April 15, 2016


News and Views


Democratic Activism

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/13/politics/occupy-wall-street-bernie-sanders-new-york-primary/index.html

Occupy Wall Street rises up for Sanders
By Gregory Krieg, CNN
Updated 1:06 PM ET, Wed April 13, 2016

24 Photos -- Occupy Wall Street One Year Later
Related: Opinion: Sanders, Reagan and the spirit of '76
Related: Bernie Sanders earns first endorsement from current senator


(CNN)The forces of Occupy Wall Street, splintered and faded in the aftermath of their 2011 demonstrations, are getting the band back together to boost Bernie Sanders ahead of next week's critical New York primary.

Nearly five years since Occupy was evicted from Zuccotti Park, blocks from the New York Stock Exchange in lower Manhattan, a coalition of organizers, labor leaders and progressive activists who lined up under the banner of "the 99 percent" are renewing their efforts in pursuit of a more traditional cause: Getting voters to the polls on April 19.

That begins with traditional canvassing, but will extend to what is expected to be a large pro-Sanders, Occupy-inspired march on Saturday in Manhattan.

"This is the place where the message of income inequality resonated across the country and across the world -- it's where it really began," said "People for Bernie" co-founder and Occupy activist Winnie Wong. "He's bringing it back home."

In Sanders and in his campaign, the more mainstream elements of Occupy Wall Street have found an ideological ally. The Vermont senator's laser focus on economic issues are a big draw, local organizers said, but they also delight in his affection for the shoe-leather activism of past generations.

"Canvassing and using apps to get people to vote and all that microtargeting stuff, that's important, but so is marching in the streets," said Charles Lenchner, who joined with Wong after efforts to draft Sen. Elizabeth Warren into the presidential race fell flat. Their "People for Bernie" popularized the "Feel the Bern" hashtag, a potent organizing tool and, nearly a year after its launch, a world-famous meme.

For Lenchner and many of his peers, the Sanders candidacy represents a logical extension -- and validation -- of the original movement.

"Occupy was a reaction to the financial collapse, to what happened because of Wall Street's power to destroy the economy, and Bernie's campaign is the one that has been consistently focused on the role of the '1 Percent,' large corporations and financial institutions," he said. "It's a very natural connection."

The Occupy-Sanders mind meld

A public show of electoral solidarity -- and a sign of things to come -- came last month, when prominent Occupy organizer Beka Economopoulos led a phone-banking effort for Sanders from Zuccotti Park. "It was another one of those moments that helped solidify the connection between the folks who had been part of Occupy and the Sanders campaign," Lenchner said.

Occupy Wall Street as a coherent political project had already begun to fray by the time the New York Police Department, acting on orders from the city's then-mayor, Michael Bloomberg, cleared the park, arresting more than 240 protesters nearly two months after the "occupation" had begun.

Many of the more pragmatic activists had become baffled or frustrated by the avant-garde in their midst, and had largely soured on the spectacle. Questions about the immediate direction of the movement could not be settled.

Despite the inner tumult and outside mockery, aspects of the animating message behind the Occupy protests -- which eventually spanned more than 1,000 locations across the country -- have become part of the current political discussion.

"Occupy Wall Street helped create the political climate that helped Bernie's message to resonate so widely, simply by shining a spotlight on issues of Wall Street greed and income inequality," Sanders spokesman Karthik Ganapathy told CNN.

The Sanders campaign is now seeing various elements of the old Occupy coalition working together to build momentum ahead of what could be a make-or-break contest in the primary battle against Hillary Clinton.

"We've been able to tap into the energy of (Occupy) and channel that into something tangible and concrete and forward-looking," Ganapathy said. "They're here [working on the campaign]. I see them, I see a lot of them volunteering, making phone calls, knocking on doors. It's a natural fit."

Occupy's laundry list of economic grievances largely mirrored Sanders' own, and in 2011 he emerged as one of the movement's earliest defenders.

"I applaud them," he told CNN's Wolf Blitzer at the time. "They are speaking to the real anger and frustration that millions of Americans feel at a time when the middle class is collapsing, poverty is increasing, the people on top are doing phenomenally well."

What the movement can do for Sanders

Now, they are returning the favor -- and their effort is transcending routine "get-out-the-vote" activities.

