August 25, 2025 • 44 mins
Political Strategist Ed Sanders and talk radio host Dominique DiPrima agree to disagree on everything from California's redistricting plan to the fate of the Menendez Brothers. Headlines, hot topics and things we don't agree on agree at the heart of this podcast with two longtime activists and friends going toe-to-toe.
X/Twitter: @EdwardMSanders @diprimaradio
X/Twitter: @EdwardMSanders @diprimaradio
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey bla talk fifteen eighty Good morning, Happy Friday, God
bless I'm Dominique Uprima. The show. It's called First Things
First and my very first thing. Every Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Uda, Wednesday,
Thursday given thanksgiving, praises and asking for blessings from God,
asking for the blessings of the ancestors and the elders,
(00:21):
and let's go okay. So on Friday, every Friday is
a Freedman Friday because we are focused on reparations three
hundred and sixty five days a year, of course, but
always the second hour on Fridays we do a focus
on that topic and get up to date, learn how
to be part of the solution, learn how to be
(00:42):
tapped in. Today we'll be talking with La County Equity
Chief d'Artagnan SCRSA. That should be quite a fascinating convo
for hour two hour three. We have a grab bag
on Fridays and today the phone lines are open, there's
space and time. Let's talk about it. Many things to
(01:02):
touch on. I want to make sure we get our
courage pledge in, you know, our pledge to be courageous
and spread it around and also you know, just have
some positivity in our lives. I'm excited because next week
we're going to have a big giant dose of arts
and culture. Some great, great guests on deck for you
(01:25):
next week, including Kean Harold. If you haven't heard him,
I'm sure you have, but if you haven't, take the opportunity.
He'll be here Tuesday. A lot of great music and
art will be in the house next week, so we
can get a nice refill of inspiration and things that
(01:47):
aren't Trump, other things that aren't Trump. It's every other Friday,
so I'm joined by kbla contributor and the founder of
ES Advisors. They do campaigns, they do public policies, and
he's also a former Fox Soul contributor. We both are
actually Ed Sanders.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
Good morning, Good morning, How are you.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
I'm blessed. It's Friday. Yeah, how you doing?
Speaker 2 (02:15):
Ready for the weekend? Blood? It's starting to warm up
around here.
Speaker 1 (02:18):
Well that's an understatement. I mean they're saying we're breaking
all these records, heat waves. You got little ones that
play sports. How you guys doing, Are you hydrated? Is
everybody whiny and complaining or they're they're loving it.
Speaker 2 (02:34):
They're loving it. I love it. You know, that's good
that part of the year where you get outside, so
it's fun.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
Yeah, that's true. I also know people can be rather grouchy.
I've seen quite a few studies actually showing how humans
fight more when it's grouchy. So I think, you know,
to everyone, we've got this. You know, have the Virgo
Mars mars energy and heat. So just be cool, stay hydrated,
(03:06):
don't don't pop off.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
Yeah, that's right, that's right. We uh, well, it always
seemed to happen with the with the young young folks. Well,
but he'd always coincicted with like being out of school
and that sort of stuff.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
So that's true.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
Those years, we've put together stuff in the in the
schools there in the parks, the sumilar success and now
streak the summer night lights to keep people faced during
the summertime.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
Yeah, I saw this crazy article. I don't want to
go off too off down on a tangent because I
didn't tell you about this, but where they now have
summer night lights in Philly, but they've turned it into
a whole cop event where it's just like Dare the
camp and they're giving some guy that I never heard
(03:56):
of credit for creating it. It's so crazy because that
started in LA with Summer of Success. You worked on
it and I worked both of us actually worked on
the original model that created Summer night Lights. So we
know that's not the truth, and that also isn't what
it was meant to be, right exactly.
Speaker 2 (04:19):
You know, we should have a copyrighted the name back then.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
Yeah, or even if it wasn't a copyright the name,
somebody should have got the concept right. I mean, it
feels like it's being co opted now into this sort
of police propaganda, copaganda you know, community relations thing and
summer Summer night Lights, which comes from Summer of Success,
(04:45):
of course, the brainchild of Karen Bass at the time
she was leader of Community Coalition then councilmember Martin Ludlow,
who had created an ad hoc public safety committee. You
were working with him, I was working with her. It
was to save lives. That was the point. It wasn't
a publicity's done. It wasn't community police relations. It wasn't there.
(05:09):
It was to have something for people to do while
violence is actually existing, which the data show us is
between eight o'clock at night and like three in the
morning or something and so I just it was it
saddened me to see you know, now it's like from
six to nine. But when then council Member Ludlow started,
(05:33):
one of the key things is you meet people where
they are and you try to prevent violence when the
violence is happening, not when it's not happening.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
Yeah, you're capturing it exactly, which is that program was
not a press you know, it was not a press event.
Then to your point about sort of the intention behind it,
you know, there was probably a few stories written about it,
but it wasn't a like sort of a big press
(06:05):
push on it. It really was about, you know, let's
take this very specific area of the district, ball In
village that that the two summers prior had erupted in
gun violence and death and find a way to calm
it down. And you know, we did that, and it's
you know, it's part of public policy. It's the part
(06:25):
of public policy, and it's the part of government service
that I've always liked. There's you see a problem, design
a solution for to implement it, and when it works,
you know, I hope you know, people don't you know,
have to jump up in the press and and you know,
applaud it, but it you know, you just do the
(06:45):
work and you hope that it matters to people. And
I you know, I know that that a good majority
of the elected officials that we put in office to
do that, and you know, in some way, yeah, but
in some way, in some ways, we do need a
longer press presence, right, so that people understand what they're doing.
(07:06):
More often than not, yas like this give platforms to
the African American elected officials. Daily Times and others generally
are critiquing and or you know, criticizing or poking holes
in some of the work they're doing. And that you
know that that's one of the important parts about like KPLA,
(07:27):
for its ability to allow our elected officials to talk
about what they're doing.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
Yeah, directly, Well, a lot's unpacked there. I just wanted
to run that by you because I know me and
you put in work on that thing. We were up
nights and nights and.
Speaker 2 (07:41):
Yeah, yeah, I don't think I slept that entire summer.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
Right, Yeah, And we actually we did that for two summers.
And the thing about it, we I mean, we did
bring homicides down to zero, and we in that in
region and we did launch something that was important for
this region. So yeah, and it's still the homicide numbers
are still down. And I should have mentioned Mayor Viara
Goosa who was mayor at the time, and it was very,
(08:08):
very instrumental in making that happen. So Eric Menendez not
getting out, not getting out of jail. The Californian Parole
Board said, no. I guess his brother Lyle will find
out whether or not he gets out today. But given
the recommendations of the District Attorney and the climate that
(08:29):
we're in around crime, I kind of doubt it.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Yeah. I mean, if I was the betting man, I
wouldn't bet that Lyle gets out either. I've been surprised
that just the public fascination with this story. It, you know,
the Mendez When was that they that they.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
The killing occurred August twentieth, nineteen eighty nine, according to
the La Times. Yeah, it was really long ago. Well,
but didn't remember. There was a Netflix documentary that just
came out. Not a documentary, it's actually a fiction. It
was a narrative film about the Menendez brothers and it
(09:15):
called Monster and and I think Monsters or something like that. Anyway,
it was popular, so that's part of why there's this
renewed fascination with them.
Speaker 2 (09:26):
Yeah, I guess that's right. I mean, in the endgame,
you know, you can paint a picture. I just remember
the original and you know, the original stories on it,
and I did not see the documentary, and you know,
I kind of get it, but it's just to me,
it's not the biggest news story in the world. There's
so much going on.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
Well, they're rich people, you know, and we rarely see
inside the lives of these Beverly Hills folks and their pathologies.
But yeah, I think it is a little overblown. I
think there's also right, like.
Speaker 2 (09:59):
They make an excuse for to your point about the rich,
you know, the positions being presented. I could look for
a thousand cases where someone has been troubled traumatically, either
on the mental side or physical side, and they don't
have the resources and it's not an issue. They still
(10:21):
are guilty they you know what I mean, the justice
system turns on them. So you know, in some sense,
I don't want to see them getting out using excuses
that are denied to everyone else.
