Is This A Bunch Of Lollipops

One doesn’t have to be banal to be consistent, or to be understandable. It just so happens that the range of my interests is rather broad, as evidenced by the fact that I went into the Jesuit seminary for three and a half years and spent that period in virtual silence and meditation and manual work and the study of Latin and spiritual treatises–and then went to Berkeley at the very beginning of the awakening in the early ’60s. I’ve always been interested in religion and polities. What I’m doing now is trying to find a way to unify them, try to raise my politics to a higher level of principle, which is never easy in the best of times.

Well, you get different interpretations of your life at different times. I would say I’m more shy-I’m more like my mother than father-although I have enough of my father in me that I followed in his footsteps rather precisely. So he has more of an outgoing, different kind of temperament. Whenever he went anywhere, he would start shaking hands with everybody. And as a child, I found that it was just clearly embarrassing, that’s all. For him, he was in his element. He was like a fish swimming in the ocean.

It’s not easy. I’ve had to work at that. It doesn’t always come as naturally as I think it does to some of my competitors.

Yes, I am, and I’m not. Garry Wills wrote an article [saying] that all these unusual features of my biography were really just a cover for what was really pretty much a traditional politician. I think there’s some truth to that.

I got elected governor. I raised money. I made TV spots. I have press releases and sound bites. So I did that. Part of me–I believe my essence–is striving toward a higher form of public discourse and political action.

Well, because I was trying to take this message that the system was broken and offer a solution, an alternative. So it’s hard to say, “Look, I have all this experience and then, by the way, the system isn’t working and I’m going to come in here with all these new people and change it.” A lot of people don’t know who I am, so I have to first of all give some account of who I am and where I’ve been. Then I have to make my critique.

I believe that in this party we have to divide before we can determine where is our soul here. I mean, what is this party.? Is this a bunch of lollipops for business, lollipops for something called the middle class is it about social justice?

I don’t believe in this whole discourse about how wonderful we are and George Bush is the only problem. I am saying something different. I’m saying the system is stuck, and I’m saying exactly what Ralph Nader is saying. You have to empower people. He calls it his toolbox of democracy. I have my 800 number, my $100 limit. These are all methods in the service of a larger goal, which is to restore greater vitality to our political life.

But I think I’m getting to be a much better messenger. It just takes a little of my humor to come out. And the reason why it’s taken a lot is it’s hard for me as an insider, as part of this culture, to then stand back and say, “OK, guys, you’re wrong, it’s empty and meaningless.” It is unpleasant. I’m not that kind of a person to stand there and chide Harkin and Kerrey for their pay raises and Tsongas for his nuclear lobbying, whatever it is. It takes a certain mentality that I have to work at.

My statement is, we do not stop. Because I believe this requires a cause, it requires a movement. And what we have today with this 800 number is quite extraordinary. We got on the ballot in New York. In 1980, when I was governor and I had two union presidents supporting me, we couldn’t get on the ballot. But we had the people–they’re all 800 people.

We build whatever movement is required to make real change. I don’t consider the Gong Show capable of making real change. People that lack the capacity to grow are not only boring, but they’re underdeveloped. They are probably not realizing their potential as a human being.

title: " Is This A Bunch Of Lollipops " ShowToc: true date: “2022-12-13” author: “Robert Lugo”

One doesn’t have to be banal to be consistent, or to be understandable. It just so happens that the range of my interests is rather broad, as evidenced by the fact that I went into the Jesuit seminary for three and a half years and spent that period in virtual silence and meditation and manual work and the study of Latin and spiritual treatises–and then went to Berkeley at the very beginning of the awakening in the early ’60s. I’ve always been interested in religion and polities. What I’m doing now is trying to find a way to unify them, try to raise my politics to a higher level of principle, which is never easy in the best of times.

Well, you get different interpretations of your life at different times. I would say I’m more shy-I’m more like my mother than father-although I have enough of my father in me that I followed in his footsteps rather precisely. So he has more of an outgoing, different kind of temperament. Whenever he went anywhere, he would start shaking hands with everybody. And as a child, I found that it was just clearly embarrassing, that’s all. For him, he was in his element. He was like a fish swimming in the ocean.

It’s not easy. I’ve had to work at that. It doesn’t always come as naturally as I think it does to some of my competitors.

Yes, I am, and I’m not. Garry Wills wrote an article [saying] that all these unusual features of my biography were really just a cover for what was really pretty much a traditional politician. I think there’s some truth to that.

I got elected governor. I raised money. I made TV spots. I have press releases and sound bites. So I did that. Part of me–I believe my essence–is striving toward a higher form of public discourse and political action.

Well, because I was trying to take this message that the system was broken and offer a solution, an alternative. So it’s hard to say, “Look, I have all this experience and then, by the way, the system isn’t working and I’m going to come in here with all these new people and change it.” A lot of people don’t know who I am, so I have to first of all give some account of who I am and where I’ve been. Then I have to make my critique.

I believe that in this party we have to divide before we can determine where is our soul here. I mean, what is this party.? Is this a bunch of lollipops for business, lollipops for something called the middle class is it about social justice?

I don’t believe in this whole discourse about how wonderful we are and George Bush is the only problem. I am saying something different. I’m saying the system is stuck, and I’m saying exactly what Ralph Nader is saying. You have to empower people. He calls it his toolbox of democracy. I have my 800 number, my $100 limit. These are all methods in the service of a larger goal, which is to restore greater vitality to our political life.

But I think I’m getting to be a much better messenger. It just takes a little of my humor to come out. And the reason why it’s taken a lot is it’s hard for me as an insider, as part of this culture, to then stand back and say, “OK, guys, you’re wrong, it’s empty and meaningless.” It is unpleasant. I’m not that kind of a person to stand there and chide Harkin and Kerrey for their pay raises and Tsongas for his nuclear lobbying, whatever it is. It takes a certain mentality that I have to work at.

My statement is, we do not stop. Because I believe this requires a cause, it requires a movement. And what we have today with this 800 number is quite extraordinary. We got on the ballot in New York. In 1980, when I was governor and I had two union presidents supporting me, we couldn’t get on the ballot. But we had the people–they’re all 800 people.

We build whatever movement is required to make real change. I don’t consider the Gong Show capable of making real change. People that lack the capacity to grow are not only boring, but they’re underdeveloped. They are probably not realizing their potential as a human being.