The independent journalists and activists who helped write the free "Occupied Wall Street Journal" in fall 2011 are now poised to produce 500,000 bilingual broadsheet newspapers, as part of their crowdsourced "Battle of New York" project. The special edition, which they hope to begin printing on Wednesday, will feature essays, art and -- in a clear pivot to the mainstream -- a direct call to vote for Sanders next week.

The blitz will continue on Saturday, when a coalition led by the Millennials for Bernie group launches a "March for Bernie." Their preliminary route is slated to take supporters north from Foley Square in Manhattan's financial district to Union Square, a path familiar to those who joined the demonstrations five years ago. Organizers expect as many as 15,000 people to attend.

"It is unique in itself that a presidential candidate has sparked people to use the protest tactic of marches, which isn't very typical in our electoral politics," said Heather Hurwitz, a post-doctoral fellow at Barnard College who is studying social movements like Occupy Wall Street.
She said that while the march's lead organizers weren't directly involved in Occupy Wall Street five years ago, there is "an inspiration from Occupy and training and strategies that people have gained."

Sanders is also expected to receive significant rank-and-file labor support in the days leading up to the New York vote. Clinton remains the clear leader in overall endorsements, but Sanders will be counting on battle-hardened unions like the Communications Workers of America to help drive turnout.

CWA political director and Working Families Party co-chair Bob Master believes Verizon workers, who were caught in a tense contract fight when Occupy took root in 2011, benefited from the spirit surrounding the demonstrations. Those same workers are, once again, without a contract and thousands began a strike Wednesday morning on the East Coast. Sanders joined some of the Verizon employees on a picket line in Brooklyn on Wednesday.

Now, the CWA is working as part of a familiar coalition to help win New York for Sanders.

"Bernie's campaign -- like the de Blasio campaign (for NYC mayor in 2013), like the Warren campaign (in 2012) -- are lineal descendants of Occupy," Master told CNN. "These campaigns, and Sanders most dramatically, are Occupy Wall Street translated into electoral politics. This is the revolt of the 99%."



EXCERPTS -- “The Vermont senator's laser focus on economic issues are a big draw, local organizers said, but they also delight in his affection for the shoe-leather activism of past generations. …. "Occupy was a reaction to the financial collapse, to what happened because of Wall Street's power to destroy the economy, and Bernie's campaign is the one that has been consistently focused on the role of the '1 Percent,' large corporations and financial institutions," he said. "It's a very natural connection." …. "Occupy Wall Street helped create the political climate that helped Bernie's message to resonate so widely, simply by shining a spotlight on issues of Wall Street greed and income inequality," Sanders spokesman Karthik Ganapathy told CNN. The Sanders campaign is now seeing various elements of the old Occupy coalition working together to build momentum ahead of what could be a make-or-break contest in the primary battle against Hillary Clinton. "We've been able to tap into the energy of (Occupy) and channel that into something tangible and concrete and forward-looking," Ganapathy said. "They're here [working on the campaign]. I see them, I see a lot of them volunteering, making phone calls, knocking on doors. It's a natural fit." …. The independent journalists and activists who helped write the free "Occupied Wall Street Journal" in fall 2011 are now poised to produce 500,000 bilingual broadsheet newspapers, as part of their crowdsourced "Battle of New York" project. The special edition, which they hope to begin printing on Wednesday, will feature essays, art and -- in a clear pivot to the mainstream -- a direct call to vote for Sanders next week. The blitz will continue on Saturday, when a coalition led by the Millennials for Bernie group launches a "March for Bernie." …. Sanders is also expected to receive significant rank-and-file labor support in the days leading up to the New York vote. Clinton remains the clear leader in overall endorsements, but Sanders will be counting on battle-hardened unions like the Communications Workers of America to help drive turnout.”


COMMENTARY -- "These campaigns, and Sanders most dramatically, are Occupy Wall Street translated into electoral politics. This is the revolt of the 99%." Gregory Krieg of CNN states that Sanders campaign focuses Occupy and makes it concrete. I agree with that statement. When they first hit the news, I saw lots of civil disobedience, but very little specific rhetoric on what their precise views and complaints were. They didn’t seem to have a leader or a goal. As a result, I didn’t get behind them in their actions.

Sanders on the other hand put out a specific viewpoint and goal, with his “Bernie photos” on Internet sources. In those, his strongly and eloquently stated views were enough to convince me that he was “the man.” I had been feeling very bland and neutral about Clinton, and he was a clear leader with bold ideas. I’m so glad he showed up on the national stage. I had known who he was, but nothing about his views.

