That being said those of us on the left favor a humane immigration system.

Here is Trump and Bernie talking about how African Americans and Hispanics Americans are harmed by immigrants. Also, it is notable how both Bernie and Trump both purport to be waiving a flag for African Americans to justify their attacks on immigrants, which just seems to promote divisions within the U.S. Who knew that Trump was actually a progressive, because he does not sound like the right-wing that Bernie describes:

https://www.vox.com/2015/7/28/9014491/bernie-sanders-vox-conversation

Ezra Klein
It would make a lot of global poor richer, wouldn't it?

Bernie Sanders
It would make everybody in America poorer —you're doing away with the concept of a nation state, and I don't think there's any country in the world that believes in that. If you believe in a nation state or in a country called the United States or UK or Denmark or any other country, you have an obligation in my view to do everything we can to help poor people. What right-wing people in this country would love is an open-border policy. Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour, that would be great for them. I don't believe in that. I think we have to raise wages in this country, I think we have to do everything we can to create millions of jobs.

You know what youth unemployment is in the United States of America today? If you're a white high school graduate, it's 33 percent, Hispanic 36 percent, African American 51 percent. You think we should open the borders and bring in a lot of low-wage workers, or do you think maybe we should try to get jobs for those kids?

I think from a moral responsibility we've got to work with the rest of the industrialized world to address the problems of international poverty, but you don't do that by making people in this country even poorer.

Tonight, I am speaking to you because there is a growing humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border. Every day customs and border patrol agents encounter thousands of illegal immigrants trying to enter our country. We are out of space to hold them and we have no way to promptly return them back home to their country. America proudly welcomes millions of lawful immigrants who enrich our society and contribute to our nation. But, all Americans are hurt by uncontrolled illegal migration. It strains public resources and drives down jobs and wages. Among those hardest hit are African-Americans and Hispanic Americans. Our southern border is a pipeline for vast quantities of illegal drugs, including meth, heroin, cocaine and fentanyl. Every week 300 of our citizens are killed by heroin alone, 90 percent of which floods across from our southern border. More Americans will die from drugs this year than were killed in the entire Vietnam War.

But he trims his position because he knows it a disqualifying position in a Democratic primary.

Geez Louise, He's no champion of women, but this is news.

Perhaps it doesn't really matter because I see him polling badly in IA and SC and then it's over. But still.

Is Bernie Sanders opposed to the European Union? Was he in favor of Brexit?

he is a strong opponent of free trade and a huge fan of tarrifs; in fact his trade policiy is remarkably similar to trumps - cancel tpa, nafta, etc.

and natural gas exports. The recent crash in energy raw materials price is hurting Putin where
it hurts the most.

Apparently, Bernie was able to differentiate between the immigrants earning minimal wages and immigrants that have $500K to contribute for a project in his state.

It will be different this time, and I don't know if he or many who support him are prepared for what that involves.

not have my vote. Register as a Democrat, maybe. But probably not.🤔

with the whole sexual harassment/assault being a huge factor

Last edited Fri Jan 11, 2019, 09:20 AM - Edit history (1)

blaming everyone and everything but the candidate.

He finally got the cheering college students, which is I imagine has been one of the very high points for him in his career.

He can go out on that note in retirement, instead having to looking back on it for decades like Nader did.

And he can always do those book tours - not as big crowds, but far less taxing.

I can imagine why. I think she has a broader view of what the obstacles are.

But I understand that one doesn't ever disagree or challenge Bernie, and she didn't.

... that are also called into question and subject to intense scrutiny. She seems weary of it all and not willing to make the effort.

Bernie never commented on the fraud or scandal.

Despite questionable or intellectually dishonest attempts to do so.

This time out the press and opposing candidates will ask about those votes.

Because REASONS!

Thanks Tom. These comments by Sen. Sanders are disturbing.

But wait... there's more. I expect that as time progresses and the vetting process continues, there will be more things revealed that were previously unknown. (Or that were known to just a few, but suppressed.)

All I'm trying to say is that IT'S NEW DAWN, IT'S A NEW DAY and I'm feeling good about how things will turn out.

No ignoring, no smearing, no fake "scandals." I want a real look at who we are choosing.

