General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy California Undocumented Youth and I Interrupted Nancy Pelosis DREAM Act Press Conference
Note: I'm not necessarily saying I agree with their tactics by posting this, I just thought people would be interested to read their views and motives for the protest, especially since so many people in the other thread were claiming it to be a nefarious plot by Republicans or Russians or Bernie supporters. This was written by the Statewide Coordinator of the California Immigrant Youth Justice Alliance, one of three groups that participated in that protest, along with RISE and Faith in Action. (That these groups were the ones that organized and carried out the protest was confirmed by Pelosi's own aides).
While I don't know of I agree with their tactics on protesting Pelosi that way (just like I didn't like it when BLM protesters took over Bernie's rally), I think people should still hear these kids out and not automatically smear them.
Moments like these cloud our visions with panic that sometimes makes people support legislation that harms others. Instead, we must reflect on how we have fought back against these familiar strategies, which aim to divide immigrant communities. Immigrant youth has been at the forefront protesting, heckling, and carrying out direct actions against Obama and the Democratic Party, regardless of the unpopularity of such tactics. President Barack Obama, dubbed by immigrants “the deporter-in-chief,” was an expert at using undocumented youth as bargaining chips during his 2012 reelection campaign, while simultaneously placing the rest of the immigrant community in jeopardy through the use of heavy enforcement, mass detention and deportation, making anti-immigrant programs and policies mandatory at the state and local level, and failing to pass a more permanent solution besides DACA.
Past actions against working class people and immigrants of color give us reason to be concerned about recent negotiation with President Donald Trump. When back-door deals are made without directly-impacted community members - who can provide solutions that matter — they can wreak long-term effects and sow divisions amongst our communities.
The Democratic Party plays into Trump’s tactics while pretending to put up a fight. Instead, party leaders endanger the lives of people of color by taking middle-of-the-road stances on issues that affect the lives of immigrants. Democrats have long kept their doors closed to community members and chosen to advance the agendas of corporate lobbyists and donors instead. Immigrant communities have not forgotten that Pelosi stood behind programs like Secure Communities (S-Comm) and the Priority Enforcement Program (PEP-Comm), policies that streamlined deportations in communities that are already heavily over-policed.
more...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why-california-undocumented-youth-and-i-interrupted_us_59c1a86de4b0f96732cbca25?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Xipe Totec
(43,888 posts)
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)and also a smaller number of their counterparts from the farther left. These sorts all do anger and resentment against those they don't see as like them all too well.
They have good reason to be angry, of course. I just wish striking out at Democrats, instead of Republicans, was not as natural to this half of our Dreamers as the scorpion's biting of the frog who gave him a ride across the river.
We Democrats are the only reason they have any hope of citizenship. We are the people who insisted they be educated in public schools against strenuous opposition from the right. We are the reason they have the good lives they are afraid of losing. Of course, we very much includes Senator Pelosi, who for 30 years has supported, and often been instrumental in passage, of every piece of legislation that has benefited them.
People so typically blame everything on the party in power, and these people especially have every reason in the world to blame the Republicans, but they attack us. Because to blame Republicans would be to blame those they want to be.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)that is not going to happen. Noisy aggression is as natural to them as it is that it be focused on the mainstream liberal base of the left, instead of the conservatives who are attacking them.
Not exactly rational, but there will be no wising up for those wired for this kind of passion.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Kentonio
(4,377 posts)I'm just curious to see if you feel the same about other issues.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)who has been a long-time effective advocate for immigrants should be subject to during a press conference on legislation that protects immigrants.
I fail to understand how she deserved this treatment.
https://pelosi.house.gov/issues/immigration
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)
leftstreet
(36,097 posts)I didn't understand what the protesting was about and couldn't find much online
At least these are the words of a protestor, and not some pundit's speculations
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)They really should ask themselves which party would help them the most. I think biting off the hand that tries to help you is not a good thing. Now that they have run Nancy Pelosi from her own rally, why would they assume she will go to bat for them?
Me.
(35,454 posts)she still will, just as PBO did, even when they protested his rallies.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)
Warpy
(111,124 posts)and tried to overturn the the EO allowing them to stay. They don't see anyone protecting them because they're too young to know where to look, mostly.
