While I find the title of this article more "clickbaity" than I would prefer, the content is of something that we haven't seen enough. I am a big fan of the Senator, but I, like many, haven't heard or read much about his past and personal life. The article doesn't provide a full picture, but the bits that it does are interesting to hear.
This was an interesting read. I think that in 2015 having a child out of wedlock is really a non-issue. Especially since he cared for and helped to raise the child. It's certainly not nearly as alarming to me as, for example, using a personal email account to conduct official business while in office and then deleting the more damning evidence before handing the account over to the state department. I do take Bernie's avoidance of mudslinging with a grain of salt now. There's a difference between not playing a game because you're sure to lose and refusing to play a game out of principle.
That said, many of those quotes from 1973 might as well have been taken from his speeches this year. Show me another politician who says the same thing as a no-name third party candidate as he does as a Senator 40 years later. I really hope we can elect this man.
In all honesty, I don't necessarily see consistency in and of itself to be a redeeming quality like people seem to make it out to be. Maybe I'm misinterpreting you and others who mention this, but I accept that politicians are human and can change their mind, and in fact I welcome ones who are self-critical enough that they CAN, without coercion, do so.
I honestly couldn't even piece together a coherent thesis out of it.
I kept expecting to get to a fact or snippet that was vaguely relevant to anything, but all he went on about was an amicable divorce and the existence of a son.
Am I supposed to be alarmed about his "secret"? That piece just made him seem more likeable and normal.
I was confused as to what this article was meant to be - was it a hitpiece, or an insight into his personal life that just seemed to veer towards the edge of unfair criticism? I found it interesting, regardless, even if the author was a bit confused as to his thesis.