We are propping this illegitimate and tyrannical system up by conceding to his whims, she's not wrong.

It's a disgrace about McConnell and until his caucus or the voters change the situation we are stuck with it. I have long believed the traitor has something on him or he may be just as evil as the menace in the White House. But it will not change if the DEms are constantly attacked by pundits or members of their own party who use words such as appeasers which is so damning.

....Democrats elected to the Senate next year.

Making exaggerated comments about Democrats is counter-productive and won't increase our representation in the Senate.

would you?

Cause that's for sure going to get more elected.

whole lot "for the kids" to continue to line their pockets with even more money while providing the same level of "care" they do now, with no oversight.

A vague sideline "promise" from Mike Pence doesn't count as oversight.

So, exactly how does this help anyone but the people whose pockets will be getting fatter?

Or do some people have more trust than I do (which admittedly is none) in the people running the concentration camps that THIS TIME they'll do the right thing?

but then so is nothing.

But the bill had to be passed, IMO.

Is that a bad thing?

but I don't believe that it will do that at all. It will simply give the people who own the contractors more lining in their already full pockets.

This is a bill supported by Mitch McConnell. That alone tells me that it is not designed to help kids.

I read a good portion of it I don't see any of that where they say they will take care of the children hygiene needs this time more than the last time it's just the same wording with a sideline guarantee by Mike pence

That's how our government works, the only way to save our country is make everything blue forever. If a political party refuses to govern, why do they have the right to be a political party? That 1/3 of our country who detest democracy and are into psychotic leaders will probably be with us forever. Vote them out, keep them powerless, and then take care of them(health insurance, job retraining, keeping them out of poorhouses) like the angry spoiled brats they are. We've already seen what they'll do with power over us. We can't take much more of that. They'll still hate us but will have their ability to hurt us reduced considerably. This isn't going to help the children now. Bring on the lawyers!!!! Sue the government in the courts, those judge's reactions to that woman refusing to acknowledge what torture is last week gave me hope. They were sickened and ANGRY.

they sprung a last minute refusal to support unless ICE was given more money

Josh Gottheimer ran point for them

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Gottheimer got a lot of pushback when he had a townhall back in his home district

Link to tweet

1) @RepJoshG led the fight pass Trump and McConnell's border bill.
2) At a town hall today, his constituents blasted him for it.
3) He told them he had nothing to do with it!
4) The patron of the caucus he leads bragged that they totally did it.

Also Josh’s group No Labels bragged that Josh did the thing he’s now pretending he didn’t do.





https://www.insidernj.com/watch-animated-gottheimer-town-hall-weekend-activist-engage-congressman-ice-funding/





Dem leadership was split over this

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, and DCCC Chair Cheri Bustos voted in favour of the bill, while other members of leadership, including Democratic Caucus Chair Hakeem Jeffries, and Assistant Democratic Leader Ben Ray Luján, who is running for Senate in New Mexico, voted against it.The Congressional Hispanic Caucus also recommended the House vote against the Senate border spending bill.


House Progressives Cry ‘Betrayal’ and Say Moderate Democrats Sold Out Detained Children

https://www.thedailybeast.com/house-progressives-cry-betrayal-and-say-moderate-democrats-sold-out-detained-children


Five Takeaways From the Border Aid Vote

The vote on Thursday exposed a number of realities about the House majority and its relationship with the Senate.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/27/us/politics/border-aid-vote-takeaways.html

snip

The power of the Democrats’ moderate wing far outweighed that of the liberal wing.

In the past, Ms. Pelosi and her leadership team have bowed to the party’s moderate wing, which was a critical force behind decisions to punt on releasing a budget resolution and to pull legislation that would have effectively given members a pay bump.

But top leaders spent days negotiating additions to the House bill that the party’s liberal flank had requested, even as some moderate members quietly expressed discomfort with the prospect of cutting funding to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and producing a bill that the Republican majority in the Senate could not stomach.

Ultimately, under pressure to get a bill to the president’s desk before recess, Ms. Pelosi ceded to threats from moderate members and agreed to put the Senate bill on the floor.

The vote on Thursday — which almost had more Republican votes of support than Democratic — underscored how powerful the moderate members of the Democratic caucus can be when united with Republicans.

A break appeared in the Democratic leadership.

Ms. Pelosi’s closest lieutenants, Representatives Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, the majority leader, and James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the majority whip, voted in favor of the Senate bill. (Ms. Pelosi, as is customary for the speaker, did not vote.)