I don't blame them for their mistrust, they feel tricked into betraying who and where they are and now they feel very vulnerable. However they, like the early BLM, need to pick their targets a little more carefully.
And no, I don't feel superior in this regard. See: Chicago 1968. We made the same mistake when we were young.
Me.
(35,454 posts)The Dems are not pretending to put up a fight. As for the rest of it, it sounds like Nina Turner with her doors closed to community members nonsense. The people putting their lives at danger are Republicans yet they focus on the Dems.
Sadly, if this is how they see the situation and choose to proceed, I feel they will not be helping themselves.
You can not bite the hand that helps you then continue asking for help.
Going after Pelosi in public was a mistake.
BigmanPigman
(51,564 posts)years ago when I became ill and had to stop and I support the dreamers. Our school superintendent spoke at the DACA rally I was able to attend a few weeks ago(my physical condition is making this more and more difficult though). She sent a letter to all the teachers in the district the following day and my teacher friends have been told that no ICE officials are allowed on school sites. The atmosphere is very scary and kids are afraid to attend school. This country is feeling less and less like my country and I am feeling more and more like an outsider since Nov 8th.
pnwmom
(108,955 posts)Pelosi. She is NOT the same as DT, but she and Schumer might be able to take advantage of DTs need for a success of some sort -- and his desire to take revenge on some of the R's he's mad at in Congress.
Me.
(35,454 posts)To help immigrants.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)go to the GOP who are in power and see how far you get.
BigmanPigman
(51,564 posts)more beneficial if they had gone after the GOP! I support their efforts to call attention to their situation and I understand that they are desperate, however the attack on Pelosi was not appropriate in my opinion. I like to look at all sides and positions and want to know why they chose to act in that manner and at that place and time. The article didn't help to shed light on that issue and I would like more information from the event organizers (if there were any).
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)
Ninsianna
(1,349 posts)to (the people standing behind her), were Dreamers. Who were also desperate, and who were silenced by these pouty kids acting out, and that's exactly what they presented themselves as.
They were more interested in yelling at Pelosi and the Democrats and literally taking all attention away from Dreamers. Acting like little kids throwing a tantrum because mommy didn't let them have what they wanted, when they wanted it, even if she had no power to give it to them.
The_Casual_Observer
(27,742 posts)shills for Roger Stone, absolutely convinced. Nope, just a group of idealistic people that know the history of that particular struggle and wanted to be heard, not that Pelosi is going to lift a finger for the general undocumented population.
JI7
(89,239 posts)Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)I am proud to have Nancy Pelosi as the minority leader...if anyone can save these kids it is her.
delisen
(6,042 posts)as well as Democrats?
If so, good. If not, why not?
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)They know they don't have much power. They're frustrated a terrified and they want to be heard. They know republicans aren't going to listen, so they went to the person who is on their side.
Pelosi's ego is strong enough to handle some criticism.
delisen
(6,042 posts)Trump and the Republicans and if not, why not?
I am not concerned about the strength of Pelosi's ego. I consider her to be a strong person who understands what comes with a her role in government.
The people whom I know who fit into the group labeled Dreamers do not seem to be in agreement with this group, and have directed their efforts in my state toward Republicans.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)And started asking them specific questions.
As soon as they would have had to say something more than a five word chant, everyone would have seen how stupid they are. Did anybody here even watch the video?
Ninsianna
(1,349 posts)also terrified and frustrated and wanted to be heard. THEY knew Democrats were listening and doing whatever they could to help, they were there and waiting to be heard when a bunch of bratty kids came in and threw a tantrum.
I know Pelosi is strong enough to take the BS, that's all she gets from the people that pushed this BS, but my concern is with the Dreamers who were given a platform to be heard and who were silenced by these people who took away their voice.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Why did they encourage these people to attack someone who is on their side?