Speaker 1 (10:37):
It's also true, though, that we're in a different era
now and the way that case would have been seen
today would be different. If they have, which appears they
do have, credible, you know, evidence that they were being
sexually abused by the father, they would have been seen
(11:00):
more as victims and not just as much as perpse
back then, I think, because we have more emphasis on
rooting out sexual predators.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Yeah, I don't, I don't disagree with you on that,
except that you know, killing is right.
Speaker 1 (11:27):
You don't get to murder people, right right, right, Well, yeah,
that's true. I mean, although we have seen cases where
you know, women were being raped and brutalized by their
husbands and then they kill the husband and they go
to jail, but it's not it's much more lenient than
(11:48):
just a murder, you know, it's murder in the context
of that person being a chronically abused Yeah.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
Like a man slaughter and and you know, the work
that we've done in the prisons, particularly the women's persons,
particularly women's death row, that seemed to be the majority
of the cases, right like that that the very scenario
described an abusive male partner with her husband, boyfriend, you
(12:19):
know whatever, and they snap in the violence and they react,
and that that's my point is that that, you know,
we could go to death row and look at the
women on death row and the trauma that they experienced
did not save them from prison.
Speaker 1 (12:39):
Yeah, there's also the point that that that this was
pretty was very premeditated. I think that's part of them,
you know, was they didn't snap. They methodically found the
right weapons. They tried to set it up and make
it look like a mob hit. I mean, it was
a lot more to it than just yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well,
(13:00):
we do got a lot to talk about. We can
when we come forward. Tory Lanez is appealing, We've got
oh my goodness, Donald Trump gets off again again, the
teflon Dawn wins again, and we have to touch on this.
In fact, I think this is our next topic, Ed,
(13:22):
the redistricting, because last time you and I were disagreeing
about this, he thought we shouldn't go down to their level.
Looks like we're down there now. The governor has signed
a redistricting plan to counteract Texas. We'll get your thoughts
on that and break it down when we come forward
on KBLA Talk fifteen eighty right now, right now, back
(13:45):
to me, back to Ed Sanders, and back to you.
If you want to get in the convo, hop in
the comments, in the chat at KBLA fifteen eighty on YouTube,
or you can always call at eight hundred and nine
two oh fifteen eighty. We would love to hear from you.
So they have done it. The governor. We'll see because
(14:05):
we still have the voters have to sign off on this.
But Governor Newsom and state lawmakers have got these new maps.
They yesterday approved the plan to elect more Democrats by
drawing those districts over again, which the plan that they
(14:29):
have put forth will completely neutralize what Texas has done.
Texas has created five new Republican seats. Our California bill
would create there are two bills that he signed actually
would create five new Democratic seats in California. And not
only that will make it easier for some Dems who
(14:51):
were in shaky districts to hold on to their seats.
So the arms race for Jerry Man, the maps race
is on.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Yeah, yeah, you know our conversation. You know my point
the last time we were talking about it is that
you know this is it's a slippery slope, and you
know Texas now California, and play this out down the
down the road let's say five more states jump on.
(15:27):
There are only you know a handful of states that
can generate Democratic Party seats. They're far more you know
sort of seats that there are states that have the
power right now have created you know, more Republican seats.
So if it's arms rates escalates, it's all for mood, right,
you know. But but you know, California has stepped into
(15:51):
the fray. The idea is going to come before the
voters and and we'll see, you know, I remember a
couple I guess a couple things. I saw the press
conference where the congressional leaders and state leaders were all
together and really appreciated congress Member Tom lauder Dove's comments.
(16:13):
I you know, this point in time with Trump and
this administration does call for action. I found the alarm
that that this particular action could lead to more catastrophe
for us down the road.
Speaker 1 (16:31):
You say that because because they have more, the math
is in their favor. Is that why you say that?
Speaker 2 (16:38):
Yeah? I say that, And I say the other side
of it, which is, you know, this is about party politics,
and and I'm less a party person, right, I'm an
African American who votes with the Democratic Party. I don't
know that. I'm an African American Democrat, right like, And
there's a distinction. When you start drawing maps or party
(17:01):
you lose sight of why people vote with the party.
And if you don't fix the the party turnout problem,
it doesn't matter. Meaning if you don't talk to people
about the issues that matter most to them and bring
them to the polls, it doesn't matter how you draw
the maps. Right. And that was the point that I
(17:22):
was making last time, is the party's got to find
its voice.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
Yeah, okay, I got you. I agree with you. They
need to stop being so milk toast and get with
a progressive agenda. But the point is, right now, if
we let Texas get five seats Republican seats off right now, unanswered,
the Republicans have a semi permanent hold on the House
(17:48):
at a time when the President obviously has the Executive Branch,
the Supreme Court, most of the lower courts, you know,
and the Senate. So there would basically we're talking about
no check on his power whatsoever for the indefinite future.
Speaker 2 (18:05):
Yeah that listen. The mid term elections are always swing
against the party in power.
Speaker 1 (18:10):
Right Yeah, unlet's the party in power cheats, which is
what they're doing and what they're telling us they're going
to do. They're letting us know we're cheating, and so
we go. What, Well, the party in power always loses.
But now they're cheating.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
Yeah, they're cheating because they should be getting steamrolled. And
the point is the point is that the this administration
has been so egregious in everything, right, like from enriching
billionaires to cutting you know, poor people off off healthcare. That, man,
(18:49):
if you can't run and win by fifty seats in
the House, and you need to you know what I mean?
Like this, this is like Taylor made for the Democratic
Party to win by a land live. They should take
the House back easily. And whether or not they took
five seats out of Texas or not, the point is
(19:09):
that they campaign messaging with what's happened over the first
We're not even one year in with this guy. They
should enough to win back the House and probably the Senate.
The Senate is all a little bit different, but that's
the point.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
This is the Senate is really problematic, is what you mean? Yeah,
because the way they have it carved up is just
not fair, right, But.
Speaker 2 (19:37):
I mean it was the other point I made last time,
if we're going to do something like this, fix the
Senate maps, fix the Senate issue, not the not the House.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
Well yeah, but we don't have the control to do
that right at the moment. And so I hear what
you're saying. You know, it could be catastrophic in some ways.
I feel the voters are going to back up the governor,
partly because he's just you know, stepping out and fulfilling
a role. And maybe he's histrionic about it, but Democrats
(20:06):
want to see somebody fight, and he's fighting, and I
think his you know, Governor Gavin troll Newsom is very
effective with voters young and old. We want to see
someone taking it to Republicans and getting their pennies in
a bunch, and that's exactly what his social media stuff
is doing.
Speaker 2 (20:25):
Yeah, agreed, agreed. Look, Gavin is quickly becoming the foil
to Donald Trump nationwide, right. You know, we saw him
to the trip to South Carolina. He's been the most
eloquent critic of the president and he's been and quite frankly,
he's been just the most eloquent voice of the party
(20:49):
for several years now. And you know, I think a
lot of the hesitation is that he is the governor
of California and what that looks like a run against
Donald Trump. Had he been you know, the Pennsylvania or
something somewhere like that, you know, he would be the
clear cut favorite to win the presidency. But but Gavin
(21:12):
is shot, and Gavin is doing exactly what what this
country needs. Uh, and you just wish there were more
Gavin's out there surprising that.
Speaker 1 (21:22):
Well, you know, some some progressive still some progressives still
don't trust him because he seems most focused on being
president and to some extent, you know, we've seen him talk, right,
We've seen him kind of blow with the opportunities. But
he's seizing the moment right now in a way that's
(21:42):
really effective. I think.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
Yeah, I agree, And and again, like you know, who
else in the country is doing this? That's the the
party problem is that right like there aren't the bench.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
It's deep, but I think the corporate wing of the
party elbow throws them bows and get rid of the
you know, the progressives who are energized more on that
when we come forward. Ed Sanders and Dominique Diprima for
KBLA Talk fifteen eighty at Sanders is here at Sanders
kbla contributor and the President of Ees advisors ed where
(22:22):
we are now, it seems like California lawmakers on the
Democratic Party side are very united behind this plan. It is.
