Bernie, Fauxcahontas and The Creation of Hillary The Progressive

Apparently, Bernie believes he has a “path towards victory.”

By know, however, I think it is quite apparent that the victory he refers to is defined by dragging his opponent as far to the progressive left as possible before bowing out and putting his full-fledged support behind Hillary 2.0 (or whatever version she’s currently at).

Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, left, and, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., argue a point during a Democratic presidential primary debate at the University of Michigan-Flint, Sunday, March 6, 2016, in Flint, Mich. (AP Photo/Carlos Osorio)

Sanders was initially viewed as the Democrat’s side show—a half-crazy/odd fellow that furthered the narrative that Hillary was going to fight a “tough” primary against serious candidates.

Nobody, despite Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s repeated insistence to the contrary, believed that any of the other Democratic candidates had half a chance of competing for the nomination. Yet, as Sanders began to build momentum and a large base, Clinton soon realized that “far-left leaning progressivism” was the new hotness. Since then, she has quickly painted herself as a legitimate progressive—a progressive who likes to get things done.

Consider some of the apparent deviations to the left Clinton has made this primary cycle: Opposition to Keystone Pipeline, Trans-Pacific Partnership, same-sex marriage, and financial reform.

As Jeff Cohen so eloquently argues:

• Promoting Fracking worldwide is not progressive
• Boosting corporate-friendly trade deals is not progressive
• Enabling military coups is not progressive
• Pocketing millions from corporate lectures fees is not progressive
• Escalating the Afghan War is not progressive
• Chaotic military intervention in the Middle East and Libya is not progressive

On the minimum wage, Hillary favored a $12 per hour minimum wage in November 2015. Since then, at an MSNBC town hall in February 2016, she adopted Sanders’ position of raising the federal minimum wage to a $15 per hour “living wage.”

On environmental issues, Sanders’ “Keep It in The Ground Act,” bars coal extraction on federal lands. Concerning this legislation, Sanders stated, in November 2015, "I don’t want to speak for Hillary Clinton, but I would hope that Hillary Clinton will join Jeff Merkley and myself on this issue.”

Hillary’s stated position in 2015 was, “not until we’ve got the alternatives in place…I think I would have to take the responsible answer.” Eight months later, however, she’s proudly proclaiming: “We’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.”

It’s quite telling that Saturday Night Live devoted a campaign ad skit of Clinton that documented her steady transformation into Bernie Sanders—in policy, appearance, and rhetoric. At the end of the ad, she states, “So thank you millennials for lending your support to the biggest outsider Jew in the race—Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

Even the mainstream media is taking advantage of this progressive slippery slope.

For those of you that both understand Spanish and are interested in chronicling the demise of our country, you were probably thoroughly entertained by the Univision debate on CNN and the moderator’s incessant desire to get the candidates to commit verbally to radical immigration statements.

At one point, moderator Jorge Ramos exchanged this dialogue with Hillary Clinton:

RAMOS: OK. So I want to be very specific. So you are telling us tonight that if you become president you won't deport children who are already here?

CLINTON: I will not.

RAMOS: And that you won't deport immigrants who don't have a criminal record?

CLINTON: That's what I'm telling you.

Sanders received the same line of questions to which he answered:

SANDERS: So to answer your question, no, I will not deport children from the United States of America.

RAMOS: And can you promise not to deport immigrants who don't have a criminal record?

SANDERS: I can make that promise.

So, Both Hillary and Bernie will not deport immigrants who do not have a criminal record.

Let that sink in for a bit. Digest a little.

Yes, you are correct, improper entry into the U.S. by an alien is a crime. All of the “non-criminals” that Hillary and Bernie have vowed not to deport are—by legal definition—criminals. But the question wasn’t about illegal immigrants.

The question essentially asked, “will you deport people who are here legally?” The question was phrased in such a way that there was only one acceptable answer. So the “pledge,” which received resounding applause, was an inconsequential softball.

This type of “wordsmithing,” however, is right in Hillary’s wheelhouse.

With a straight face, she explained to her supporters how being against something she publicly supported 45 times is not contradictory because she “learned” more about it. She articulated to the American people how her explanation of the Benghazi video was done in a “very specific way,” thus negating deception. And, my favorite, her continued assertion that she did not send or receive anything that was “marked classified.”

Evidently, us Americans are too dang stupid to understand semantic wordy thingys.

Amiright?

It’s not a coincidence that Sen. Elizabeth Warren has yet to endorse a candidate. In a recent CBS interview, she repeatedly dodges questions that require her to offer favorable opinions of one candidate above another. She knows by now that her like-minded leftist has no chance of being the nominee, and she will eventually offer a full endorsement for Hillary, but not until Bernie’s baiting game has been completely exhausted.

Come July, Hillary is likely to take the stage in Philadelphia wearing a bluish/blackish/brownish pantsuit, a classy “feel the Bern” brooch, and thank the Democratic party in a boisterous Brooklyn/Jewish/Southern accent—while Fauxcahontas discreetly gives Bernie a well-deserved pat on the back--or whatever the Cherokee equivalent is.

Anthony DeChristopher holds a M.A. in Strategic Security Studies from National Defense University’s College of International Security Affairs. He blogs at exceptionism.com

–

TheBlaze contributor channel supports an open discourse on a range of views. The opinions expressed in this channel are solely those of each individual author.