Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

polly7

(20,582 posts)
Fri Mar 25, 2016, 12:17 PM Mar 2016

LA Times Interviews Bernie Sanders

By Bernie Sanders

Source: LA Times

March 25, 2016


The following is a transcript of Bernie Sanders’ meeting with the Los Angeles Times’ editorial board on March 23, 2016.

Nicholas Goldberg (editor of the editorial pages): Thanks for doing this on such short notice. We’re excited because it means that the California primary, even though it comes so late in the cycle, is not meaningless.

Bernie Sanders: To me it is not meaningless.

[ROOM LAUGHS]

Goldberg: Good. We have a lot of questions. We’re on the record. We are almost exclusively people from the opinion side of the paper. But we do have a person from the news pages as well. You are being recorded, so stuff could end up in the paper. If you want to go off the record, just tell us and that’s fine. We have a lot of people with a lot of questions, I think, so don’t let your answers go on too long just so we can get more of them in.

Sanders: OK.

Nick Goldberg: I’ll start with a touchy-feely question. I’m sure people will have more specific programmatic questions. But I wanted to ask if you could talk about how your ideas on poverty and wealth and income inequality and economic fairness were formed. It seems to be such a deep and integral part of your being. I wonder whether if it came from books, something you lived, something you witnessed?

Sanders: I think, Nick, that’s a good question. I’ve thought about that a lot. I can’t give you a definitive answer. But I think, to a significant degree, it resulted from the family life I grew up in. My father came to this country at the age of 17. He had no money, couldn’t speak English. Never made a whole lot of money. He was a paint salesman. We lived, for the first part of my life, in a three-and-a-half-room rent-controlled apartment in Brooklyn, N.Y.

There was always a lot of tension in our house with regard to money. My mother, her dream was that she would own her own home. Not an apartment. She died young. She never achieved that dream. So there was always stress in the household over money. I learned that economics lesson at a very young age. I’ve studied economics since. But I would answer your question knowing what lack of money does to a family.

I’m not suggesting we were poor or hungry. That was not the case. But it had a major impact on my political thinking.


Full article: https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/la-times-interviews-bernie-sanders/
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
LA Times Interviews Bernie Sanders (Original Post) polly7 Mar 2016 OP
California's primary is not only NOT meaningless, LWolf Mar 2016 #1
+1000. nt. polly7 Mar 2016 #2
Uh, oh. But no one is accusing BS of being a DINO like they would had Hillary made these same point Jitter65 Mar 2016 #3
There's a reason for that. LWolf Mar 2016 #4
"everyone's voice will be heard" vs. "sit down and applaud what we give you" MisterP Mar 2016 #5
Or LWolf Mar 2016 #6
I agree dana_b Mar 2016 #7
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Mar 2016 #8
You're very welcome, Uncle Joe. polly7 Mar 2016 #9
I wish I could, polly. Uncle Joe Mar 2016 #10
Very good read BernieforPres2016 Mar 2016 #11
You're very welcome, BernieforPres2016. nt. polly7 Mar 2016 #12

LWolf

(46,179 posts)
1. California's primary is not only NOT meaningless,
Fri Mar 25, 2016, 12:55 PM
Mar 2016

it is giving meaning to many other smaller (delegate-wise) states whose late primaries are usually meaningless.

I'm grateful.


The whole thing is a good read; I especially liked the conversation around the ubiquitous question about how he'd get around obstruction in Congress to get things done; here's just a bit:

Sanders: First of all, it’s not that I can’t work with Mitch McConnell. I have worked with Mitch McConnell. In fact, last session of Congress, before the Democrats were defeated, as you may or may not know, I was the chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs. Working with people like John McCain, who is a friend of mine. Working with people like Jeff Miller, who is the Republican chair in the House. We passed the most comprehensive VA healthcare legislation in the modern history of this country. It was one of the major pieces of legislation passed.

If you check my record going back to the House, there were many years where I passed more amendments on the floor with Republican support than any other member. So I know how to work with the Republicans.

But what I am suggesting to you, is that at the end of the day, the powers that exist in Washington — Wall Street, who has endless supplies of money, the wealthy campaign contributors — every day, the legislation that comes down is not the legislation that the American people want. It is often the exact opposite. Every poll that’s out there [says] raise the minimum wage. Republicans, many of them now want to abolish the concept of the minimum wage. Rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. Republicans don’t want to spend any money on infrastructure. Expand Social Security. That’s what the American people want. What do Republicans want? Cut Social Security.

How do we win? How do we take them on? You take them on when you say, “Hey, Mitch, look out the window. There’s a million young people out there now. And they’re following politics in a way they didn’t before. If you want to vote against this legislation, go for it. But you and some of your friends will not have your seats next election.” That’s the way I do politics. And that is the way I believe we’re going to deal with our crises today.



He's said he can't do it alone. He's said he can't do it without us. Are there enough Democrats who WANT to engage in the fight to take this country back from the 1%, or do they just want to cast a vote in November and go back to their lives of complaining about how it's all the fault of Republicans?

That remains to be seen.

If the first, they'll vote for Sanders. If the second, they'll vote for Clinton and let the next 4 years be all about her, or about Trump; not about us.

 

Jitter65

(3,089 posts)
3. Uh, oh. But no one is accusing BS of being a DINO like they would had Hillary made these same point
Fri Mar 25, 2016, 01:16 PM
Mar 2016

about working with the GOPers.

LWolf

(46,179 posts)
4. There's a reason for that.
Fri Mar 25, 2016, 01:21 PM
Mar 2016

It's quite simple.

Sanders has demonstrated that one can find common ground and work on that common ground without "compromising" previously made gains away, while not eroding that line in the sand while constantly backing up and drawing it again as the right-wing tide rolls forward.

Clinton has been part of eroding that line in the sand.

dana_b

(11,546 posts)
7. I agree
Fri Mar 25, 2016, 01:51 PM
Mar 2016

If California goes too early, then the smaller states get overshadowed with "well, s/he won California so it's too hard to catch up now!"

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»LA Times Interviews Berni...