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)I just don't agree. I do think they are being used against anti-Democratic Party operatives.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)It never ceases to amaze me how people can talk themselves into doing something completely counterproductive to their cause. If you have to pen a 1000+ word missive to try to justify yourself on something that is really pretty simple, it's a pretty good bet you are in the wrong.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)require deeper explanation. That's why instruments of lies usually try to get people with a soundbyte rather than the whole clarification, preferring to either preempt it or cut it out in editing.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)What are you talking about?
JCanete
(5,272 posts)specific dog in this conversation and you just want to voice your dissatisfaction with my posting at all, I'm not interested in looking at the context to explain to you what I was saying, because you aren't actually interested in knowing.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And you're not the only person on this thread that I've replied to.
Is that a problem? Do you not have conversations with other people in more than one OP?
And are you going to answer my question?
JCanete
(5,272 posts)"instruments of lies", "instruments of disinformation" whatever. People who's job it is to sell the public on or off a product or brand. The conservative brand of the corporate media qualifies in particular.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)You have implicated the Boston Globe as one such "corporate" shill.
What is your metric?
JCanete
(5,272 posts)about my opinion of the Boston Globe and media in general. I think we can both agree that Fox isn't even in the business of journalism.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)What, for you, makes a specific newspaper "corporate" enough to dismiss any OPED from them?
Can you give an example and why?
The Boston Globe, for instance. How would they be more "corporate" or less corporate than another paper.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)say for all the other reasons I stated, and when I find that the writer's own perspective has absolutely caused a framing of information in a way that propagates certain assumptions without even bothering to address potential challenges to those assumptions, I do not hold that piece high as an example of intrepid journalism getting to the bottom of things. This is just not a strength of mainstream papers and their staff when it comes to progressive economic issues. I certainly don't want to suggest there are no exceptions, but I can't think of any off the top of my head.
You could argue that its all benign, and that the editors are catering to a larger audience and the paper is looking for voices that speak to enough of that audience, but I think that's a cop-out. They are at least partly responsible for how their audience thinks about things, and when they have a financial incentive to come down a certain way on something, and papers do, when that's where they come down it doesn't mean they aren't right on that particular issue in that particular case, it just means that I question the forces that helped them to arrive at their conclusions.
The Boston Globe implying medicare-for-all isn't coming because Vermont couldn't pass it already buys into the notion that politics is just a matter of ideology and even those liberals who believe in it balked when it came down to it, presumably not because of the political backlash that money might buy, but because of the plan's costliness.
The information in the article is valuable, its just all incredibly one-sided. Where is the counter-argument?
Absolutely there are risks to a small state doing this. If corporations have leverage they can use like threatening to leave the state for another one, that obviously is a risk that Vermont takes, and one that California takes as well, but to a much lesser extent.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)I don't have a subscription, so I can't read the article. Would you mind copying the text from it that you are referring to?
And is that the basis upon which you determined that the OPED is not that of the actual editors, but that of corporations?
JCanete
(5,272 posts)"In short, if a liberal state electing a Socialist (US Senator Bernie Sanders) to Congress can’t or won’t put a single-payer system into place, then who will?"
Here's the headline of the article.
"Costs derail Vermont’s dream of a single-payer health plan"
And here's some framing
"The numbers were stunning. To implement single-payer, the analysis showed, it would cost $4.3 billion in 2017, with Vermont taxpayers picking up $2.6 billion and the federal government covering the rest. To put the figures into perspective, Vermont’s entire fiscal 2015 budget, including both state and federal funds, is about $4.9 billion."
Now we already know that the state is going to be paying for more and that taxes are going up in any single payer plan. What, no mention of the fact that some of this(my guess without knowing Vermont's plan in detail is probably most of this) is an offset of what consumers and businesses already spend? To answer my own question...no.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)They listed numbers. You don't provide the links or sources for those numbers - and that would be important as to the research they did.
You also keep saying that (without even knowing what the Vermont number are) that "most of what businesses and customers already spend would be offset by.... what? Lower out of pocket premiums and deductibles and the increased taxes? Do you have numbers on this?
Where does "the state" get the money to pay for this? From increased taxes - which as we saw was enough to scuttle single payer in the most welcoming state that it could have been implemented in....