We really do have a lot of talk from the Bernie followers about “revolution,” which will undoubtedly turn older and more conservative leaning Democrats off to his campaign. It really wouldn’t have to be a “revolt” at all, if the modern day Republicans weren’t so far to the right and so obstructionist in their federal and state legislative stances and methods. Given the fact that politics has become so hostile along with such a strong racist tinge, We The People need to confront the Right effectively. As a result, I am glad to see that Occupy is involved with the Sanders push for societal and financial equity, and I do hope that this movement does not “fizzle out,” like the social activism of the 1960 and 70s did. At this point, there really is lots of momentum, or “the big mo” as one pundit called it, such as the following: 500,000 broadsheets urging followers to get out and vote, strong union support, and the March For Bernie are in the works on his side, and considerable canvassing will be done in NY. This really reminds me of the antiwar movement of Eugene McCarthy. I do hope Sanders, unlike McCarthy, will win the presidency in November.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/how-bill-clinton-lost-his-1406972950126646.html

How Bill Clinton lost his legacy
Matt Bai,Matt Bai
April 14, 2016 15 hours ago

Photograph -- Former President Bill Clinton at a benefit concert for his wife in New York City in March. (Photo: Mike Segar/Reuters)

When Bill Clinton left office in 2001, historians compared him to Teddy Roosevelt. Like the Bull Moose, the Big Dog was unusually young (only 54) and still popular when he finished his presidency. He established his base in New York, about 100 blocks from where Roosevelt was born.

For a while there was even talk of Clinton running for mayor, as Roosevelt once had. What a spectacle that would have been.

Looking back now, though, the comparison seems wildly off. Roosevelt, you may recall, ended up running for president again and then crusading against Woodrow Wilson’s pacifism. To the day he died in 1919, TR jealously protected his twin legacy of reform and internationalism.

Clinton, on the other hand, has run from every big ideological fight like a man on parole. From the moment he stepped out of the White House, the husband of a newly elected senator, his own political interests have been subservient to his wife’s.

Sure, he started a foundation and got crazy rich, but for the last 16 years — a period in which much of what he achieved has been steadily distorted and discredited — Clinton has been chained by the role of dutiful political spouse.

And so this is what it’s come to, as the most talented campaigner of the modern age apologizes for defending his own record and stumps cautiously for Hillary ahead of next week’s New York primary. What was supposed to be the final validation of Bill Clinton’s legacy inside the Democratic Party — the election of his wife as a successor — has now become the only thing left that can save it.

To be clear, Clinton’s governing legacy, unlike Roosevelt’s, featured little by way of transformative legislation. Though he presided over a surging economy, Clinton’s presidency played out mostly like a tragedy in three acts: first the stumble over health care; then the survival of Republican rule through compromise; and finally the sex scandal that crippled his second term.

Whatever lasting achievements Clinton might have claimed as world leader were probably washed away eight months after he left office, when the sudden strike of terrorists exposed a glaring failure of his tenure.

But Clinton’s more lasting political legacy — the thing for which he should have been remembered — was the transformation of the Democratic Party from a tired, marginalized coalition of interest groups to a governing entity that embraced modern realities.

As I was recently reminded watching “Crashing the Party,” an upcoming documentary about the founding of the Democratic Leadership Council in the 1980s, Democrats by 1992 had lost five of the previous six presidential elections and were losing ground everywhere else. They were perceived, fairly, as reflexively anti-military and anti-business.

Clinton’s central argument, which it took no small amount of courage to make in those early days, was that in order to both win and govern effectively, Democrats had to stop agitating for an ever more expansive government and start trying to build a better one.

That was the philosophy that underlay Clinton’s string of pragmatic achievements: free trade, a balanced budget, welfare reform, the crime bill. For a while, anyway, it seemed like he had left an indelible stamp on the party, widening its focus from the poor and excluded to encompass the broader middle class.

Except then came the Iraq War and the collapse of Wall Street, a crushing recession followed by an even more crushing recession and soaring inequality. Angry liberal populism reemerged as a powerful force, first in Howard Dean’s insurgency and then through the reborn John Edwards and now Bernie Sanders.

At first, both Clintons tried gamely to defend the underpinnings of what became known as Clintonism. “I think that if ‘progressive’ is defined by results, whether it’s in health care, education, incomes, the environment, or the advancement of peace, then we had a very progressive administration,” Clinton told me during an interview in 2006 for my first book, on Democratic politics.