And spouses in the public eye are fair game too. I have mixed feelings about a candidate's adult children, but not if they're intimately involved in the candidate's career or campaign.

If the adult children are involved in the candidates business, a la the Trump spawn, they are fair game for vetting.

The underlying interview was by Ezra Klein. Also, here is a story analyzing Bernie's responses by Dylan Matthews.

https://www.vox.com/2015/7/29/9048401/bernie-sanders-open-borders

f I could add one amendment to the Constitution, it would be the one Wall Street Journal editorial page editor Robert Bartley once proposed: "There shall be open borders." There is no single policy that the United States could adopt that would do more good for more people. An average Nigerian worker can increase his income almost 15-fold just by moving to the United States, and residents of significantly richer countries like Mexico can more than double their earnings. The humanitarian gains of letting everyone who wants to make that leap do so would be astounding.

So I was disappointed, if not surprised, at the visceral horror with which Bernie Sanders reacted to the idea when interviewed by my colleague Ezra Klein. "Open borders?" he interjected. "No, that's a Koch brothers proposal." The idea, he argued, is a right-wing scheme meant to flood the US with cheap labor and depress wages for native-born workers. "I think from a moral responsibility, we've got to work with the rest of the industrialized world to address the problems of international poverty," he conceded, "but you don't do that by making people in this country even poorer."

There are two problems with Sanders's view on this, one empirical and one moral. He's wrong about what the effects of an open-border policy would be on American workers, and he's wrong in treating Americans' lives as more valuable and worthy of concern than the lives of foreigners.

he existing economic literature suggests that eliminating all barriers on movement between nations would increase world GDP by 50 to 150 percent. The midpoint estimate is that the world economy would double. That's because people are much more productive in rich countries. Because of better technology, more skilled co-workers, better institutions, and the like, a worker doing the same job will earn vastly more for it in the US than in, say, Haiti. And if everyone were able to take jobs where they'd earn the most, the cumulative effect on the economy would be massive.

instead of posting a Libertarian's op-ed about the interview?

Okay, to be fair, here is a conservative, right wing columnist Byron York totally agreeing and praising Bernie Sanders' anti-immigration policies.

My whole point is that even some people on left can be racist and not all conservatives are racist. Woodrow Wilson was Democratic President, but he was also a virulent racist. Likewise, FDR signed off on placing Japanese Americans in internment camps. I think we need to watch out for how racist scapegoating can even take hold on the left.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bernie-sanders-schools-vox-on-immigration

As a socialist moving up in the Democratic presidential polls, Bernie Sanders raises the expectations of many on the Left. Some assume Sanders believes what they believe and are disappointed if they discover he does not. In a newly-published interview, Vox founder Ezra Klein, an advocate of an open-borders immigration policy, asked a question virtually inviting Sanders to agree with Klein about allowing any and all would-be immigrants to come to the United States. Sanders most emphatically did not go along.

wtf? is there nobody you won't quote here? Fucking ridiculous.

...here who has been saying that Sanders would attract trump voters (i.e., conservatives) and win if he ran against him?

Sanders would attract some Trump voters. Trump can not afford to lose any voters because of the razor thin margins in recent elections.

This source sounds questionable.

However this is a fact of life: Bernie will be vetted this time, unlike 2016.

Your best strategy as a Sanders advocate in 2020 is to write solid intellectually honest defenses of Senator Sanders’ questionable votes.

Here, I’ll even help you:

Yes, Bernie Sanders voted to kill immigration reform in 2007. But it’s complicated.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/10/yes-bernie-sanders-voted-to-kill-immigration-reform-in-2007-but-its-complicated/?utm_term=.62e458670451

...probably starting even before it really begins:

Voted multiple times against the Brady Bill
Voted to allow guns on Amtrak trains
Voted AGAINST the Magnitzky Act*
Voted AGAINST sanctions for Russia*

*the only Senator to vote against both

And more.

Did someone say something? Does the person who called me ''right wing bullshit'' for being against homophobia actually think I'd ever engage with them?

Can't imagine how they could think that. But I can say this for sure in case they do: I never ever will.