It does have a sunset. It is contingent on Texas
or another Republican state doing going through with theirs. It
looks like Texas will have final approval. It has to
(22:45):
go through their Senate and be signed by the governor.
That looks like that's going to happen. So if California
voters approve this November fourth, it's a go. Does How
does that play out in your vision? Like, do you
think this is is going to create problems here in
our state or you know, of course Republicans are against it.
(23:08):
I know what you're saying as far as the national picture,
and I get what you're saying that we should be
winning by a landslide. So these five seats in Texas
shouldn't matter, But they could, you know what I mean,
they could if we look at how close things have
been and how traditions are falling. Yeah that the opposition
(23:28):
party usually wins in the midterms, but nothing is usual, right, now, yeah.
Speaker 2 (23:35):
Agreed it it I I don't think it's a good
idea when we set voting up based on party, and
I get that the Republicans are doing and this is
a counter to that, and you know, all of that,
all of it needs to be stopped, and it just
(23:59):
it shouldn't be an f relation of you know, for tat.
But we've got to stop. Yeah, we've got to stop.
Would is the obvious brand to and I'm going to
speak from an African American to our civil liberties. Right,
We've got a Supreme Court that is a super you
(24:19):
know majority for the conservative right, and there were issues there.
We should have had the you know, a couple justices
should have stepped down so that they could have been replaced.
We don't have control of the Senate, we don't have
control of the House, we don't have control of the presidency.
There are all these different things that are impacting our
way of life and a future for us. And you know,
(24:43):
while we're fighting back here with this little tip for Tat,
what we're really doing is pushing and continuing the polarizing
of the country. And the polarizing of the country is
not good for us.
Speaker 1 (24:57):
We're not the ones polarizing this country. I mean, I really,
I know some of us do it, but we are
not the main ones pushing that polarization is coming from
white supremacist ed and are Redistricting seats is not going
to fix that.
Speaker 2 (25:14):
No, no, you're right, but it gives, it gives. The
reaction to that is it is not the high road.
And that's the that's the that's the whole points that
the reaction to us redistricting does not bring middle of
the road white people to the Democratic Party.
Speaker 1 (25:33):
F them. The Democratic Party needs to super serve their
base and activate the dog on people that that brought
you the dances who brung.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
You colored people again, No, no, no, but but look,
this is the conversation. If the polarization of this country
is white people versus colored people, that's not the dynamic
that we need.
Speaker 1 (25:56):
I'm not I'm not saying it's white versus BIPOC people.
I'm saying, don't try to go get the little independent
so called soccer mama who's really a Republican. Stop kissing
Republican butt and the so called centrist white people, and
super serve your base, turn out your dog on base.
(26:16):
It's not just BIPOC people and black people and young people.
But we're a big part of it. And guess what.
The Democratic Party has been ignoring us and trying to
cater to them, the Liz Cheney voter for a long time.
And it doesn't work.
Speaker 2 (26:34):
It doesn't work on the other side of that equation either,
it works. How do we know?
Speaker 1 (26:41):
We haven't seen it. We haven't seen it. We have
not seen it. Look at how they're doing mom Domi
in New York. He's winning by a mile, and all
of the corporate Dems, the Hakeem Jeffrieses won't touch him
with a ten foot pole. You would think they'd be
trying to jump on the bandwagon as he's young, he's energizing,
you know, good looking, he's a good speaker. He's winning
(27:03):
by a mile. Nope, they want to. I mean they're
seriously considering back in Cuomo, who's already a criminal. It.
How does that not work? How does leaning into okay?
Speaker 2 (27:17):
You know, we know New York in La are progress
you know, had the ability to be progressive. That's not
the case the rest of the country.
Speaker 1 (27:26):
Well, we don't know that because we need to be
running on the progressive policies not then, and I agree
with you, we should lean less into party and more
into policies. But the progressive energized yes, bipoc yes, young
wing of the party is who has the policies that
(27:47):
other people like when they're not labeled like universal health care,
free college things, you know, loan forgiveness, things that people
like when they're not labeled progressive or labeled democratic. They
like the policies, right right.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
They like they like the they like the notion of
the policy, the specifics, the specifics always are the specifics
of a policy. But yeah, you can throw out sort
of the top lines.
Speaker 1 (28:19):
Well that's what people run on, right, I mean, they
run on top lines, they don't run on specifics.
Speaker 2 (28:23):
Mostly true, true, It still is that geography matters here,
and you know we're in Los Angeles. New York is
another progressive base. And then once you come outside of
those two states, which you know have their delegations to
(28:47):
Congress only two senators for both of those states, you
you you are hard pressed to run progressives to win
across the Midwest, certainly in the d south right, and
so California and New York have always been outliers on
that side of the on that question, and my point
(29:10):
on the whole thing is when you push people further
apart by you know, by action, it you know, if
you're forcing people that could be with you to choose
and they choose to go against you because of the
actions of this, it hurt us. If more people come
(29:31):
to the party because we drew five states, then then certainly,
you know, I have no problems coming was wrong.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
No, I mean, I think you're right that it doesn't
draw people to the party. But not every move you
do is meant to draw people to the party. The
policies draw people to the party. The candidates, the energy,
and the problems created by your opponents are what draw
people to the party, not redistricting. But sometimes you've got
(29:59):
to fight.
Speaker 2 (30:00):
We're talking about redistricting, like this is the national story.
We're talking about redistricting. We're not going into you know,
Missouri in Saint Louis and standing out in front of
the Senior Center that just got its budget cut and
the hundred you know seniors that are in there relying
on medicare to to finance them are being put out
(30:21):
in the street. We're not doing that. We're talking about redistricting.
Speaker 1 (30:25):
Well we're talking about Yeah, we're talking about redistricting to
keep Republicans from cheating and having what could be a
permanent majority in the House of Representatives, which means the big,
ugly bill that's doing all the things that you're talking
about and more of its kind, continue to be the
(30:46):
deciders for those seniors. We're trying to stop the policies
that created that of that bill.
Speaker 2 (30:53):
That bill is an all time winner for Democrats.
Speaker 1 (30:57):
Agreed, Agreed. It's so unpopular, it is, it is.
Speaker 2 (31:01):
It is the worst piece of legislation that ever hit
this country. I'm not talking about the path to it,
to worst ever. It's well, you know, let me let
me go back, thank you. I can think of a
couple other things that were just as bad. But you know,
(31:23):
the pain that's inflicted by this bill, that's what we
should be talking about. And we shouldn't ever stop talking
about that redistricting. Great, whatever it's done, get past it.
Talk about the pain of the bill now and constantly,
and it should be at nauseam. His grandmother got kicked
off of Medicare, show or have or talk about it.
(31:46):
All of that. It matters. That's what matters. That's what
brings people to the party, is that that we have
a voice and who we're fighting for. If we're just
talking about, hey, I think if we draw this map,
you know, we'll win these seats that everyone listening KBLA
just heard the ads over the break about you know,
the attorneys and the little disclaimer at the end. Past
(32:08):
performance doesn't predict future performance. It's the same here in politics.
You could draw the mass. It doesn't predict how the
vote is truly going to go. I mean, you get
out there and campaign on the message.
Speaker 1 (32:20):
That's definitely true and lucky for us because Republicans may
not be getting the results they think with this redistricting
war either. I don't think you know, I think their
lines don't always equal wins. That's a great point. And
I don't know why we can't do both. We have
(32:40):
to do this redistricting because you know, Dominique's granny lost
her Medicare or Medicaid or whatever it is. I think,
I think you're right. We do need to be talking
about the big terrible bill, and I think we'll be
talking about it more and more as the effects become
more and more obvious. I mean, this thing is barely
(33:00):
being implemented, right.