When I had lunch with him in South Carolina the next year, while working on a cover piece for the New York Times Magazine about his legacy, Clinton readily agreed to talk more about it. By then, though, Hillary Clinton’s aides had decided that the more Bill went on about his own centrist legacy, the less helpful he became. They promptly quashed the interview.

Now, some eight years later, the DLC is long dead (succeeded by a group called Third Way), and Clinton’s legacy inside his own party is savaged as never before. He’s derided on the left as a shill for Wall Street, a racist for supporting mass incarceration, a conservative for overhauling welfare.

Clinton refuses to defend his own record at any length, and when he can’t help himself and plunges in anyway — as he did in rightly defending the crime bill to a couple of activists last week — he almost immediately retreats.

It’s hard now to escape the conclusion that Clinton did not ultimately transform his party, the virus of Clintonism having been expelled from its bloodstream. Ordinary Democrats still love the former president, but the Democratic leaders and activists reject pretty much everything he stood for.

In politics, you see, timing is everything. Bill Clinton arrived on the scene at a time when Democrats were desperate and dispirited, and they were willing to entertain any argument that might reverse their string of losses, even if it clashed with their own dogma.

Hillary never had that luxury. She’s trying to fend off her own Jerry Brown circa 1992 at a time when Democrats have been winning presidential elections, and winning parties tend to care a lot about ideological purity. She can’t have Bill out there excoriating populism and protectionism.

Maybe this is Bill Clinton’s penance — the price he pays for having humiliated his wife so publicly in 1998. Maybe in order to salvage what remained of his presidency and his marriage, he ultimately had to be willing to sacrifice his own case for historical relevance.

Maybe this is why Clinton seems so much older all of a sudden, the white hair more brittle, the eyes more watery, the cranelike movements of the arms slower and more deliberate. You can imagine how all that forced silence takes its toll, how physically ruinous it must be to keep the fury inside, when all you want to do is defend yourself.

What we know is that if Hillary Clinton goes on from New York to win the nomination, it will have more to do with the Obama record than with her husband’s. And if she’s elected in November, it won’t validate Bill’s legacy so much as offer him some path to redemption.

Bill Clinton once argued to me that Teddy Roosevelt didn’t see his own progressive legacy affirmed for 24 years after he left office, when his distant cousin, Franklin, was elected with the same name and a similar platform. That may or may not be a sound interpretation of history.

But you can see why it’s a comforting thought.



“That was the philosophy that underlay Clinton’s string of pragmatic achievements: free trade, a balanced budget, welfare reform, the crime bill. For a while, anyway, it seemed like he had left an indelible stamp on the party, widening its focus from the poor and excluded to encompass the broader middle class. …. Angry liberal populism reemerged as a powerful force, first in Howard Dean’s insurgency and then through the reborn John Edwards and now Bernie Sanders. …. He’s derided on the left as a shill for Wall Street, a racist for supporting mass incarceration, a conservative for overhauling welfare. …. Bill Clinton arrived on the scene at a time when Democrats were desperate and dispirited, and they were willing to entertain any argument that might reverse their string of losses, even if it clashed with their own dogma. …. Bill Clinton once argued to me that Teddy Roosevelt didn’t see his own progressive legacy affirmed for 24 years after he left office, when his distant cousin, Franklin, was elected with the same name and a similar platform. That may or may not be a sound interpretation of history. But you can see why it’s a comforting thought.”


Read more at http://www.notable-quotes.com/w/winning_quotes.html#2SEkGc7HmlgqW70d.99


My essentially negative ex-husband once said to me that sports figure Vince Lombardi said “Winning isn’t everything. It’s the only thing.” Wikipedia says that it wasn’t Lombardi, but another football coach Henry Russell ("Red") Sanders. Whoever said it, while I freely acknowledge it’s catchy and slightly humorous, Unfortunately, it's also cynical to the core, distinctly lacking in empathy and a very poor rule to build a life around. As high school coaches used to say, “It's not whether you win or lose but how you play the game.” The phrase back then was "good sportsmanship. Another and probably more accurate quotation is “Winning isn't getting ahead of others. It's getting ahead of yourself,” by Roger Staubach, from Wisdom Sayings for Our Troubling Times. Much of life is learning to do that.