But the second tier of leadership — widely seen as next in line to ascend to the top of the House Democratic leadership — did not. Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the caucus chairman; Representative Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico, the assistant speaker; and Representative Katherine M. Clark of Massachusetts, the caucus vice chairwoman, voted “no.”

The two representatives for the freshman class, Representatives Joe Neguse of Colorado and Katie Hill of California, also voted against the bill.

snip

I'm watching AM JOY
Damn good answer that she gave.!
As activists for children's lives - We shouldn't be appeasing terrorists

in regards to the Dems but then of course they are not as pure in their actions as she is.

in the service of advancing a personal agenda.

Chamberlain anyone?

True, we don’t know for sure if the kids will benefit, but we have to take that chance. If even one kid gets treated better, it’s worth it.

The dems did cave. They got rid of protections and assurances on humanitarian care and handed the Republicans billions of dollars for the border based on a handshake agreement with an administration that lies more than any other administration in history.

that Nancy Pelosi is an appeaser who keeps appeasing the WH?

that some of her colleagues across the aisle are decent people. They are not. It's time for Pelosi, Schumer, Biden & all of the old guard to face up to the fact that today's republican party is actively working against representative government.

Like it or not, the dems have some complicity in this current situation. If they had been a strong & outspoken opposition party the past 45 years we wouldn't be in such a dire situation. And the voters are to blame, as well. Or perhaps I should say the non-voters—our largest voting block.

1. Nancy is no fool and knows exactly what she is up against

2. The Dems started down the slippery slope when they voted to pass the ACA.

3. I hear a lot of disappointed criticism, so tell me, what is the solution...all or none?

4. If your thought applies to anyone it would be Schumer

the party could start with a national radio campaign to challenge the hours & hours of hate messaging that Limbaugh & his ilk spread across rural America & on our university stations, & have now for decades. Hate radio is why we have American citizens wearing tee shirts that read, "I'D RATHER BE A RUSSIAN THAN A DEMOCRAT." If we get rid of Trump but never address hate radio & the right wing echo chamber, we still have a huge problem & we will back here again. And again.

my issue is members of their own party using such nasty words to describe their colleagues. It is divisive and counter-productive.

I like the I'd rather be a Russian than a Democrat"

I also like the baby steps being taken in that direction by platform owners such as Twitter.

consumers hold the power with the likes of Limbaugh, Ingraham, and 'leaders kill' Tucker. If they stop buying the advertisers will stop supporting these shows.

McConnell and the Republicans refused to negotiate and demanded the Democrats amendments be stripped. So RUN ON THEM BEING OBSTRUCTIONISTS. You really think without checks on how the funding is spent, Trump and the GOP are going to do anything to help the kids (which, by the way, giving concentration camps beds is not a solution; not having concentration camps is).

Run on them being obstructionists yes, when there are elections, none of which are happening at the moment and the needs of the children are immediate. And yes the camps should've never been permitted but as there they are, I bet any child in them would prefer a bed to a cement floor.

and her a loser

that congress has that presents a fucking chance for those kids, doesn't it?

no wonder we have a hard time getting elected, bash, bash, bash, criticize, criticize, criticize. And why I'm going to call it out whenever I see it. It's counterproductive and harmful with real-life consequences.

That the money will go to the needs of the children when the amendments were stripped from the final bill?

I see you don't have any ideas either, just a lot of hand wringing about Democrats for doing their job within the parameters set up by the constition, and a copy/paste variation of the "why are Democrats stupid enough to try doing their jobs and create legislation to help those kids because McConnell sucks and that's what they should be telling people instead of passing a funding bill!!!!" virtriol at Speaker Pelosi. They were just supposed to sit there and give the finger to McConnell so he can say that child welfare wasn't the issue after all - but making the situation worse by not restoring money that was running out was a campaign strategy to oust Trump?

What assurances do you have that all will fail, other than hoping your dislike of Democratic leadership in congress will be validated? But do tell us... what are your specific predictions about this? In what way will the NGOs who are supposed to be receiving the additional money escape media attention of the job they are doing in longer term shelters? Or will they simply do nothing, and not go to the media when they don't get that money, as you are pushing people to think? You believe that Democrats in congress will just sit there smirking and not demand oversight, and not release photos of continuing abuses?