Speaker 2 (33:03):
Yeah, true, true, you know, to the point of of
everything that's happened, this administration hasn't been in a year yet,
and so the point of the implementation is still still coming.
Speaker 1 (33:17):
Forensic account says we should keep hammering him on those
Epstein files too. That's also a winner. Agreed, agreed, agreed.
Me and Ed are both on the same page with that.
When they go low, we make sure you know that's
and that's what Epstein is all about. Eight hundred and
nine to two oh, fifteen eighty. If you want to
weigh in Ed Sanders and Dominique Duprima for KBLA Talk
(33:39):
fifteen eighty. Wow, it's impossible to keep up with all
of these stories, Ed, I had such a long list
and we're not going to get through them. Ed Sanders
is with me. I'm Dominique Duprima. And look who's on
our phone, Ed Sanders, it's Molly Bell straight out of
Compton Morning, right, Belle.
Speaker 3 (33:58):
Morning Reparations and meyor of our ancestors. Good morning tall.
Ed Sanders, I've always a vote, I've always looked up
to you. Now I'm not disagreeing with you. Yeah, I
am be for real maliville right now. The Republicans have
(34:22):
been so wrong, so out of order. But they did
what they did in Texas by getting those extra seats.
They did that the legal right way. Can't we do
it legally? Can't we do it the right way so
(34:42):
that they could see that we're not kind to start
to stay Ussies? But we're not that, And so I'm
asking you you could still stand up for me. Our
vote needs the count. We need those representatives in the
seats because we are going to vote for the Democrats
(35:06):
and we've got to win. We've got we are in
a war, and I don't think that we should use
bow and arrows in a war where they're using machine guns.
I think it's unfair, and I think that I wish
that you would find another way to help us to
get the votes that we need to fight against the
(35:28):
ones that they're stealing, and they are stealing it, and
they're trying to stop using paper so that they could
even steal better. Can they? Is that a correct term?
Domini still better? That's what I'm saying.
Speaker 2 (35:46):
Ed.
Speaker 3 (35:46):
You know I'm crazy about you and I always enjoy
when you come on, but today I'm disagreeing with you,
and I'm asking you to rethink it or if you
have a better way, share that with us, because we
have got to win all your prayer warriors out there.
You know what you've got to do too fast and
(36:07):
in praying, because the struggle continues. Dominique, you hold his
speech to the wire, even if you've got to get
down and get mild and everybody is there to help you.
Thank you for mis b call, thanks.
Speaker 2 (36:23):
And listen. I love Molly and I love what she's
saying it to me when when she says we and
we're sort of talking about those in the country that
would lean to vote with the Democratic Party, we're making
the assumption that that same we will continue to vote
(36:46):
with the party. And that's what's drawing the lines is
sort of based on It's based on just this assumption.
And you just reference something in New York where you've
got a really strong candidate running for mayor and the
leadership of the party can't seem to get out of
its own way to embrace this leader in Mondami, Right,
(37:10):
and that makes the whole conversation about we draw these lines,
you know, less less. It's not such a sure thing, right,
that the party is going to drive to turn out
to even win the seats California. Yeah, we'll be find here.
(37:31):
We will get those five seats. And I'm saying the
same thing about the Republicans in Texas that you're asking,
you know, Republicans to get up there and support that big,
big awful bill or whatever you want to call it
and expect that they're going to win. The question isn't
necessarily the lines. The question is the message and what
(37:53):
you're running on. And the more we hold party leaders
to to your point dom of putting forward the ideas
that we want them to vote on, then the stronger
this party will be. If this party has to run
just based on lions, we're not gonna win. We're not.
We won't even take back the House. We don't care
(38:15):
about the Democratic I don't care about the Democratic Party.
I care about African American interests. And where the Democratic
Party doesn't or walks away or it's half hearted on
African American interests, I'm half hearted on the Democratic Party.
And so you know, if the party wants to play
games on lines, all right, whatever, but you better speak
(38:37):
to our interest in our best future. And if you
don't you know, I don't care about your lines, you know,
I want what's best. Rests.
Speaker 1 (38:47):
Yeah, well, I think we know though that even though
the Democratic Party may not deserve our vote all the
time and they don't automatically get our vote, we're not
a monolith blah blah blah. Still the vast majority of
Black voters are in the Democratic Party, and when they
do what they're doing in Texas, we know that the
(39:11):
net result of that is a loss of African American
voting clout. It means that it takes from one article
I saw two million black voters to add up to
one and a half million white voters the way those
lines are drawn. So what they're actually doing is disenfranchising us,
(39:32):
making our vote cheaper. And so, whether you want to
call it party or you want to look at it
in terms of our black community, either way you slice it,
you know, we we we're losing in Texas and winning
in Cali.
Speaker 2 (39:55):
We're loosing in Texas for sure. I don't know that
we as African Americans are winning in California necessarily, but
but yeah, we are losing.
Speaker 1 (40:05):
By having more Democratic seats. You don't you don't think
we're automatic we don't win with that equation, even though
more of us by a landslide vote Democratic.
Speaker 2 (40:16):
Well, the new seats that are drawn here in California
add another African American. I don't know that they do.
Speaker 1 (40:23):
Nope, they don't. They add from what I from what
I'm reading, they add another Latino seat, but which is
also warranted when you look at the population of the.
Speaker 2 (40:30):
State, right right, agreed. I'm just saying it doesn't necessarily
lend to another African American winning in an African American
populated seat. So I don't I can't say that we
win per se. There may be more Democrats, but you know,
we've seen a lot of our issues get killed within
(40:52):
party politics before before even having to take home.
Speaker 1 (40:55):
Oh yeah, all the time, I'm not there, it's happening
in real time.
Speaker 2 (41:00):
With that's if we are being disenfranchised, and you're right,
and that needs to you know, we got to address that.
But I'm not going to stay that that California benefits
us per se. We could have potential allies. That's That's
the best that I can say about that.
Speaker 1 (41:16):
I saw that Paul Paul's pointing out that the FBI
rated John Bolton's House this morning, former national security advisor
to Donald Trump, who's constantly on CNN talking smack about
Donald Trump. Ah, the era of retribution and revenge is
upon us. Say, it's a national security investigation in the
(41:37):
search of classified records. Clearly that's tit for tat right.
He's still mad about the Mar A Lago records, which
were not a raided because they told him a one
hundred times give us back the records.
Speaker 2 (41:53):
Yeah. Yeah, we're living and I feel like we're living
in the Star Wars movie and the Empire is just
you know, a.
Speaker 1 (42:01):
Star Wars movie is hilarious. Uh yeah, because the Empire
strikes back all the time. Mm hmmmm. Well, Ed, it
is a freedman Friday. We will be talking reparations next hour.
But I know there's about I sent you a million
articles I wanted to talk I wanted to talk about.
(42:23):
We won't get to any of those. So what would
you like to spend the last minute on?
Speaker 2 (42:29):
Well, I think you know, quick shout out to Karl
Douglas and you know his win on the jury award
for the I think the family that got hit by
the rubber bullet fired by the sheriff deputy during the
George Floyd protest. You know, a significant payout. I think
three point five if army membering right, yeah, to the fly,
(42:53):
and I think like another three hundred to the daughter
or something like that. You know, from an accountability standpoint point,
you know, we always look at sheriff's deputies and some
of their renegade behavior. I do hate that the jury
award comes out of the county budget. You know, while
(43:13):
we hope that there's accountability with the sheriff department, you know,
is that this three point five less for some of
the services that the county provides, and the county provides
the safety net services, you know, in some way, I
hope we start to look at how we do these
these judgments so that it's not taking away from services
(43:34):
to and and not with a clear plan for accountability.
Speaker 1 (43:39):
Well yeah, so how about police and sheriff stop killing
people and grievously harming them. That would be one good
way try to cut back on that. Uh, great point.
Selling Gluck and his daughter Carolyn Gluck were hit by
supposedly less lethal while protesting and actually after a protest,
and they they got a big winning court week. Ed Sanders,
(44:01):
thank you so much for stopping in on Fridays. It's
always fun to talk to you.