In the meantime, if they're looking for something to do, they could try to find where I say I'm "a Sanders advocate in 2020"

They'll be looking for a while I'd imagine.

Last edited Fri Jan 11, 2019, 04:17 PM - Edit history (2)

ON EDIT: I just found the post, that was terrible and I sincerely apologize for calling you that. I didn’t believe your source, but I shouldn’t have gotten so personal; it was a awful thing to do. What I said was horrible and I deserved the hide.

—————

At any rate, I gave you an excellent link to a good substantive defense of Senator Sanders’ vote against Ted Kennedy’s immigration reform bill.

Those kinds of coherent arguments will be more effective. I don’t think that is some kind of crazy off the wall notion.

The same goes for which ever candidate you and I and our fellow DU’ers choose to support. Like it or not, all of them will have their voting records examined.

Have a nice weekend.

“Jack Welch, former CEO of General Electric, captured the new reality when he talked of ideally having “every plant you own on a barge”. The economic logic was that factories should float between countries to take advantage of lowest costs, be they due to under-valued exchange rates, low taxes, subsidies, or a surfeit of cheap labor. “

Finally, let me ask you this, what is wrong with an immigrant seeking opportunity? Isn't that the promise of America? You quote Jack Welch as those immigrants are evil. Do you agree with Trump?

Because I have trouble believing that they would share that same view of immigration. Is Jack Welch some racist KKK Grand Wizard or Right Wing Talk Radio Host? I am trying to understand the context of the reference. He was a CEO. So what?

He thinks labor, whether it’s here or in Africa, should grovel and compete all the way down to pennies per hour - whatever the market will bear. That’s the whole idea behind his libertarian utopia idea of a factory on a barge - ship cheap unprotected workers in, or ship the jobs out. Makes no difference to him.

Oh and by the way. He supported Trump:

I did not understand what was the relevance of your reference to Jack Welch, a CEO, but you introduced him (even though he had not come up) so that you can knock him down. Nice.

Frankly, I am opposed to racism, and just because someone that people do not like is against racism, does not mean that we should all be racist. "Hey, look, Jack Welch is a bad person and is pro-immigration, so build a wall, build a wall." I don't think that line of logic necessarily follows. Do you?

Of course, the question that folks who have defended Bernie are refusing to answer is what is the difference between Bernie's views on immigration and Trump's? Don't they both scapegoat immigrants? Haven't they both tried to exploit differences by suggesting that African Americans are somehow uniquely harmed by immigrants? Is anyone brave enough to defend Bernie/Trump or to explain the differences between what both Bernie and Trump said.

And then have the nerve to post..


"Hey, look, Jack Welch is a bad person and is pro-immigration, so build a wall, build a wall."

...as if anyone is saying anything remotely like that?


wtf

said...

“Jack Welch, former CEO of General Electric, captured the new reality when he talked of ideally having “every plant you own on a barge”. The economic logic was that factories should float between countries to take advantage of lowest costs, be they due to under-valued exchange rates, low taxes, subsidies, or a surfeit of cheap labor. “

No, I don't think you are confused. Not at all. You know exactly what you are doing.

" "Hey, look, Jack Welch is a bad person and is pro-immigration, so build a wall, build a wall." I don't think that line of logic necessarily follows. Do you?"

Holy Strawman, Batman!

Right?

Libertarians are not conservatives, and on immigration they hold a liberal view, as they do on marriage equality, drug policy, criminal justice, civil liberties, etc. So in this case, I am OK with the source.

do better DU..

Last edited Fri Jan 11, 2019, 12:03 AM - Edit history (1)

and post that section because I can't find where he said that and I read it twice. Because when you say "Bernie Sanders on Immigrants: Silly, Tribal and Economically Illiterate" you are saying that Bernie said that while speaking on immigrants. He didn't say those words. Smells like bullshit from here.

Any defense you give of Bernie can be applied to Trump. For example, here is Trump and Bernie (in their own words) talking about how African Americans and Hispanics Americans are harmed by immigrants. What is notable is how both Bernie and Trump purport to be waiving a flag for African Americans to justify their attacks on immigrants, which just seems to promote divisions within the U.S. Who knew that Trump was actually a progressive, because he does not sound like the right-wing that Bernie describes:

https://www.vox.com/2015/7/28/9014491/bernie-sanders-vox-conversation

Ezra Klein
It would make a lot of global poor richer, wouldn't it?