Also, you need to factor in the disruption to the health care delivery upending the payment process and amounts. I think you may recall that the ACA website rollout was not a success. When you rush things, they often fail. Imagine that multiplied across all aspects of health care for everyone...not to mention the problems that exist in Medicare and Medicaid and the VA currently.
One of the biggest is exactly how to redistribute literally trillions of dollars. The problem, said Harold Pollack, a professor at the University of Chicago, is that the change will create losers as well as winners.
“Precisely the thing that is a feature for single-payer proponents is a bug for everyone who provides goods and services for the medical economy,” he said, since their profits — and possibly their incomes — could be cut.
And it’s not just the private insurance industry (which would effectively be put out of business) that could feel the impact to the bottom line. Parts of the health care industry that lawmakers want to help, like rural hospitals, could inadvertently get hurt, too. Many rural hospitals get paid so little by Medicare that they only survive on higher private insurance payments. Yet under single-payer, those payments would go away and some could not make it financially. “You would not want to wipe out a third of the hospitals in Minnesota by accident,” Pollack said. “And you could,” if payments to hospitals end up too low.
There are also questions about how feasible it would be to have the federal government run the entire health care system. “It’s hard to be nimble” when a system gets that big, said Ezekiel Emanuel, a former health adviser in the Obama administration now at the University of Pennsylvania. “No organization in the world does anything for 300 million people and does it efficiently.”
To try to do it in one fell swoop would be massively disruptive.
The politics of Medicare — which serves roughly 50 million Americans — already make some things difficult or impossible, he said, pointing to a current fight in which doctors and patient advocacy groups blasted a proposal to move to a more cost-effective way to pay for cancer drugs. “You already can’t do certain things in Medicare because of the politicization,” he said. ”When you cover the whole country, it would be a lot of gridlock.”
http://khn.org/news/democrats-unite-but-what-happened-to-medicare-for-all/
JCanete
(5,272 posts)It's not possible. And it isn't an assumption that any insurance premiums people and corporations currently pay to insurance companies would not be spent there. That is the offset. I currently don't know whether or not this plan was offered with copays in mind or if it did away with copays. If the latter that also has to be factored in.
I already told you that I had no reason to suspect they were being nefarious. I don't trust that their perspective is unbiased. I don't trust that their assumptions are good ones. I gave you an example of the commentary and the details it left out, and if you think there should be a link to where they got their numbers, blame the Globe for not providing them. They simply said it was the financial analysis that Shumlin's office released.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)No one said they had to account for "everything," just reality. And math.
And if you don't know enough to know basic information such as if "this plan was offered with copays in mind" or not, how is it you can dismiss any analysis of it that actually uses the information from the architects of Green Mountain Care as "corporate" or not?
The ACA was not an upending of the health care delivery funding system in one fell swoop, as M4A intends to do in FOUR YEARS. Even the ACA regulations that were rolled out over a few years, as were gradual expansions of Medicaid, and the funding mechanisms.
The financial analysis that Shumlin's office released is the source of all reliable information on why Green Mountain Care failed, so yes, the Globe was using direct sources.
Shumlin isn't a corporation. He was the one trying to implement single payer in the most homgenous, liberal state in the US. And they were not going to accept the costs involved.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)Why don't you look at it and tell me how I got it wrong. I have a feeling I didn't. They talked about a huge tax increase without the fact that people would no longer be paying huge insurance premiums. That is misleading as hell.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)The Globe lied and didn't say that the out of pocket costs to people, in taxes and in other copays, would be offset by the health care they would not have to pay for. (at least those not on medicaid and Medicare)
Now, are you saying that the people of Vermont were not told that this would come to pass? That they were NOT told that their costs would be offset?
Because you're saying that if people are told that, they would be OK with the higher taxes. Right?
Not clear on what you are saying about the Globe.
Here's the report from the Governor:
http://hcr.vermont.gov/sites/hcr/files/pdfs/GMC%20FINAL%20REPORT%20123014.pdf
Page 22 lists the out of pocket maximums and co-pays.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)beyond those "stunning" numbers to what they actually represent, which is sloppy but not necessarily intentionally misleading. I have no other knowledge of this writer and I wouldn't want to weigh in on the motivations of that omission.