Speaker 2 (44:06):
Thanks thought yourself.
Speaker 1 (44:08):
We've got news, traffic, and sports, and then it's time
for Friedman Friday talking reparations on KBLA Talk fifteen eighty
Hey bla talk fifteen eighty Good morning, Happy Friday, God
bless I'm Dominique Uprima. The show. It's called First Things
First and my very first thing. Every Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Uda, Wednesday,
Thursday given thanksgiving, praises and asking for blessings from God,
asking for the blessings of the ancestors and the elders,
(00:21):
and let's go okay. So on Friday, every Friday is
a Freedman Friday because we are focused on reparations three
hundred and sixty five days a year, of course, but
always the second hour on Fridays we do a focus
on that topic and get up to date, learn how
to be part of the solution, learn how to be
(00:42):
tapped in. Today we'll be talking with La County Equity
Chief d'Artagnan SCRSA. That should be quite a fascinating convo
for hour two hour three. We have a grab bag
on Fridays and today the phone lines are open, there's
space and time. Let's talk about it. Many things to
(01:02):
touch on. I want to make sure we get our
courage pledge in, you know, our pledge to be courageous
and spread it around and also you know, just have
some positivity in our lives. I'm excited because next week
we're going to have a big giant dose of arts
and culture. Some great, great guests on deck for you
(01:25):
next week, including Kean Harold. If you haven't heard him,
I'm sure you have, but if you haven't, take the opportunity.
He'll be here Tuesday. A lot of great music and
art will be in the house next week, so we
can get a nice refill of inspiration and things that
(01:47):
aren't Trump, other things that aren't Trump. It's every other Friday,
so I'm joined by kbla contributor and the founder of
ES Advisors. They do campaigns, they do public policies, and
he's also a former Fox Soul contributor. We both are
actually Ed Sanders.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
Good morning, Good morning, How are you.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
I'm blessed. It's Friday. Yeah, how you doing?
Speaker 2 (02:15):
Ready for the weekend? Blood? It's starting to warm up
around here.
Speaker 1 (02:18):
Well that's an understatement. I mean they're saying we're breaking
all these records, heat waves. You got little ones that
play sports. How you guys doing, Are you hydrated? Is
everybody whiny and complaining or they're they're loving it.
Speaker 2 (02:34):
They're loving it. I love it. You know, that's good
that part of the year where you get outside, so
it's fun.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
Yeah, that's true. I also know people can be rather grouchy.
I've seen quite a few studies actually showing how humans
fight more when it's grouchy. So I think, you know,
to everyone, we've got this. You know, have the Virgo
Mars mars energy and heat. So just be cool, stay hydrated,
(03:06):
don't don't pop off.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
Yeah, that's right, that's right. We uh, well, it always
seemed to happen with the with the young young folks. Well,
but he'd always coincicted with like being out of school
and that sort of stuff.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
So that's true.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
Those years, we've put together stuff in the in the
schools there in the parks, the sumilar success and now
streak the summer night lights to keep people faced during
the summertime.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
Yeah, I saw this crazy article. I don't want to
go off too off down on a tangent because I
didn't tell you about this, but where they now have
summer night lights in Philly, but they've turned it into
a whole cop event where it's just like Dare the
camp and they're giving some guy that I never heard
(03:56):
of credit for creating it. It's so crazy because that
started in LA with Summer of Success. You worked on
it and I worked both of us actually worked on
the original model that created Summer night Lights. So we
know that's not the truth, and that also isn't what
it was meant to be, right exactly.
Speaker 2 (04:19):
You know, we should have a copyrighted the name back then.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
Yeah, or even if it wasn't a copyright the name,
somebody should have got the concept right. I mean, it
feels like it's being co opted now into this sort
of police propaganda, copaganda you know, community relations thing and
summer Summer night Lights, which comes from Summer of Success,
(04:45):
of course, the brainchild of Karen Bass at the time
she was leader of Community Coalition then councilmember Martin Ludlow,
who had created an ad hoc public safety committee. You
were working with him, I was working with her. It
was to save lives. That was the point. It wasn't
a publicity's done. It wasn't community police relations. It wasn't there.
(05:09):
It was to have something for people to do while
violence is actually existing, which the data show us is
between eight o'clock at night and like three in the
morning or something and so I just it was it
saddened me to see you know, now it's like from
six to nine. But when then council Member Ludlow started,
(05:33):
one of the key things is you meet people where
they are and you try to prevent violence when the
violence is happening, not when it's not happening.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
Yeah, you're capturing it exactly, which is that program was
not a press you know, it was not a press event.
Then to your point about sort of the intention behind it,
you know, there was probably a few stories written about it,
but it wasn't a like sort of a big press
(06:05):
push on it. It really was about, you know, let's
take this very specific area of the district, ball In
village that that the two summers prior had erupted in
gun violence and death and find a way to calm
it down. And you know, we did that, and it's
you know, it's part of public policy. It's the part
(06:25):
of public policy, and it's the part of government service
that I've always liked. There's you see a problem, design
a solution for to implement it, and when it works,
you know, I hope you know, people don't you know,
have to jump up in the press and and you know,
applaud it, but it you know, you just do the
(06:45):
work and you hope that it matters to people. And
I you know, I know that that a good majority
of the elected officials that we put in office to
do that, and you know, in some way, yeah, but
in some way, in some ways, we do need a
longer press presence, right, so that people understand what they're doing.
(07:06):
More often than not, yas like this give platforms to
the African American elected officials. Daily Times and others generally
are critiquing and or you know, criticizing or poking holes
in some of the work they're doing. And that you
know that that's one of the important parts about like KPLA,
(07:27):
for its ability to allow our elected officials to talk
about what they're doing.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
Yeah, directly, Well, a lot's unpacked there. I just wanted
to run that by you because I know me and
you put in work on that thing. We were up
nights and nights and.
Speaker 2 (07:41):
Yeah, yeah, I don't think I slept that entire summer.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
Right, Yeah, And we actually we did that for two summers.
And the thing about it, we I mean, we did
bring homicides down to zero, and we in that in
region and we did launch something that was important for
this region. So yeah, and it's still the homicide numbers
are still down. And I should have mentioned Mayor Viara
Goosa who was mayor at the time, and it was very,
(08:08):
very instrumental in making that happen. So Eric Menendez not
getting out, not getting out of jail. The Californian Parole
Board said, no. I guess his brother Lyle will find
out whether or not he gets out today. But given
the recommendations of the District Attorney and the climate that
(08:29):
we're in around crime, I kind of doubt it.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Yeah. I mean, if I was the betting man, I
wouldn't bet that Lyle gets out either. I've been surprised
that just the public fascination with this story. It, you know,
the Mendez When was that they that they.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
The killing occurred August twentieth, nineteen eighty nine, according to
the La Times. Yeah, it was really long ago. Well,
but didn't remember. There was a Netflix documentary that just
came out. Not a documentary, it's actually a fiction. It
was a narrative film about the Menendez brothers and it
(09:15):
called Monster and and I think Monsters or something like that. Anyway,
it was popular, so that's part of why there's this
renewed fascination with them.
Speaker 2 (09:26):
Yeah, I guess that's right. I mean, in the endgame,
you know, you can paint a picture. I just remember
the original and you know, the original stories on it,
and I did not see the documentary, and you know,
I kind of get it, but it's just to me,
it's not the biggest news story in the world. There's
so much going on.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
Well, they're rich people, you know, and we rarely see
inside the lives of these Beverly Hills folks and their pathologies.
But yeah, I think it is a little overblown. I
think there's also right, like.
Speaker 2 (09:59):
They make an excuse for to your point about the rich,
you know, the positions being presented. I could look for
a thousand cases where someone has been troubled traumatically, either
on the mental side or physical side, and they don't
have the resources and it's not an issue. They still
(10:21):
are guilty they you know what I mean, the justice
system turns on them. So you know, in some sense,
I don't want to see them getting out using excuses
that are denied to everyone else.
