It’s *all *fair game. Including Harris’s attack on Biden over busing, which was from longer ago than 1981.
Which shows how dishonest the name is. There is no resemblance between Bernie’s bill and Medicare other than their both being generally about health coverage. Medicare has premiums and copays, doesn’t cover certain things, etc. Bernie just took his classic “single payer” dream, with more benefits than any other major country offers, and slapped a more marketable name on it.
That is entirely different than what you wrote - Bernie didn’t reference “spreading legs” or even sex at all.
Not everything is about sex.
This is also entirely different than what you wrote. It’s difficult to have a discussion about this when you are so determined to misquote and mischaracterize what he’s written, even back in the 60s.
I’m confused…is this supposed to be a bad thing to say? His quote sounds entirely reasonable and a good thing to be saying. The fact that he said this in the 60’s and it still needs to be said to way too many parents, is disheartening, but there’s certainly nothing wrong with his statements there.
This part, on the other hand…that does concern me. It is one of the only things I have seen out of Bernie that makes me go ‘wait a minute…’ about the idea of enthusiastically supporting him.
I’ll let Sam Stone speak for himself:
:smack: I’d like to “paraphrase” this Sam Stone nugget, but I’ll just let it lay here and dry out. 
It’s not part of his current plans, and AFAICT he hasn’t advocated for any of this in decades.
Almost every extended health care benefits cover some massage therapy in Canada, you realize? Yours probably does. Federal employees certainly do.
Sheeesh. How do you guys tolerate living in such a socialist hell-hole?
BTW, I once turned in an expense report with a charge for massage, and the accountant questioned me about: They would pay it in any event but needed to know what kind of massage it was for their IRS filing!
There’s a great deal of exaggeration and nonsense in what you wrote, most of which I snipped out for brevity. The single most important fact is that whatever Bernie may or may not believe today about the benefits of some forms of alternative medicine has absolutely nothing to do with advocating the principle of Medicare for all, essentially single-payer health care like we have in Canada. Arguing about minor items that it may or may not cover is just nitpicking irrelevant details. Who cares if it covers something controversial like acupuncture, as long as it also covers all basic medical needs?
Second, some of his supposedly “crazy” ideas like the link between emotional health like stress and cancer may be controversial but do have an actual basis in science.
Third, his statement about flouridated drinking water, made over 50 years ago, was ambiguous and doesn’t reflect his position today, which is the following:
We must ensure that all people get the preventive services and education they need to maintain oral health, especially those who do not have the resources to be immediately seen by a dentist when a problem develops. For example, drinking fluoridated water can have important oral health benefits for everyone, especially for those who are unable to access or afford dental care. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recognized community water fluoridation as one of the ten greatest public health achievements of the 21st century.
Fourth, if Bernie is the nominee, he’ll be up against a guy who as of January 20 has told 16,241 lies since inauguration, according to the Washington Post. Since these are post-inauguration lies, they don’t include things like the claim that Obama was born in Kenya and Trump has investigators in Hawaii who can prove it. Or that, once elected, he will abolish Obamcare and replace it with “something terrific”. Presumably this is your preferred candidate.
And, concentrating again on what Trump has done for American health care:
I’m sure Sam Stone is just as eager to apply the same level of evenhanded scrutiny and intellectual rigor to statements by candidates on both sides of the political spectrum but only refrains from mentioning things like “windmill cancer”, the concept that “clean coal” is coal that is washed, the idea that tariffs are paid by the country against which they are imposed, and other pearls of shit that have dropped from Trump’s lips because this is a Sanders thread. But we will certainly see him do so in one or more of the many Trump threads currently available, I have no doubt.
Everyone’s past is scrutinized and used against them when they decide to run for president, especially if they make it far enough to compete in the general election. What relevance does Warren’s claim to Native American ancestry have in regards to her platform as a potential president? Biden’s views on busing in the 1970s? Buttigieg having worked for a consulting firm? It’s pure folly to assume Sanders should somehow be exempt from all of that. Especially when he’s used his own past to his benefit, like bringing up marching in protests in the 1960s. Can’t expect the unsavoury stuff to stay in the dark. Fair or not, that’s how the game is played.
Did you miss the part where I said that much of Sam’s post was “a great deal of exaggeration and nonsense”? He follows the alternative medicine quote with the comment “This is a guy who thinks he kmows how to completely redesign American Health Care. Get ready for your government-paid-for nonsense medicine.” This would have one believe that if Bernie is elected, US health care will consist entirely of homeopathy, acupuncture, and 17th century witchcraft. Whereas the actual facts are that Bernie has visited Canadian hospitals, spoken with Canadian medical professionals, admires the Canadian system, and wants to make the Medicare for All look something like it, within the constraints of existing American institutions.
This should include, IMHO, partnering with the existing private health insurers subject to strict regulation to achieve the cost goals and universality of M4A. If health insurers find the regulations too onerous, then they’re free to find some other line of business that is less regulated than human health care. Maybe they can get into the pet insurance business. Or, with rising sea levels, flood insurance would be a good business, and in the typical style of health insurers, they could have fine print that says that living within 100 miles of a coastline is a “pre-existing condition” so you’re not covered, sorry, sucks to be you.
So you thought it would be a good idea to enter this discussion just to take a personal shot at me?
Never heard of windmill cancer, but it sounds stupid. I have never supported trade tariffs in general, and fully understand how they work. The ‘clean coal’ nonsense is just a straight up smear with no basis in reality.
In short, your post is an inappropriate ad-hominem attack, as well as being completely fabricated. Unless of course you have some cites that I have said any of the things you are claiming. If not, an apology would be the decent thing to do.
This just in. From the Center for Politics at UV via CNN:
If it’s Sanders vs. Trump, Sanders will get 248 electoral votes. Trump will get 260. WI (10 electoral votes) and PA (20) are toss-ups. Bernie would have to take both to win.
In a generic map where an unknown Dem opposes Trump, it would be 248 vs. 248 with 42 toss-up votes.
[bolding mine]
Bernie isn’t the guy who could win the election. I’d like to see maps comparing the other Dems to Trump. I’m not sure they’d be any stronger, given the disappointing slate. 
Bernie can win, but yes, it’s Biden who has the best chance. And these things change.
I like Pete the best. Sanders has some great ideas. Biden has the best chance vs trump.
What did I claim you had said?
Sam Stone is just another foreign national trying to influence our elections.
A new poll finds Bernie statistically tied with Trump in the battleground states, while Biden has a seven point lead: New Yahoo News/YouGov poll: Who is strongest against Trump? Must-win states and swing voters show Biden holds edge over Sanders