“Angry liberal populism reemerged as a powerful force, first in Howard Dean’s insurgency and then through the reborn John Edwards and now Bernie Sanders.” It’s not surprising that I liked all three of those leaders because they were sticking to the FDR based emphasis on the poor and Middle Class. Until FDR the Democrats were the ultraconservative wing, but when the Civil Rights movement was championed by Lyndon Johnson those Dixicrats switched over to the Republican party, who correspondingly purged their ranks of the moderates. I personally don’t consider liberal populism to be necessarily angry, but it is assertive for sure. We are at a point in this society when they are needed again, and I’m hopeful that Sanders’ run may do the trick. If we do have Real Democrats in office again, that will be a Happy day!



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-sanders-urges-a-moral-economy-during-vatican-visit/

Bernie Sanders urges a "moral economy" during Vatican visit
By REENA FLORES CBS NEWS
April 15, 2016, 11:58 AM

Video – CBS: Battle In Brooklyn
Play VIDEO -- Clinton, Sanders battle over minimum wage, Wall Street and guns
Photograph -- dsc0062.jpg, Bernie Sanders addresses the Pontifical Academy of Social Science's 25th anniversary conference on Centesimus Annus. PONTIFICAL ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE


Bernie Sanders brought his campaign platform on wealth inequality to Vatican City Friday, calling for the world to embrace a more "moral economy" during a speech to a pontifical conference.

"At a time when so few have so much, and so many have so little, we must reject the foundations of this contemporary economy as immoral and unsustainable," Sanders told an audience of a few dozen at the Vatican, according to his prepared remarks.

Sanders arrived in Rome early Friday to deliver remarks at the Pontifical Academy of Social Science's 25th anniversary conference on Centesimus Annus, an important encyclical released by Pope John Paul II that expounded on the economy and social issues after the Cold War.

"Twenty-five years after Centesimus Annus, speculation, illicit financial flows, environmental destruction, and the weakening of the rights of workers is far more severe than it was a quarter century ago," Sanders noted to the Vatican think tank's meeting. "Financial excesses, indeed widespread financial criminality on Wall Street, played a direct role in causing the world's worst financial crisis since the Great Depression."

In his speech, Sanders, who is Jewish, drew parallels between his own campaign promises and the calls by Pope Francis for a more compassionate economic world view.

"I am told time and time again by the rich and powerful, and the mainstream media that represent them, that we should be 'practical; that we should accept the status quo; that a truly moral economy is beyond our reach," Sanders said. "Yet Pope Francis himself is surely the world's greatest demonstration against such a surrender to despair and cynicism. He has opened the eyes of the world once again to the claims of mercy, justice and the possibilities of a better world."

He also used the speech to slam the United States' financial sector and the protections provided it by politicians that believed in a 'too big to fail' banking system.

"In my country, home of the world's largest financial markets, globalization was used as a pretext to deregulate the banks, ending decades of legal protections for working people and small businesses," Sanders said.

The result, the Vermont senator said, was a decline in the middle class. And of the effect on the country as a whole, Sanders added: "Our very soul as a nation has suffered as the public lost faith in political and social institutions."

Sanders' arrival at the Vatican comes just hours after he departed the Democratic debate stage in New York Thursday night, where economic issues and the corruption of big banks dominated much of the conversation between him and rival Hillary Clinton.

Speaking to reporters outside of the Vatican, Sanders said that his break from campaigning in New York, which holds its primary on April 19, was well worth the opportunity to speak at the conference.

"I know it's taking me away from the campaign trail for a day," Sanders said, but it was "so moving to me that it was just something I could not simply refuse to attend.'

While the Democratic candidate did not meet with Pope Francis (despite holding out hopes of doing so), he still expressed admiration for the Catholic leader, saying "I have long been a supporter of the economic vision of Pope Francis" and noting his "profound role in turning many people's minds around" on climate change.



EXCERPTS -- "At a time when so few have so much, and so many have so little, we must reject the foundations of this contemporary economy as immoral and unsustainable," Sanders told an audience of a few dozen at the Vatican, according to his prepared remarks. …. "Twenty-five years after Centesimus Annus, speculation, illicit financial flows, environmental destruction, and the weakening of the rights of workers is far more severe than it was a quarter century ago," Sanders noted to the Vatican think tank's meeting. "Financial excesses, indeed widespread financial criminality on Wall Street, played a direct role in causing the world's worst financial crisis since the Great Depression." …. "I am told time and time again by the rich and powerful, and the mainstream media that represent them, that we should be 'practical,; that we should accept the status quo; that a truly moral economy is beyond our reach," Sanders said. …. "In my country, home of the world's largest financial markets, globalization was used as a pretext to deregulate the banks, ending decades of legal protections for working people and small businesses," Sanders said. The result, the Vermont senator said, was a decline in the middle class. And of the effect on the country as a whole, Sanders added: "Our very soul as a nation has suffered as the public lost faith in political and social institutions."