Nor am I saying that people, given all of the facts by those institutions which are supposedly there to inform the public, would ultimately approve of Single-Payer, although i'm actually pretty damn impressed with the numbers as they stood in Vermont, with 40 percent being in favor, and it being the most popular plan among all proposals among the voters. In fact, I've already said this in a post to you...that while I believe single-payer would be popular if it got honest press, I don't know that it would be.
I don't know what kind of information campaign the legislature or any advocacy groups did to try to educate the public in Vermont on how this worked. We weren't talking about that though. We were talking about how the media weighs in. And here we have one example which I didn't even have to go looking for. It was brought to me on a silver platter. I hadn't even read it until you prompted me to do so. My initial comments were simply about why some statement by the writer of the Globe doesn't hold any significance to me. Reading it has only upheld my expectations.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)So, yeah, it's important.
If you don't know what kind of information campaign that was used to educate people, how is it that you can assume "rich people" kille it and not the public sentiment? Not clear on that.
"My initial comments were simply about why some statement by the writer of the Globe doesn't hold any significance to me."
No, you originally dismissed the Globe piece as being from a "corporate newspaper" who could not be trusted.....
And now, you're saying that you don't know if the author of the Globe had corporate motives, or that the Globe is a corporate shill? Or do you still think that? I'm losing track of all the tangents, and lack of direct response to my questions.
I think you are talking in circles, and appear not to remember what you have posted before.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)just because the writer has a bias doesn't mean the person is lying or trying to obfuscate or distort the truth. that doesn't mean the person's truth isn't distorted, it just means I'm not going to weigh in on whether this person's coverage is cynical or naive. Its bad either way, for reasons I'm assuming you don't disagree with since you've let my criticisms stand?
My point was already stated that sometimes its just a matter of who the producers and owners like. Just because you got hired because you fit a mold doesn't mean you had to contort yourself to fit that mold.
If you want to try to catch me in a contradiction, by all means go for it, but at least bother to read my posts.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)
JCanete
(5,272 posts)got something a little wrong.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)
But hey, if it makes you feel like "you won" and you clearly have a real need to think that - by all means, just keep saying it...
JCanete
(5,272 posts)perspective and speech in media. I wasn't spouting grand conspiracy theories about smoky backrooms or any of that nonsense, because the causes are far more systemic and natural than that. Not saying Corps don't sometimes silence those voices they disapprove of when they can get away with it, because that certainly happens, but for the most part its about who gets hired in the first place.
If you want to show me how I've talked in circles, I'm actually interested to see the case you make.
greeny2323
(590 posts)Jackasses.
CherokeeFiddle
(297 posts)Try telling that to those who have had family and loved ones deported. That's insulting.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)see how well you fare with the GOP...be my guest.
CherokeeFiddle
(297 posts)Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)It has nothing to do with people came here without documentation. With the GOP in charge,we can do nothing to help those folks. But we might be able to help the dreamers...but hey if the Dreamers think they can get a better deal with the GOP, let them try...done with folks attacking the Democratic leaders and the party...had the left left(green riffraff with no clue about winning elections) had President Obama's back in 10 instead of the sob fest because we didn't get single payer...maybe we could have gotten immigration reform and a quite a bit more really...but when the GOP took the house and the governorship's and then gerrymandered the House...it became impossible. And the party's are not the same by the way. I suggest you re-read TOS. If Hillary Clinton had been elected with a Senate majority...Gorsuch would not be on the court(even without a Senate majority he wouldn't have been even nominated)...we would have a liberal justice, the dreamers would not be endangered, we would not be on the verge of nuclear war and the ACA would be protected. But again the left left (green riffraff) voted in a self destructive way and we lost the election. There were enough votes in Stein's numbers to have eked out a victory.
CherokeeFiddle
(297 posts)Why do you keep threatening me with the TOS? Are you a moderator here? Deportation is deportation. Why are you talking about Jill Stein? We are talking about people having their families ripped apart and sent away to God knows where.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)say the parties are the same. They are not. It is a factual statement not a threat. No matter what you say...DACA would not exist with out a Democratic president ...Barack Obama.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)pay more than lip service to their causes right? That is why the democrats are who we are today, not in-spite of.
