WaPo: Why would Bernie nominate FOUR MEN and ONLY ONE WOMAN to the DNC Platform Committee????
(I remember reading several such breathless headlines)
It's simple: he didn't; at least, initially, anyway.
The Washington Post reports:
Sanders: DNC vetoed union leader pick for platform committee
What we heard from the DNC was that they did not want representatives of labor unions on the platform-drafting committee, he said. Thats correct.
Yesterday, Wall Street Journal reporter Peter Nicholas was the first to report that Sanders had included RoseAnn DeMoro, executive director of National Nurses United, on his list of preferred platform committee members. "He told me that he really wanted me on the committee to advocate for Medicare for All, especially," DeMoro told The Washington Post today.
"I think it was a set-up," said DeMoro. "It fed into the 'Bernie bro' narrative and meme -- oh, Bernie picked one woman, he's a sexist. As soon as the list was out, there were articles about how he chose two 'anti-Israel' people. The truth of the matter is that they were choices the DNC had signed off on."
In an interview Wednesday, DNC platform committee spokeswoman Dana Vickers Shelley confirmed that the DNC had not wanted labor leaders on the platform drafting committee, limiting labor's presence to Paul Booth of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees union.
That was cold comfort to DeMoro. "The most insidious thing, frankly, is that only one of 15 people on this drafting committee is for labor," she said. "It shows you how insidious the DNC has become. Labor built this party. Labor built this country. One person is enough to represent all of that? If you look at the composition of who they chose, besides Bernies choices, K Streets far better represented than the labor movement."
Clinton's DNC stopping progressives from organized labor from being represented on the platform committee. Only women who have the correct beliefs are allowed. #NotMyDemocraticParty
Any Clinton supporters want to defend this? I suppose there will be many apologies for the attacks on Sanders only nominating one woman. I'll wait patiently for the apologies (but don't worry about my health -- I won't hold my breath).
in the 70s, that it is nearly unrecognizable, especially in it's economic views. All they have left are the social/civil rights issues (and Obama has decimated some of those with his mass deportations). They now are the closest they have ever been to being accepted as indestinguishable from regular conservative (non-Teaparty) Republicans.
I have as much loyalty to it as it has to working people. None.
It has become Third Way all the way. End of August - I am out. As is my family.
just like they did not want them to work on the TPP and other trade bills. And they want us to believe they are on our side.
Even though a lot of labor union leadership chose to endorse HRC, its good to see Bernie support labor on the platform committee.
convention in a right-to-work state last time around told me all I needed to know about how today's Democratic Party feels about labor.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]
And I thank the press for revealing the DNC's dirty dealings here again.
You might want to re-read the OP again -- it doesn't say what you thought it did when you commented. Reading the OP helps too.
The corporate sugardaddies won't like it.
I mean shitloads of unions have fallen in line behind Clinton, despite many of their members wanting Bernie.
You'd think Clinton and the DNC would want shitloads on the platform committee.
Think about this: Lack of Retirement. Lack of Health Benefits. Sick Leave. Low Pay.
The government can mandate these things and make more programs to provide these.
However if we have a strong union movement then there is not any reason for gov't to be involved. Workers would be able to bargain and strike and get these things for themselves.
Maybe with the political process so corrupt the rich figure they can hold benefits to the workers at a lower level by buying the politicians, and letting the gov't provide them, rather than allowing us to have unions.
Sort of sad the dems are ok with it.
How is this defensible? Seriously, I want to see someone try.
Unfortunately, they forgot to read the OP (as I intended!).