COMMENTARY -- When I was in secondary school and then college we were taught a sharing mentality rather than a fiercely competitive money grubbing turn of mind, and I personally from childhood believed that aggressiveness and greed are not positive characteristics. I believed that if we approach each other with honesty, generosity, acceptance and some other high-minded characteristics like that, we absolutely can achieve the American Ideal.

At this stage in my life I will settle for real improvement rather than perfection. There will always be a necessity for fair police forces, for instance, but our cities will be more safe and accepting of newcomers even if they wear a burqa and prostrate themselves in the street to pray. Some people think we can ban those outsiders from entering our country, but that never was the American ideal and it’s extremely unfair at this point when refugees from so many places keep coming here. They’re running from horrific groups like ISIS and aren’t coming here just to get a better source of income, though there’s nothing wrong with that motivation either.

We must remember that those are the reasons why our European forebears came here in the 1500 to 1700s. Because the earliest settlers moved over and gave them some space, we now have a varied cultural and genetic mix which brings exciting new ideas and technology, and a relatively liberal philosophy. Rather than stopping that societal trend, we should increase it. Differences aren’t necessarily dangerous, and don’t have to foster hatred.




http://www.cbsnews.com/news/in-democratic-debate-bernie-sanders-brings-the-fight-to-hillary-clinton/

In Democratic debate, Bernie Sanders brings the fight to Hillary Clinton
By STEPHANIE CONDON CBS NEWS
April 15, 2016, 1:56 AM

Play VIDEO -- Clinton campaign reacts to debate performance
Play VIDEO -- Sanders campaign reacts to intense debate
Related:
Sanders slams Clinton's 1996 super predators comment as "racist"
Hillary Clinton goes on the attack over gun control
Clinton vs. Sanders on a $15 wage: who's right?


Back in October, Bernie Sanders was confronted with the question of whether Hillary Clinton has the "right stuff" to be president. He demurred, instead touting his own record of standing up to special interests and disavowing super PACs.

On Thursday night, the Vermont senator openly mocked his one-time Senate colleague for her claim that she "called out" Wall Street for its misconduct.

"Secretary Clinton 'called them out.' Oh my goodness, they must have been really crushed by this," Sanders said sarcastically from the debate stage in Brooklyn. "And was that before or after you received huge sums of money by giving speaking engagements?"

And while he acknowledged Clinton has the experience to serve president, he certainly wasn't ready to say she has the "right stuff" for the job. Once again attacking her willingness to take money from special interests, he said, "I don't believe that that is the kind of judgment we need to be the kind of president we need."

The central theme of the Democratic primary has held steady since October: Clinton presents a pragmatic if incremental approach to governing, while Sanders is campaigning on a bolder, more aspirational vision of progressive leadership. Over the course of several months, however, as Sanders' support has crept up and up, the tension has grown between the two candidates. By the time the candidates finally met for their ninth debate in Brooklyn, both were ready to go on the attack.

Sanders -- who's been on a winning streak lately, claiming victory in seven of last eight nominating contests -- seemed driven by his growing conviction that he could win the Democratic nomination in spite of his current deficit in the delegate race.

"I think we're going to win this nomination to tell you the truth," he said near the end of the debate.

The senator aggressively challenged Clinton on multiple issues, compelling her to clarify her stance on issues like Social Security and the federal minimum wage. Yet when pushed on his own bold positions, Sanders at times failed to get past generalities.

For instance, the senator aggressively called into question Clinton's judgment for taking money from Wall Street. Yet when pressed to give one specific example of how that money influenced her policymaking, Sanders could not.

"When the greed and recklessness and illegal behavior of Wall Street brought this country into the worst economic downturn since the Great Recession... Secretary Clinton was busy giving speeches to Goldman Sachs for $225,000 a speech," Sanders said.

It wasn't until after the debate that Sanders' campaign released a document charging that Clinton voted for the Bankruptcy Reform Act in 2001 because of her ties to Wall Street.