TomSlick
(11,086 posts)I understand that the Dreamers are frightened - reasonably so. I also understand that when people are frightened, they sometimes do irrational things. While I believe that silencing Pelosi was counterproductive, I can understand.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)TomSlick
(11,086 posts)However, I think it understandable.
I was angry when I say the protestors silencing Pelosi. However, I recognized that I should give myself some thinking time before reaching any firm conclusions. I wish these Dreamers had given themselves some thinking time before acting on their fear.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)I have no more patience for those who attack the Democratic Party...Nancy Pelosi is their only shot...and even then we may not win. They should be doing everything to help the effort...and why not attack the GOP? It makes no sense.
TomSlick
(11,086 posts)Never attribute to malice anything that can be adequately explained by simple stupidity.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)Thank you. You made my day.
Chipper Chat
(9,671 posts)You could look at her face and tell she was hurt. Those people were rude and not very tactful. I was disgusted by the whole thing.
onecaliberal
(32,775 posts)The Dems are NOT against them in any way. The republicans, however, would throw them away tomorrow if they could get away with it.
treestar
(82,383 posts)from them. They can't vote. Maybe there is potential (as the right insists we believe they will vote for us), but it would be years before it would show up in their becoming US citizens. So this is just plain dumb. They could be convincing us that they will not vote for us even then. But this is a minority, so I look at it that way. They get attention from negative behavior. Just proves they are American in outlook.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)be a miracle and cannot be done without Republicans being on board (Trump) That is the way it is. We will make a deal and won't get exactly what we want...but thousands of young dreamers will not be deported. Then, we go back and get more when we can. I have seen the response to this disgraceful ac,t and many Dreamers are not on board with this behavior. The Democrats are doing all they can...try booing the GOP for a change. I believe this happened because the leader simple dislikes Democrats.
Hekate
(90,538 posts)...Darrell Issa and Dana Rohrabacher are just two who spring to mind. Both are GOP, both are dishonest, both are Californians, both are men, and one is in Putin's pocket.
To go after Nancy Pelosi in this fashion is so counterproductive and flat-out stupid that it makes me wonder if this crowd and its leaders are even who they say they are. She is one of the best legislative allies the DREAMers will ever have.
It reminds me of the crowd that shouted down, jostled, and disrespected Dolores Huerta, a living hero who worked alongside Cesar Chavez in dark and dangerous years and has never ever backed down from working to improve the lives of, specifically, Mexican and Mexican American workers.
What do these two people have in common? Well, they are both women, which seems increasingly like some criterion for persecution by people who claim to have some kind of progressive values. They are both small and older -- and Dolores Huerta is over 80 and tiny.
So I ask again of these protestors: Who the hell are they? Are they even who they say they are? Whose idea was this?
Me.
(35,454 posts)
sheshe2
(83,637 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Zoonart
(11,828 posts)As applies to the country in general and the Democrats in particular:
"We have to learn to differentiate between imperfect friends and deadly enemies."
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)By the tone of this thread, we haven't quite done that yet Rushdie.
nini
(16,672 posts)Protesting one thing but if it doesn't lead to discussion you harmed your cause.. not helped it.
Glorfindel
(9,714 posts)I no longer care what happens to these "undocumented youth." Let them depend on the mercies of the Repuke party. There are other more worthy causes I can support. Just my humble opinion.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)leader(s) in my opinion who used their fears to try to attack Nancy because of the burning hatred these folks (not progressive in my opinion) have for the Democratic Party. Many Dreamers have come out against this incident.
demmiblue
(36,816 posts)
LostOne4Ever
(9,286 posts)
Cuthbert Allgood
(4,905 posts)How dare they.
On a related note: Is this really a sight for the liberals of the world, because...Jesus Fucking Christ.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)because their organizer has a beef with particular liberals...Jesus Fucking Christ
Strawman much?
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)Just my humble opinion.
Eyeball_Kid
(7,429 posts)I surmised that this kind of protest could not have been executed by well intentioned people, that it must be a Roger Stone Production.