Speaker 1 (10:37):
It's also true, though, that we're in a different era
now and the way that case would have been seen
today would be different. If they have, which appears they
do have, credible, you know, evidence that they were being
sexually abused by the father, they would have been seen
(11:00):
more as victims and not just as much as perpse
back then, I think, because we have more emphasis on
rooting out sexual predators.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
Yeah, I don't, I don't disagree with you on that,
except that you know, killing is right.
Speaker 1 (11:27):
You don't get to murder people, right right, right, Well, yeah,
that's true. I mean, although we have seen cases where
you know, women were being raped and brutalized by their
husbands and then they kill the husband and they go
to jail, but it's not it's much more lenient than
(11:48):
just a murder, you know, it's murder in the context
of that person being a chronically abused Yeah.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
Like a man slaughter and and you know, the work
that we've done in the prisons, particularly the women's persons,
particularly women's death row, that seemed to be the majority
of the cases, right like that that the very scenario
described an abusive male partner with her husband, boyfriend, you
(12:19):
know whatever, and they snap in the violence and they react,
and that that's my point is that that, you know,
we could go to death row and look at the
women on death row and the trauma that they experienced
did not save them from prison.
Speaker 1 (12:39):
Yeah, there's also the point that that that this was
pretty was very premeditated. I think that's part of them,
you know, was they didn't snap. They methodically found the
right weapons. They tried to set it up and make
it look like a mob hit. I mean, it was
a lot more to it than just yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well,
(13:00):
we do got a lot to talk about. We can
when we come forward. Tory Lanez is appealing, We've got
oh my goodness, Donald Trump gets off again again, the
teflon Dawn wins again, and we have to touch on this.
In fact, I think this is our next topic, Ed,
(13:22):
the redistricting, because last time you and I were disagreeing
about this, he thought we shouldn't go down to their level.
Looks like we're down there now. The governor has signed
a redistricting plan to counteract Texas. We'll get your thoughts
on that and break it down when we come forward
on KBLA Talk fifteen eighty right now, right now, back
(13:45):
to me, back to Ed Sanders, and back to you.
If you want to get in the convo, hop in
the comments, in the chat at KBLA fifteen eighty on YouTube,
or you can always call at eight hundred and nine
two oh fifteen eighty. We would love to hear from you.
So they have done it. The governor. We'll see because
(14:05):
we still have the voters have to sign off on this.
But Governor Newsom and state lawmakers have got these new maps.
They yesterday approved the plan to elect more Democrats by
drawing those districts over again, which the plan that they
(14:29):
have put forth will completely neutralize what Texas has done.
Texas has created five new Republican seats. Our California bill
would create there are two bills that he signed actually
would create five new Democratic seats in California. And not
only that will make it easier for some Dems who
(14:51):
were in shaky districts to hold on to their seats.
So the arms race for Jerry Man, the maps race
is on.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Yeah, yeah, you know our conversation. You know my point
the last time we were talking about it is that
you know this is it's a slippery slope, and you
know Texas now California, and play this out down the
down the road let's say five more states jump on.
(15:27):
There are only you know a handful of states that
can generate Democratic Party seats. They're far more you know
sort of seats that there are states that have the
power right now have created you know, more Republican seats.
So if it's arms rates escalates, it's all for mood, right,
you know. But but you know, California has stepped into
(15:51):
the fray. The idea is going to come before the
voters and and we'll see, you know, I remember a
couple I guess a couple things. I saw the press
conference where the congressional leaders and state leaders were all
together and really appreciated congress Member Tom lauder Dove's comments.
(16:13):
I you know, this point in time with Trump and
this administration does call for action. I found the alarm
that that this particular action could lead to more catastrophe
for us down the road.
Speaker 1 (16:31):
You say that because because they have more, the math
is in their favor. Is that why you say that?
Speaker 2 (16:38):
Yeah? I say that, And I say the other side
of it, which is, you know, this is about party politics,
and and I'm less a party person, right, I'm an
African American who votes with the Democratic Party. I don't
know that. I'm an African American Democrat, right like, And
there's a distinction. When you start drawing maps or party
(17:01):
you lose sight of why people vote with the party.
And if you don't fix the the party turnout problem,
it doesn't matter. Meaning if you don't talk to people
about the issues that matter most to them and bring
them to the polls, it doesn't matter how you draw
the maps. Right. And that was the point that I
(17:22):
was making last time, is the party's got to find
its voice.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
Yeah, okay, I got you. I agree with you. They
need to stop being so milk toast and get with
a progressive agenda. But the point is, right now, if
we let Texas get five seats Republican seats off right now, unanswered,
the Republicans have a semi permanent hold on the House
(17:48):
at a time when the President obviously has the Executive Branch,
the Supreme Court, most of the lower courts, you know,
and the Senate. So there would basically we're talking about
no check on his power whatsoever for the indefinite future.
Speaker 2 (18:05):
Yeah that listen. The mid term elections are always swing
against the party in power.
Speaker 1 (18:10):
Right Yeah, unlet's the party in power cheats, which is
what they're doing and what they're telling us they're going
to do. They're letting us know we're cheating, and so
we go. What, Well, the party in power always loses.
But now they're cheating.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
Yeah, they're cheating because they should be getting steamrolled. And
the point is the point is that the this administration
has been so egregious in everything, right, like from enriching
billionaires to cutting you know, poor people off off healthcare. That, man,
(18:49):
if you can't run and win by fifty seats in
the House, and you need to you know what I mean?
Like this, this is like Taylor made for the Democratic
Party to win by a land live. They should take
the House back easily. And whether or not they took
five seats out of Texas or not, the point is
(19:09):
that they campaign messaging with what's happened over the first
We're not even one year in with this guy. They
should enough to win back the House and probably the Senate.
The Senate is all a little bit different, but that's
the point.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
This is the Senate is really problematic, is what you mean? Yeah,
because the way they have it carved up is just
not fair, right, But.
Speaker 2 (19:37):
I mean it was the other point I made last time,
if we're going to do something like this, fix the
Senate maps, fix the Senate issue, not the not the House.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
Well yeah, but we don't have the control to do
that right at the moment. And so I hear what
you're saying. You know, it could be catastrophic in some ways.
I feel the voters are going to back up the governor,
partly because he's just you know, stepping out and fulfilling
a role. And maybe he's histrionic about it, but Democrats
(20:06):
want to see somebody fight, and he's fighting, and I
think his you know, Governor Gavin troll Newsom is very
effective with voters young and old. We want to see
someone taking it to Republicans and getting their pennies in
a bunch, and that's exactly what his social media stuff
is doing.
Speaker 2 (20:25):
Yeah, agreed, agreed. Look, Gavin is quickly becoming the foil
to Donald Trump nationwide, right. You know, we saw him
to the trip to South Carolina. He's been the most
eloquent critic of the president and he's been and quite frankly,
he's been just the most eloquent voice of the party
(20:49):
for several years now. And you know, I think a
lot of the hesitation is that he is the governor
of California and what that looks like a run against
Donald Trump. Had he been you know, the Pennsylvania or
something somewhere like that, you know, he would be the
clear cut favorite to win the presidency. But but Gavin
(21:12):
is shot, and Gavin is doing exactly what what this
country needs. Uh, and you just wish there were more
Gavin's out there surprising that.
Speaker 1 (21:22):
Well, you know, some some progressive still some progressives still
don't trust him because he seems most focused on being
president and to some extent, you know, we've seen him talk, right,
We've seen him kind of blow with the opportunities. But
he's seizing the moment right now in a way that's
(21:42):
really effective. I think.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
Yeah, I agree, And and again, like you know, who
else in the country is doing this? That's the the
party problem is that right like there aren't the bench.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
It's deep, but I think the corporate wing of the
party elbow throws them bows and get rid of the
you know, the progressives who are energized more on that
when we come forward. Ed Sanders and Dominique Diprima for
KBLA Talk fifteen eighty at Sanders is here at Sanders
kbla contributor and the President of Ees advisors ed where
(22:22):
we are now, it seems like California lawmakers on the
Democratic Party side are very united behind this plan. It is.