Bernie Sanders
It would make everybody in America poorer —you're doing away with the concept of a nation state, and I don't think there's any country in the world that believes in that. If you believe in a nation state or in a country called the United States or UK or Denmark or any other country, you have an obligation in my view to do everything we can to help poor people. What right-wing people in this country would love is an open-border policy. Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour, that would be great for them. I don't believe in that. I think we have to raise wages in this country, I think we have to do everything we can to create millions of jobs.

You know what youth unemployment is in the United States of America today? If you're a white high school graduate, it's 33 percent, Hispanic 36 percent, African American 51 percent. You think we should open the borders and bring in a lot of low-wage workers, or do you think maybe we should try to get jobs for those kids?

I think from a moral responsibility we've got to work with the rest of the industrialized world to address the problems of international poverty, but you don't do that by making people in this country even poorer.

Tonight, I am speaking to you because there is a growing humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border. Every day customs and border patrol agents encounter thousands of illegal immigrants trying to enter our country. We are out of space to hold them and we have no way to promptly return them back home to their country. America proudly welcomes millions of lawful immigrants who enrich our society and contribute to our nation. But, all Americans are hurt by uncontrolled illegal migration. It strains public resources and drives down jobs and wages. Among those hardest hit are African-Americans and Hispanic Americans. Our southern border is a pipeline for vast quantities of illegal drugs, including meth, heroin, cocaine and fentanyl. Every week 300 of our citizens are killed by heroin alone, 90 percent of which floods across from our southern border. More Americans will die from drugs this year than were killed in the entire Vietnam War.

Bernie never said that or used those words while speaking on immigrants. I read both articles 3 fucking times. It's a fucking lie and that tells me all I need to know.

Those are direct quotes from both Bernie and Trump. Are you opposed to Trump's policies? Or, would you be cool with Trump's anti-immigration policies and scapegoating of immigrants if they were promoted by Bernie?

suit your narrative. Show me where in your RW article Bernie Sanders said on Immigrants that they are Silly, Tribal and Economically Illiterate? Show me. Don't deflect prove it.

...they are blaming immigrants for the economic hardships of African Americans. I gave you direct quote from both Bernie and Trump so I am not sure how that is deflecting. That is what they literally said.

It strikes me that there are so many other reasons as to why some members of the African American community might be experiencing economic hardship, like racism, but I think that immigrants falls pretty low down the list.

Finally, let me ask you a question, if you are blaming and scapegoating immigrants, how do you differ from Trump?

convince people that Bernie has said about immigrants.

I tried giving you direct quotes from both Bernie and Trump, but you still don't see it. Okay how about video? Here is Bernie Sanders on Lou Dobbs' TV show both bashing on amnesty and immigrants. Even when Dobbs uses the term “illegal alien” Bernie just chuckles along and says, “I just read something today… a lot of people coming into this country are coming in as lifeguards,” and the two share a laugh.

the OP has given us the Libertarian guy, Byron York, Lou Dobbs, and has also asked ''what's so bad about Jack Welch?"

It's really something.

I think it clear that there are racist Republicans, as well as racist folks on the left, who scapegoat immigrants. That is the whole point of this thread. We need to be careful and not assume that progressives are free from sin in terms of scapegoating immigrants. Likewise, I am sure that there are some Republicans, like Ana Navarro, who detest Trump because he scapegoats immigrants and minorities.

However, I can tell you were I stand. I am against racism. I am against how Trump and Bernie scapegoat immigrants. I think America was built by immigrants and that it is a melting pot of cultures where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Our diversity is not a threat to who we are, it makes us who we are.

It is not like someone held a gun to Bernie's head and made him sit down and chew the fact with Lou Dobbs. Yet, instead of asking, why are Bernie and Lou Dobbs totally on the same page, your response is, "You posted a video of RW Hack Lou Dobbs!"

Sheesh.

news blocked. Many liberals go on Fox news because they think they can reach the viewers, and we even have stevenlessner a member here who is a Fox news regular analyst . The author of the article in the OP is a libertarian hacks and the

is = to agreeing with them and promoting everything they promote.

