<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>LAist: Bill Bradley&apos;s Take on America</title>
<link>http://laist.com/2007/04/19/bill_bradleys_take_on_america.php</link>
<description>All comments for Bill Bradley&apos;s Take on America</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2008 la_julie</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 13:00:00 -0800</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>juliewolfson@ca.rr.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>juliewolfson@ca.rr.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>Sloane</title>
<link>http://laist.com/2007/04/19/bill_bradleys_take_on_america.php#comment-1071428</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://laist.com/2007/04/19/bill_bradleys_take_on_america.php#comment-1071428</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:44:23 -0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;As the author, I respect your opinion, but I think you&apos;re forgetting that Bradley is on a book tour not campaign trail. 8 years ago he was looking for votes and yes certainly would have been a lot more alive and lively, but the circumstances were completely different. His story telling is a reflection of where he is right now in his career and showed, to me, that he is stepping back and taking it all in a lot more. His book is a step to define what his legacy will be and what is so wrong about being a little optimistic? I found it refreshing and so in conclusion we were in the same place, I just think we were looking for different things.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>Bruin Fever</title>
<link>http://laist.com/2007/04/19/bill_bradleys_take_on_america.php#comment-1071281</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://laist.com/2007/04/19/bill_bradleys_take_on_america.php#comment-1071281</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:23:56 -0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;I was at the UCLA stop as well, but was incredibly disappointed. I have been a longtime Bill Bradley fan, having read the McPhee biography and been a former constituent. I had seen him pitch the book on Charlie Rose and thought that he was unfairly beat up. However, at the UCLA event, I came to realize that Bill Bradley has truly lost it. By &quot;it&quot;, I mean political sensibility. 

When asked whether the difference between the haves and the have nots was the biggest problem facing America, he responded with some bizarre argument about the savings rate, which then devolved into the supposition that the firing of Imus shows that corporate America cares about racial harmony. 

He does have several great policy points, particularly his proposed fixes for Social Security. However, he overestimates America&apos;s optimism and willingness to pursue easy answers. The reason why people don&apos;t find consensus over issues isn&apos;t because they can&apos;t see it. Typically, things are pretty complicated. He tries to gloss over this with stories about mothers writing letters to young cancer patients. That is no doubt an honorable undertaking. However, it has no relevance to how to move forward politically. 

Additionally, he indicated that he had been informed that he would have to touch on the Mitt Romney hunting controversy, but he had no idea what the controversy involved. 

Overall, his poise and delivery was not as compelling as eight years ago. I&apos;m not sure the author and I attended the same event. &lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>Brian Corbin</title>
<link>http://laist.com/2007/04/19/bill_bradleys_take_on_america.php#comment-1071153</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://laist.com/2007/04/19/bill_bradleys_take_on_america.php#comment-1071153</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2007 01:15:18 -0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;I fucking love Bill Bradley and thought he should have been president!&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>