It does have a sunset. It is contingent on Texas
or another Republican state doing going through with theirs. It
looks like Texas will have final approval. It has to
(22:45):
go through their Senate and be signed by the governor.
That looks like that's going to happen. So if California
voters approve this November fourth, it's a go. Does How
does that play out in your vision? Like, do you
think this is is going to create problems here in
our state or you know, of course Republicans are against it.
(23:08):
I know what you're saying as far as the national picture,
and I get what you're saying that we should be
winning by a landslide. So these five seats in Texas
shouldn't matter, But they could, you know what I mean,
they could if we look at how close things have
been and how traditions are falling. Yeah that the opposition
(23:28):
party usually wins in the midterms, but nothing is usual, right, now, yeah.
Speaker 2 (23:35):
Agreed it it I I don't think it's a good
idea when we set voting up based on party, and
I get that the Republicans are doing and this is
a counter to that, and you know, all of that,
all of it needs to be stopped, and it just
(23:59):
it shouldn't be an f relation of you know, for tat.
But we've got to stop. Yeah, we've got to stop.
Would is the obvious brand to and I'm going to
speak from an African American to our civil liberties. Right,
We've got a Supreme Court that is a super you
(24:19):
know majority for the conservative right, and there were issues there.
We should have had the you know, a couple justices
should have stepped down so that they could have been replaced.
We don't have control of the Senate, we don't have
control of the House, we don't have control of the presidency.
There are all these different things that are impacting our
way of life and a future for us. And you know,
(24:43):
while we're fighting back here with this little tip for Tat,
what we're really doing is pushing and continuing the polarizing
of the country. And the polarizing of the country is
not good for us.
Speaker 1 (24:57):
We're not the ones polarizing this country. I mean, I really,
I know some of us do it, but we are
not the main ones pushing that polarization is coming from
white supremacist ed and are Redistricting seats is not going
to fix that.
Speaker 2 (25:14):
No, no, you're right, but it gives, it gives. The
reaction to that is it is not the high road.
And that's the that's the that's the whole points that
the reaction to us redistricting does not bring middle of
the road white people to the Democratic Party.
Speaker 1 (25:33):
F them. The Democratic Party needs to super serve their
base and activate the dog on people that that brought
you the dances who brung.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
You colored people again, No, no, no, but but look,
this is the conversation. If the polarization of this country
is white people versus colored people, that's not the dynamic
that we need.
Speaker 1 (25:56):
I'm not I'm not saying it's white versus BIPOC people.
I'm saying, don't try to go get the little independent
so called soccer mama who's really a Republican. Stop kissing
Republican butt and the so called centrist white people, and
super serve your base, turn out your dog on base.
(26:16):
It's not just BIPOC people and black people and young people.
But we're a big part of it. And guess what.
The Democratic Party has been ignoring us and trying to
cater to them, the Liz Cheney voter for a long time.
And it doesn't work.
Speaker 2 (26:34):
It doesn't work on the other side of that equation either,
it works. How do we know?
Speaker 1 (26:41):
We haven't seen it. We haven't seen it. We have
not seen it. Look at how they're doing mom Domi
in New York. He's winning by a mile, and all
of the corporate Dems, the Hakeem Jeffrieses won't touch him
with a ten foot pole. You would think they'd be
trying to jump on the bandwagon as he's young, he's energizing,
you know, good looking, he's a good speaker. He's winning
(27:03):
by a mile. Nope, they want to. I mean they're
seriously considering back in Cuomo, who's already a criminal. It.
How does that not work? How does leaning into okay?
Speaker 2 (27:17):
You know, we know New York in La are progress
you know, had the ability to be progressive. That's not
the case the rest of the country.
Speaker 1 (27:26):
Well, we don't know that because we need to be
running on the progressive policies not then, and I agree
with you, we should lean less into party and more
into policies. But the progressive energized yes, bipoc yes, young
wing of the party is who has the policies that
(27:47):
other people like when they're not labeled like universal health care,
free college things, you know, loan forgiveness, things that people
like when they're not labeled progressive or labeled democratic. They
like the policies, right right.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
They like they like the they like the notion of
the policy, the specifics, the specifics always are the specifics
of a policy. But yeah, you can throw out sort
of the top lines.
Speaker 1 (28:19):
Well that's what people run on, right, I mean, they
run on top lines, they don't run on specifics.
Speaker 2 (28:23):
Mostly true, true, It still is that geography matters here,
and you know we're in Los Angeles. New York is
another progressive base. And then once you come outside of
those two states, which you know have their delegations to
(28:47):
Congress only two senators for both of those states, you
you you are hard pressed to run progressives to win
across the Midwest, certainly in the d south right, and
so California and New York have always been outliers on
that side of the on that question, and my point
(29:10):
on the whole thing is when you push people further
apart by you know, by action, it you know, if
you're forcing people that could be with you to choose
and they choose to go against you because of the
actions of this, it hurt us. If more people come
(29:31):
to the party because we drew five states, then then certainly,
you know, I have no problems coming was wrong.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
No, I mean, I think you're right that it doesn't
draw people to the party. But not every move you
do is meant to draw people to the party. The
policies draw people to the party. The candidates, the energy,
and the problems created by your opponents are what draw
people to the party, not redistricting. But sometimes you've got
(29:59):
to fight.
Speaker 2 (30:00):
We're talking about redistricting, like this is the national story.
We're talking about redistricting. We're not going into you know,
Missouri in Saint Louis and standing out in front of
the Senior Center that just got its budget cut and
the hundred you know seniors that are in there relying
on medicare to to finance them are being put out
(30:21):
in the street. We're not doing that. We're talking about redistricting.
Speaker 1 (30:25):
Well we're talking about Yeah, we're talking about redistricting to
keep Republicans from cheating and having what could be a
permanent majority in the House of Representatives, which means the big,
ugly bill that's doing all the things that you're talking
about and more of its kind, continue to be the
(30:46):
deciders for those seniors. We're trying to stop the policies
that created that of that bill.
Speaker 2 (30:53):
That bill is an all time winner for Democrats.
Speaker 1 (30:57):
Agreed, Agreed. It's so unpopular, it is, it is.
Speaker 2 (31:01):
It is the worst piece of legislation that ever hit
this country. I'm not talking about the path to it,
to worst ever. It's well, you know, let me let
me go back, thank you. I can think of a
couple other things that were just as bad. But you know,
(31:23):
the pain that's inflicted by this bill, that's what we
should be talking about. And we shouldn't ever stop talking
about that redistricting. Great, whatever it's done, get past it.
Talk about the pain of the bill now and constantly,
and it should be at nauseam. His grandmother got kicked
off of Medicare, show or have or talk about it.
(31:46):
All of that. It matters. That's what matters. That's what
brings people to the party, is that that we have
a voice and who we're fighting for. If we're just
talking about, hey, I think if we draw this map,
you know, we'll win these seats that everyone listening KBLA
just heard the ads over the break about you know,
the attorneys and the little disclaimer at the end. Past
(32:08):
performance doesn't predict future performance. It's the same here in politics.
You could draw the mass. It doesn't predict how the
vote is truly going to go. I mean, you get
out there and campaign on the message.
Speaker 1 (32:20):
That's definitely true and lucky for us because Republicans may
not be getting the results they think with this redistricting
war either. I don't think you know, I think their
lines don't always equal wins. That's a great point. And
I don't know why we can't do both. We have
(32:40):
to do this redistricting because you know, Dominique's granny lost
her Medicare or Medicaid or whatever it is. I think,
I think you're right. We do need to be talking
about the big terrible bill, and I think we'll be
talking about it more and more as the effects become
more and more obvious. I mean, this thing is barely
(33:00):
being implemented, right.
Speaker 2 (33:03):
Yeah, true, true, you know, to the point of of
everything that's happened, this administration hasn't been in a year yet,
and so the point of the implementation is still still coming.
Speaker 1 (33:17):
Forensic account says we should keep hammering him on those
Epstein files too. That's also a winner. Agreed, agreed, agreed.