Right. Because REASONS!

That's rather convenient; that means that you can ignore anything that he ever said that you find unpalatable, simply by discrediting the people he was talking to.

This is known as a Guilt by Association Ad Hominem fallacy.

nor do I have to read a RW hit job to know where he stands on immigration. He has given many talks on immigration .

https://berniesanders.com/a-fair-and-humane-immigration-policy/

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1280&pid=222648

There are many people in our own party who have held some reprehensible views in the past that have now come around. Do they deserve the same treatment?

prior stated reasoning.

If you're just going to ignore their previous position statements by attacking the source, then you are you're not evaluating if they have actually changed.

That's the headline from Newsweek for the article written by libertarian Daniel Bier for the libertarian site "Foundation for Economic Education." It's a bit confusing because of the colon, but the writer isn't saying Sanders called immigrants those things; rather, the writer is calling Sanders those things.

You choose to listen only to the points that validate your opinions while ignoring the rest.

BTW, Steven Lesser is no longer a member of DU, but I'm certain that you already knew that so it makes a convenient point of attack when the person you accused can't respond.

Last edited Fri Jan 11, 2019, 01:00 PM - Edit history (4)

If quoting a RW source is "promoting everything that they do and say," I can't imagine what you think of someone actually going one of them for an interview.. or god forbid, being a regular contributor!

Sanders combines support for a path to citizenship and other important protections for the rights and dignity of immigrants in this country with specific opposition to guest worker programs. Guest worker programs have supporters on the left and on the right (many on the right like them because they allow corporations to import cheap labor that is more easily exploited and disposed of), but they also had skeptics and critics on the left (many labor unions, for instance) and on the right (including racists like Steve King).

For those on the right, opposition to guest worker programs is part of a portfolio that includes a desire to crack down on and punish undocumented immigrants and a yearning for whiter, simpler times. For those on the left, opposition to guest worker programs is part of a portfolio that includes concern about wages, worker rights and safety, and American values of basic rights, human dignity, and inclusiveness (which is why, as your own source suggests, Sanders's support for things like a path to citizenship and protection for the rights of immigrants has been unwavering). It is pretty simple to see why skepticism about guest worker programs is a natural fit for both of these perspectives, but that opposition has a very different role and a different texture in each case.

Incidentally, the same is true of support for guest workers. For those on the left who support such programs, it is part of a portfolio that includes general support of immigration and a desire to expand economic opportunity in a manner consistent with liberal values of inclusiveness, etc. For those on the right who support such programs, it is part of a portfolio that includes opposition to worker rights, opposition to organized labor, opposition to any limitations on the rights of corporations or capital, and so on. Again, it's easy to see how support for such programs could fit in the agendas of folks like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, and it's easy to see how support for such programs could fit in the agendas of folks like the Koch brothers, Marco Rubio, and Lindsey Graham. But it's silly to pretend that the support in each of these cases has the same function or the same texture.

Another key difference between Sanders and Trump: trump's administration has actually worked to *expand* the guest worker program, making it easier for farm companies to bring workers in specifically for this purpose even while cutting back on the protections that they have access to. So, if opposition to the guest worker program makes Sanders wrong on immigration, then what does that make the trump administration?

I agree that now Bernie Sanders has come over to the Democratic Party side and expresses support for a path to citizenship and protection for the rights of immigrants.

However, in terms of rhetoric, Bernie has blamed immigrants for the economic troubles of the working class, and Bernie has made it a point to bring up African Americans similar to Trump.

My issue with Bernie is not so much his stated policy on paper, because as you note, he seems to have adopted many mainstream Democratic positions on immigration. My problem with Bernie is how he has scapegoated immigrants and even paternalistically described them as pawns of the Koch empire. His rhetoric on the issue is harmful. While it is nice that he now has come back to mainstream Democratic positions on immigration, I do not appreciate the continued dog whistles up until quite recently.

I am a child of immigrants. I am glad they came to the U.S. I have taken advantage of the opportunities afforded to me. I do not think that there is anything wrong with that. I think playing races off of each other (African Americans are hurt by immigrants) or scapegoating immigrants for the troubles of working class Americans is wrong.