Beringia
(4,316 posts)
OhioBlue
(5,126 posts)and for those that do, their families don't. They are making an appeal for themselves, their loved ones and their communities in solidarity. I'm guessing they chose to protest Nancy because she is one of the highest level elected officials that they thought might actually care. I don't agree with their protest, but I understand it.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)able to do anything about the others until we are back in power...we have to get what we can...it will be imperfect and a compromise...but a 100% of nothing is still nothing. We go back and get more when we can.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)I haven't seen that point addressed here, but yes, the Obama administration deported a LOT of people. While DACA was a good gesture (achievable, sadly, only by Executive Order for reasons we all know and therefore easily undone), it wound up putting some immigrants at odds with other immigrants, sometimes within their own families. I think the Pelosi Protesters perceive that if the fight is narrowed down to DACA and DACA only, some people will be served, but a lot more people are going to get left out and treated unjustly. I think they're correct.
aikoaiko
(34,161 posts)It perplexed a lot of supporters of Bernie and MOM. Some even suggested conspiracies which were plausible but unlikely just as some Democrats are saying about these DACA protestors.
In the end, I think it is safe to say that BLM saw the Democratic party candidates as the most likely to respond to their anger and despair and targeted them. It was more complicated than that, but that was my take away.
And it worked, Bernie and Martin responded quickly. Eventually BLM got to HRC and she responded.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And how HRC reached out to the Mothers of the Movement when others didn't.
aikoaiko
(34,161 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)haveahart
(905 posts)get some aid after the earthquake.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)Elections have consequences. These kids have no ties to Mexico which is the point of DACA.
Cuthbert Allgood
(4,905 posts)that have lived here pretty much their entire lives. And this asshole administration wants to send them to a country that they have basically never lived in. And they are fighting to stay in THEIR country. But, yeah, fuck them for trying to stay here.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)is up in the air?
They are volunteering in disaster recovery in the US right now - and one lost his life.
https://qz.com/1069222/hurricane-harvey-killed-a-daca-recipient-who-was-on-a-rescue-mission/
stonecutter357
(12,693 posts)
saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)I had hoped your article would create a discussion on the need for real Immigration Reform. Sure, DACA gets the most exposure while failing to address the struggle of those who will remain undocumented.
Weekend Warrior
(1,301 posts)I find the protest to be righteous. I think they need to spend all of their efforts protesting Democrats and others on the left. That is where their time is best spent, in my opinion.
Rene
(1,183 posts)Those obnoxious, screaming 'Dreamers'....lost my respect yesterday.....and my sympathy. That was a disgusting display that served no valid purpose. What a nasty crowd of disrespectful, belligerent jerks.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)Pelosi is at no risk. I think that we can find within us a little patience, rather than trying to return any bile in kind.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And I think that you yourself should seek to find within yourself a little patience, rather than trying to return any bile in kind....
JCanete
(5,272 posts)other poster was...so yeah, point taken on that note.
Cuthbert Allgood
(4,905 posts)with the voices of scared people asking for help.
What jerks.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,106 posts)Are you calling the leader of our party this?
One of our leaders anyway?
Cuthbert Allgood
(4,905 posts)Really? Of course she does. How is this even a point of discussion?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)I hadn't heard about that.
Cuthbert Allgood
(4,905 posts)That's how it works.
because it might be necessary.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)working for their rights as well.
Because she's been there for immigrants when others were off at rallies.
https://pelosi.house.gov/issues/immigration
Cuthbert Allgood
(4,905 posts)That means that she might not understand what these people are going through? They interrupted her. Big fucking deal. If she can't deal with that, then she certainly doesn't understand what they are currently going through.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)on her attempt to talk about DACA, despite her long record of effective, sincere advocacy for immigrants?
It's not like she just cancelled the talk when interrupted by people, right?
I guess being a public servant that actually gets things done is the opposite of progressive now.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Their timing was suspect too, since it just 'happened' to be the day the Manafort story broke...