Me and Ed are both on the same page with that.
When they go low, we make sure you know that's
and that's what Epstein is all about. Eight hundred and
nine to two oh, fifteen eighty. If you want to
weigh in Ed Sanders and Dominique Duprima for KBLA Talk
(33:39):
fifteen eighty. Wow, it's impossible to keep up with all
of these stories, Ed, I had such a long list
and we're not going to get through them. Ed Sanders
is with me. I'm Dominique Duprima. And look who's on
our phone, Ed Sanders, it's Molly Bell straight out of
Compton Morning, right, Belle.
Speaker 3 (33:58):
Morning Reparations and meyor of our ancestors. Good morning tall.
Ed Sanders, I've always a vote, I've always looked up
to you. Now I'm not disagreeing with you. Yeah, I
am be for real maliville right now. The Republicans have
(34:22):
been so wrong, so out of order. But they did
what they did in Texas by getting those extra seats.
They did that the legal right way. Can't we do
it legally? Can't we do it the right way so
(34:42):
that they could see that we're not kind to start
to stay Ussies? But we're not that, And so I'm
asking you you could still stand up for me. Our
vote needs the count. We need those representatives in the
seats because we are going to vote for the Democrats
(35:06):
and we've got to win. We've got we are in
a war, and I don't think that we should use
bow and arrows in a war where they're using machine guns.
I think it's unfair, and I think that I wish
that you would find another way to help us to
get the votes that we need to fight against the
(35:28):
ones that they're stealing, and they are stealing it, and
they're trying to stop using paper so that they could
even steal better. Can they? Is that a correct term?
Domini still better? That's what I'm saying.
Speaker 2 (35:46):
Ed.
Speaker 3 (35:46):
You know I'm crazy about you and I always enjoy
when you come on, but today I'm disagreeing with you,
and I'm asking you to rethink it or if you
have a better way, share that with us, because we
have got to win all your prayer warriors out there.
You know what you've got to do too fast and
(36:07):
in praying, because the struggle continues. Dominique, you hold his
speech to the wire, even if you've got to get
down and get mild and everybody is there to help you.
Thank you for mis b call, thanks.
Speaker 2 (36:23):
And listen. I love Molly and I love what she's
saying it to me when when she says we and
we're sort of talking about those in the country that
would lean to vote with the Democratic Party, we're making
the assumption that that same we will continue to vote
(36:46):
with the party. And that's what's drawing the lines is
sort of based on It's based on just this assumption.
And you just reference something in New York where you've
got a really strong candidate running for mayor and the
leadership of the party can't seem to get out of
its own way to embrace this leader in Mondami, Right,
(37:10):
and that makes the whole conversation about we draw these lines,
you know, less less. It's not such a sure thing, right,
that the party is going to drive to turn out
to even win the seats California. Yeah, we'll be find here.
(37:31):
We will get those five seats. And I'm saying the
same thing about the Republicans in Texas that you're asking,
you know, Republicans to get up there and support that big,
big awful bill or whatever you want to call it
and expect that they're going to win. The question isn't
necessarily the lines. The question is the message and what
(37:53):
you're running on. And the more we hold party leaders
to to your point dom of putting forward the ideas
that we want them to vote on, then the stronger
this party will be. If this party has to run
just based on lions, we're not gonna win. We're not.
We won't even take back the House. We don't care
(38:15):
about the Democratic I don't care about the Democratic Party.
I care about African American interests. And where the Democratic
Party doesn't or walks away or it's half hearted on
African American interests, I'm half hearted on the Democratic Party.
And so you know, if the party wants to play
games on lines, all right, whatever, but you better speak
(38:37):
to our interest in our best future. And if you
don't you know, I don't care about your lines, you know,
I want what's best. Rests.
Speaker 1 (38:47):
Yeah, well, I think we know though that even though
the Democratic Party may not deserve our vote all the
time and they don't automatically get our vote, we're not
a monolith blah blah blah. Still the vast majority of
Black voters are in the Democratic Party, and when they
do what they're doing in Texas, we know that the
(39:11):
net result of that is a loss of African American
voting clout. It means that it takes from one article
I saw two million black voters to add up to
one and a half million white voters the way those
lines are drawn. So what they're actually doing is disenfranchising us,
(39:32):
making our vote cheaper. And so, whether you want to
call it party or you want to look at it
in terms of our black community, either way you slice it,
you know, we we we're losing in Texas and winning
in Cali.
Speaker 2 (39:55):
We're loosing in Texas for sure. I don't know that
we as African Americans are winning in California necessarily, but
but yeah, we are losing.
Speaker 1 (40:05):
By having more Democratic seats. You don't you don't think
we're automatic we don't win with that equation, even though
more of us by a landslide vote Democratic.
Speaker 2 (40:16):
Well, the new seats that are drawn here in California
add another African American. I don't know that they do.
Speaker 1 (40:23):
Nope, they don't. They add from what I from what
I'm reading, they add another Latino seat, but which is
also warranted when you look at the population of the.
Speaker 2 (40:30):
State, right right, agreed. I'm just saying it doesn't necessarily
lend to another African American winning in an African American
populated seat. So I don't I can't say that we
win per se. There may be more Democrats, but you know,
we've seen a lot of our issues get killed within
(40:52):
party politics before before even having to take home.
Speaker 1 (40:55):
Oh yeah, all the time, I'm not there, it's happening
in real time.
Speaker 2 (41:00):
With that's if we are being disenfranchised, and you're right,
and that needs to you know, we got to address that.
But I'm not going to stay that that California benefits
us per se. We could have potential allies. That's That's
the best that I can say about that.
Speaker 1 (41:16):
I saw that Paul Paul's pointing out that the FBI
rated John Bolton's House this morning, former national security advisor
to Donald Trump, who's constantly on CNN talking smack about
Donald Trump. Ah, the era of retribution and revenge is
upon us. Say, it's a national security investigation in the
(41:37):
search of classified records. Clearly that's tit for tat right.
He's still mad about the Mar A Lago records, which
were not a raided because they told him a one
hundred times give us back the records.
Speaker 2 (41:53):
Yeah. Yeah, we're living and I feel like we're living
in the Star Wars movie and the Empire is just
you know, a.
Speaker 1 (42:01):
Star Wars movie is hilarious. Uh yeah, because the Empire
strikes back all the time. Mm hmmmm. Well, Ed, it
is a freedman Friday. We will be talking reparations next hour.
But I know there's about I sent you a million
articles I wanted to talk I wanted to talk about.
(42:23):
We won't get to any of those. So what would
you like to spend the last minute on?
Speaker 2 (42:29):
Well, I think you know, quick shout out to Karl
Douglas and you know his win on the jury award
for the I think the family that got hit by
the rubber bullet fired by the sheriff deputy during the
George Floyd protest. You know, a significant payout. I think
three point five if army membering right, yeah, to the fly,
(42:53):
and I think like another three hundred to the daughter
or something like that. You know, from an accountability standpoint point,
you know, we always look at sheriff's deputies and some
of their renegade behavior. I do hate that the jury
award comes out of the county budget. You know, while
(43:13):
we hope that there's accountability with the sheriff department, you know,
is that this three point five less for some of
the services that the county provides, and the county provides
the safety net services, you know, in some way, I
hope we start to look at how we do these
these judgments so that it's not taking away from services
(43:34):
to and and not with a clear plan for accountability.
Speaker 1 (43:39):
Well yeah, so how about police and sheriff stop killing
people and grievously harming them. That would be one good
way try to cut back on that. Uh, great point.
Selling Gluck and his daughter Carolyn Gluck were hit by
supposedly less lethal while protesting and actually after a protest,
and they they got a big winning court week. Ed Sanders,
(44:01):
thank you so much for stopping in on Fridays. It's
always fun to talk to you.
Speaker 2 (44:06):
Thanks thought yourself.
Speaker 1 (44:08):
We've got news, traffic, and sports, and then it's time
for Friedman Friday talking reparations on KBLA Talk fifteen eighty
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.