For me it is deeply personal in terms of how immigrants or foreigners are painted as scapegoats by U.S. politicians on the left as well as the right. This is not new. Just because some folks say that people like me and my family are Koch empire pawns being exploited by being allowed to immigrate, from our perspective, we got a chance to live the American dream and be apart of it. Likewise, I can see how the Ann Coulters of the world will feel threatened since we do not come from an European country, but my response and my view, perhaps selfishly, is that America was built on the idea that the poor, dispossed, and persecuted can come over and thrive.

He was hardly on an island with his concerns about the 2007 bill, and he supported the 2013 reform.

I agree with you that it is important that we safeguard against divisive rhetoric used to attack immigrants, and I agree with you (as would, according to everything I've ever read, Bernie Sanders, who is also proudly the child of an immigrant) that it is important that we protect, defend, and continue our country's traditional identity as a welcoming place for those seeking a better life.

I don't really agree with your characterization of Sanders's remarks as scapegoating, and I strongly disagree with your characterization that they are in any meaningful way similar to the hateful and divisive rhetoric that donald trump has built his career on.

I'll explain why.

As a general framework, the key differences in the quotes you've offered as roughly equivalent are these: first, donald trump is speaking about immigration *as the source and cause* of the problems of the American worker, while Bernie Sanders is rejecting the guest worker program specifically (and, in the original "open borders" question, unregulated immigration) as a *solution* to the problems of the American worker. It's worth noting that the guest worker program, though included as part of immigration reform, doesnt't encourage or allow permanent residency for immigrants; guest workers are allowed here to serve the needs of businesses for cheap labor, and their presence is restricted in various ways. They aren't allowed to stay permanently. They aren't allowed to seek better employment. They are more vulnerable to various employer abuses than permanent residents. And Sanders is saying that expanding this policy isn't good for American workers. So I don't really see that as the same as trump's scapegoating.

A second big difference is in the way that both trump and Sanders, as you note, specifically use the economic interests of African Americans to support their positions. But that similarity hardly makes their positions or their rhetoric similar. For trump, this feigned interest is quite transparently bullshit, since both his rhetoric and his policies are quite clearly racist, ranging from his explicit scapegoating of immigrants, his fearmongering regarding the caravan, his support for racial profiling in immigration enforcement, his ideas about who should be allowed to and who should be forbidden from immigrating, and so on. Sanders, on the other hand, expresses his concern about the disproportionate economic hardships faced by people of color in this country, and that dovetails with immigration proposals that (again, with respect to his plan in the 2016 campaign) seek primarily and explicitly to reject and address the same racist biases in immigration policy that trump seeks to expand and impose. His immigration proposals sought to end race-based enforcement, to expand diversity visas, to expand opportunities for refugees, and so on.

Sanders is opposed to trump on just about every point of immigration policy. (Including, as I've noted elsewhere, the guest worker program, which trump is just fine with as long as we can limit the rights of those workers.) The fact that trump adds some empty BS rhetoric about how immigration hurts african americans to disguise the bigotry of his immigration agenda hardly means that Sanders is also racist for considering the way the guest worker program might affect people of color.

refugee resettlement areas.

I hope that he opts not to run, but this article is an intentional distortion of positions he has taken all his life. If you did not like it when comments out of context has been used against people like HRC, Biden etc, you should have a problem with this.

There are issues - like his extremely ideological rejection of trade treaties - that can be accurately stated and rejected. Here though a look at his actual record and the breath of his comments on immigrants - he is not in the Trump camp.

The bad words describe what the author of this opinion piece thinks of Sanders. This is no surprise from an extremely neoliberal publication that has been attacking Sanders and progressive ideas generally for years.

But by the usual convention of headline writing, one logically reads the bad words as though they are a quote from Sanders talking about immigrants.

The effect of this falsehood is to defame Sanders, make him sound like Steve King. While it is possibly a mistake, since headline writers are often illiterate, it's more likely just part of the attack. Either way it shows you the quality of the publication and the author.

The corporate media are just doing the exact same thing they did throughout 2016. The majority of people do not trust them and the more obviously they do it, the more it may work to Sanders' advantage.