And not to mention this isn't the first Dem event they've disrupted -- How many new fans have they won over to their cause with this bullshit?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)MGKrebs
(8,138 posts)It looks like they are others who came here on their own who also want protection and are using the DACA issue as a wedge?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts) Kentonio
(4,377 posts)It's seriously disturbing to read people who claim to be supportive of immigration suddenly talking in such a deeply condescending and patronizing manner about how immigration groups are supposedly allowed to talk or who they're allowed to critisize. The simple truth is that neither party come up smelling of roses on these issues (obviously the GOP are far, far worse, but that doesn't give us a free pass to be fair weather friends).
Maybe instead of throwing your toys out of your pram about poor Nancy's hurt feelings, maybe you should focus a little more on the needs of these people who risk being thrown out of a country they've in some cases only ever known and being sent to a country where they have nothing, know no-one and have no means to support themselves.
We haven't served these people anywhere near as well as we'd like to think we have, and its about time we accepted that instead of acting like country club members who get offended because their favourite charity case doesn't appreciate their efforts enough.
CherokeeFiddle
(297 posts)You are correct in what you say and here is a video from the protest. I think it is pretty clear how the protesters feel and it is likely to make quite a few folks around here very uncomfortable.
Link to tweet
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)Really clears things up plus I back people over party any day of the week.
treestar
(82,383 posts)She is tough.
But then, they are not legally here, and don't have the right to vote in any case, so it seems pretty dumb to do this. Maybe it is a privilege to be an American born citizen or otherwise legally here. But there is a law and you can't act so entitled when you are asking another country to change its laws for you. It's one thing for Susan Sarandon and that group to act that way, but when you just plain are deportable under the laws you have to be more sensible.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Just because someone fell through a crack in the system, doesn't mean they should be told to shut up and be grateful for what little they receive. Nothing will change without activism and these folks are the people actually being affected. Of course they should be allowed to put their case, even when it makes us feel uncomfortable about our own shortcomings. Friends listen, not just speak.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)I have more animosity at the political opportunist who used them in this disgusting manner.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,106 posts)by Democrats attacking Democrats. At least not normally. It more or less ended with 1968.
Something new and different is happening. I know what it is but I cant say.
Something very new and different is happening that is creating distrust and dislike of the Democratic Party, BIG TIME!
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)Last edited Tue Sep 26, 2017, 05:09 PM - Edit history (1)
thing undermines the chances...stupid and irresponsible. I recognize at least one of them as a Stein supporter...so it seems as if the usual suspects attacking the Democratic Party. They did those they purport to represent no favors...how about going after the GOP who wants to send DACA kids to their country of birth...Certainly not their home. It will take a compromise to save these kids and that is a fact so prepare yourself. It is the only way at the moment.
brooklynite
(94,302 posts)Will it change the mind of Nancy Pelosi or compel her to do something different?
Will it change the minds of anyone who happened to watch the press conference on C-SPAN, or a 10-second clip on the evening news?
ProfessorGAC
(64,827 posts)I think this is a case of slapping the hands of an ally because it's easier to get close to them, but not so much to the enemy.
Too convenient, by at least half.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,391 posts)There was a bipartisan bill passed by the Senate in 2013 that, unfortunately, went nowhere in the House. Why? Because Republicans didn't even consider it. Hard to blame President Obama for that IMHO. The whole immigration system is in need of repair and reform to make it more effective but also humane (which is going to be impossible under Trump and his out-of-control ICE), however, for the most part, the people in this article are pretty much "preaching to the choir when it comes to Democrats. If they really want to get something done, they really need to start exerting some more pressure on Republicans and/or working to elect more like-minded candidates in their districts.
Weekend Warrior
(1,301 posts)I also think BLM protested the right person(mentioned in your op).
They will gain nothing by protesting McConnel or Cruz. Like Obama said, hold feet to the fire. There should be no free passes.
ananda
(28,831 posts)Absolutely no one in the Reep party will do anything
for them.
Yet they attack the Dems who will.
I keep wondering whether they were paid by Russia.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)were giving Jeff Sessions a boner.
And while middle-of-the-road sounds like treason to both the right and the left, it is actually how we used to get things done in this country. All major social legislation of the 20th Century had people willing to accept compromises, and we incrementally solved a lot of problems in that way.
"All or nothing" usually winds up with nothing.