Clinton, meanwhile, repeatedly associated herself with President Obama, even using Sanders' Wall Street attacks to do so.

"Make no mistake about it, this is not just an attack on me, it's an attack on President Obama," she said. "President Obama had a super PAC when he ran. President Obama took tens of millions of dollars from contributors. And President Obama was not at all influenced when he made the decision to pass and sign Dodd-Frank, the toughest regulations on Wall Street in many a year."

On the issue of climate change, Sanders gave Clinton an opportunity to align herself with the president and to cast herself as a realist. When asked how he could realistically phase out nuclear power and fossil fuels, given how little U.S. energy currently comes from renewables, Sanders said, "Well, you don't phase it all out tomorrow." His response elicited some applause but also some doubtful murmurs from the crowd.

The senator went on to describe a "massive program" of installing solar rooftops across the country. Still, Clinton said of Sanders' approach, "It's easy to diagnose the problem. It's harder to do something about the problem," she said.

The former secretary of state also proposed widespread solar panel installation and said she's aiming for enough clean energy to provide electricity to every home in America within 10 years. Touting the international commitments on climate change she helped craft in the Obama administration, Clinton chided Sanders for failing to acknowledge those advances.

"I'm getting a little bit concerned here," she said. "I really believe the president has done an incredible job against great odds and deserves to be supported."

Clinton, as she has many times before, attacked Sanders for his positions on gun control. She slammed him for repeatedly voting against the Brady bill, charging that he "kept his word to the NRA."

Sanders, meanwhile, let Clinton have it for her use of the term "super-predator" in the 1990's to refer to young criminals. "It was a racist term, and everybody knew it was a racist term," he said.

While the debate was relatively acrimonious, the two remaining Democratic candidates did drill down to specific policy questions, such as how to achieve a $15 minimum wage and how to preserve Social Security.

After an extended debate on lifting the cap on taxable income for Social Security, Clinton remarked, "It's always a little bit challenging because, you know, if Senator Sanders doesn't agree with how you are approaching something, then you are a member of the establishment."

Sanders retorted, "Yes, Secretary Clinton, you are a member of the establishment."



"The central theme of the Democratic primary has held steady since October: Clinton presents a pragmatic if incremental approach to governing, while Sanders is campaigning on a bolder, more aspirational vision of progressive leadership. …. Secretary Clinton was busy giving speeches to Goldman Sachs for $225,000 a speech," Sanders said. It wasn't until after the debate that Sanders' campaign released a document charging that Clinton voted for the Bankruptcy Reform Act in 2001 because of her ties to Wall Street. …. "Well, you don't phase it all out tomorrow." His response elicited some applause but also some doubtful murmurs from the crowd. The senator went on to describe a "massive program" of installing solar rooftops across the country. …. She slammed him for repeatedly voting against the Brady bill, charging that he "kept his word to the NRA." Sanders, meanwhile, let Clinton have it for her use of the term "super-predator" in the 1990's to refer to young criminals. "It was a racist term, and everybody knew it was a racist term," he said. …. the two remaining Democratic candidates did drill down to specific policy questions, such as how to achieve a $15 minimum wage and how to preserve Social Security. After an extended debate on lifting the cap on taxable income for Social Security, Clinton remarked, "It's always a little bit challenging because, you know, if Senator Sanders doesn't agree with how you are approaching something, then you are a member of the establishment." Sanders retorted, "Yes, Secretary Clinton, you are a member of the establishment."


I do believe that Clinton is “a member of the establishment.” That’s what the whole “New Democrat” concept is about. It does seem clear to me that at this point in time, we really do need another FDR style Democrat. Both agree on lots of solar panels on houses, which is good, but this article didn’t say how Hillary feels about lifting the SS income cap so that the very wealthy will pay a meaningful amount toward financing our national retirement and disability systems. I agree with Sanders that her receiving $225,000 on (potentially politically cozy) speeches is not a good thing and should be against the law. There is, in a general way, way too much money sloshing around in our political system, and I do believe that it leads to corruption. It’s too bad that Sanders didn’t find the document on the Bankruptcy Reform Act in 2001, as proof of her judgement being biased toward Big Money. As for Clinton’s “pragmatic if incremental approach to governing,” I do think that is way too little and too late at this time. Our Middle Class shrinks daily while billionaires’ club continues to get richer. It’s time to do something really significant.