But to find Democrats using it is surprising.

Shine the Light!

...

I see we have the same tactic of desperate false equivalence. Weaver is still exempt from it, I guess?

It was a Newsweek article. But it seems like you are deflecting to try to argue that being anti-immigrant is progressive? Also, libertarians are against marijuana regulation. Does that mean we all have to be anti-weed? If a libertarian is anti-racist, then I welcome their support against racism.

http://time.com/4170591/bernie-sanders-immigration-conservatives/

When it comes to immigration reform, Bernie Sanders has checked all the boxes for a Democratic presidential candidate. The Vermont Senator supports a path to citizenship. He would protect the vast majority of undocumented immigrants from deportation. He’d abolish most detention centers and allow the undocumented to buy health insurance through the Affordable Care Act.

Nevertheless, the liberal senator has drawn approval from some unlikely quarters.

Roy Beck, the president of NumbersUSA, a group that seeks to dramatically reduce legal and illegal immigration to the United States, said this week that after studying Sanders’ record and rhetoric, he sees some common ground.

“I think in his gut he believes his obligation as president would be to the workers of America, not to the workers of the world,” Beck said in an interview.

Last edited Thu Jan 10, 2019, 11:49 PM - Edit history (1)

Is it meant to mock a Democratic Rep? Sure looks like it.


When one googles that quote nearly all the results are right wing sites.

Bernue is out of the Democratic party mainatream when ir comes to immigration and. It is always best not to use right wing.sources

Who knew?

The arguments are solid but the author is a right winger and thus is giving his defenders an avenue of attack

the foundation for economic education, where, among other things, the author of this article talks about the foolishness of the minimum wage. (This info is at the bottom of the article: "Daniel Bier is the editor of the blog Anything Peaceful on the Foundation for Economic Education website, which is where this article first appeared."

Eye opening.

"Okay, has he evolved since 2015 when he, in his own words, described liberal immigration policies as a "Koch Brothers proposal"? This is notable because no one has advocated open borders."

The question he was responding to was explicitly about open borders, so it's bizarre to say that nobody was advocating open borders and a fabrication to claim that these comments (which, again, were specifically and explicitly in response to a question about open borders) equates to criticism of "liberal immigration." If Bernie really is so out of step with mainstream liberal views on immigration, I'm sure you can find something that makes that point without relying on such obfuscation.

It isn't surprising to me that Daniel Bier thinks Sanders's opposition to open borders is naive and misguided. Bier is a libertarian, after all, and also finds things like the minimum wage to be misguided. But it is a bit surprising to see Bier's arguments used as somehow support for a liberal critique of Sanders.

Newsweek may seem a mainstream media source, but in this case they found a Rightwinger to stick his fingers in Bernies face. Here's Bernies entire response to Ezra Klein's questions:

Klein
It would make a lot of global poor richer, wouldn’t it?
Sanders
It would make everybody in America poorer—you're doing away with the concept of a nation state.…
What right-wing people in this country would love is an open-border policy. Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour, that would be great for them. I don’t believe in that. I think we have to raise wages in this country, I think we have to do everything we can to create millions of jobs.
You know what youth unemployment is in the United States of America today? If you’re a white high school graduate, it’s 33 percent, Hispanic 36 percent, African-American 51 percent. You think we should open the borders and bring in a lot of low-wage workers, or do you think maybe we should try to get jobs for those kids?



https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=hx04XNuwBIyyggejrYXgDQ&q=Daniel+Bier&btnK=Google+Search&oq=Daniel+Bier&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0l7j0i10j0l2.14655.20438..31345...0.0..0.188.1557.0j11......0....1..gws-wiz.....0..0i131.vOYBzoKboE0

too convenient. It always sounded like insincere posturing from him.

He is probably going to run and is currently the most popular senator.

area for Vietnamese, Bhutanese, Somali, Tibetan etc refugees in the late 1980s - when Sanders was mayor of Burlington - making him the top elected official in that area. Today, it is not uncommon to see many people of color, often in the dress of the countries they left.

Thread should be deleted.

It's a bit confusing because of the colon, but the original writer was actually using those words to describe Sanders, rather than claiming that Sanders said them.