they are fit for the job, like any of us would have for our employers. But not details. That should always be kept private no matter who.
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnflesh
Nov 2014
32,826
6,596
North Carolina
Where are those medical records you promised to show us, NBC News’ Chuck Todd asked last weekend on “Meet the Press.“ Sen. Bernie Sanders sounded polite enough, as he exhaled a puffy cloud of obfuscation.

It was not hard to translate Sanders’ word cloud: Go to hell, Chuck.

A lot of that going around these days. Go to hell is what President Donald Trump said in response to his own reneged pledge to release his tax records, to inquiries about the details of his own health records, to criticism to this week’s decision by the leadership of his Justice Department to intervene in sentencing recommendations by line prosecutors in the case of Trump friend Roger Stone.

A much larger question is raised by Sanders’ willingness to tell Todd—and the rest of us—to pound sand, seemingly confident in his belief that there is not much price to be paid for doing so.

Sanders’ evasion highlights the dilution of mainstream media’s institutional power. There has been no aspirant or occupant of the White House during the modern presidency who has not wished to say "Go to hell" to uncomfortable inquiries about health, finances, or aspects of personal lives that affect public duties. Trump and Sanders are hardly the first to do so. But the reason most politicians have historically resisted the impulse is that it came with a high cost: It was unpleasant and politically expensive.

That's because the press in this country used to at least pretend to be objective. Those days are long gone. When the media becomes openly hostile with an obvious political agenda then the candidates they target have every right to tell them to fuck off. So that's the reason there is no longer a price to be paid. Because the mask is off of our media and the public knows it.

Props for an interesting post.
 

HayJenn

Former Staff
Jul 2014
74,679
66,899
CA
A "right" to know?? Nope, don't think so.

But if Sanders declines to release any particular information, then thoughtful voters should take that into consideration when they go to cast their ballot.


(Not unlike The Donald and his pesky tax returns...)

..
So he just had a heart attack, and you don't think people should know if he could even make it past a first year in office?

And yeah, the tax returns are a big deal - not other POTUS has not released them, kind of like how all of them have released their medical records

Sanders kept promising he would (like Trump on his taxes) yet won't do it.

So, in that regard, they are alike.