And since you asked...recent Media spotlight attention to the conditions and a majority of Americans not supporting family separation are two impetuses the GOP has to improve conditions.

NGOs like the physician that released the report will be monitoring the conditions as well.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212232942

I suppose you think that Democratic leaders haven't thought of any of these things because you haven't? Or because stoking division among Democrats is a priority for some?

Which ensure the money actually goes toward care.

Trump and co are fighting the judges ruling requiring doctors inside; you think they're going to honour a handshake deal?

I suppose you have an alternative to getting legislation passed through the Senate? Please share.

Perhaps you think Pelosi should have used hypnosis on MConnell? What other means was Pelosi supposed to get him to accept the house bill as is? Walk out and give the GOP the talking point that Dems refused to actually approve an emergency spending bill to help those kids - and saying that it's "proof" Dems don't care about those kids at all except as a political bargaining chip to get back at Trump?



You still haven't answered the question...

You left out the part that actually includes helping the kids. Remember them?

Try again.

Oh right, it's about actually getting help, any kind, any amount to those kids....not scoring points

Thank you ehrnst

Trump the finger.

Last edited Mon Jul 1, 2019, 07:53 AM - Edit history (1)

What happens to the kids in the meantime? "Not fight?" Are we no better than the GOP letting those kids suffer and perhaps die in an attempt for content for campaign ads in 2020?

What is the alternative does congress to helping these kids other than emergency funding legislation?

Perhaps you can tell us that? I asked you that before...

Do you have a magic solution no one else knows about? A long lost part of the Constitution that allows legislation to bypass the Senate?




That's sounding an awful lot like McConnell's plan to obstruct everything that Obama did, so when the country ran off a cliff, they could blame it on him, no matter who got hurt as a result.

What it would do is counter the message of hate, offer an alternative. Someone once told me that you can't overcome their fear & I call BS on that. Humor trumps fear. We have Al Franken on our side, Jon Stewart, Samantha Bee, & a ton of other smart, funny people. Why don't we have liberal radio stations that counter the message that the the libs just want to take your money & give it to lazy people who don't work. Maybe we should also counter the message that the GOP is the party of God. Yeah, good writing costs money, but we've written off an entire sector of our country - rural America - & what has that cost us?

so that Dems could blame it on the GOP in 2020?

That she should tell them all to fuck off, and do nothing as long as DT is POTUS?

Asking for clarification.

She absolutely did the right thing. My point is that it's hard to see people that you've worked with for decades, a lifetime career, take such an inhumane turn.

Why do you call Democrats "THEY"?

You know, the ones with the money & funding to do things like marketing & taking charge of the narrative. Social media is definitely a boon to the grassroots, but it's a double edge sword as we're finding out. And yeah, I know the corporate media isn't on our side, so we have to work harder & smarter. Ignoring hate radio is just dumb.

I supported her through all the Pelosi wars here not so long ago.

At this point, however, I’m very, very disappointed in her.

However, I am not and think she's doing the best anyone could with recalcitrant House members of all stripes, McConnel, an absent Schumer and the traitor in the WH

What president would be?

Sickening.

This is such dis-info and people really need to read up on the strategy and what she actually said. And Btw...you want to speed things up...see what you can do to move poll numbers in that direction.

to fight these racist asshole RethugliKKKons tooth and nail!!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

Last edited Sun Jun 30, 2019, 02:12 PM - Edit history (2)

If he was, as you say, the only one who will "fight these racist asshole RethugliKKKons tooth and nail" why didn't he when he had the chance?

None of the Senators who are running for POTUS voted when the bill came up, and no one suggested any amendments or even promises, except Pelosi. If Bernie is as you claim, different than the rest - more progressive and more ready to "fight the racist asshole RethugliKKKons," then why his silence, just like all the other Dems running for POTUS?



The bill was too controversial to touch for a POTUS candidate, and Bernie wasn't any different concerning staying silent for political expediency in the face of an actual opportunity to actually "fight these racist asshole RethugliKKKons tooth and nail."

Do you think that Pelosi isn't fighting them? It looks like she was the ONLY one doing it. The alternative to the Senate bill was letting those kids stay in that horrific situation.

Is that something you think is a "victory?

....and then going out and voting against the Democratic majority, and in many cases it's for trivial or even unfounded reasons.

In this case, after complaining about conditions in the detention centers for weeks, too many Democrats voted AGAINST improving the conditions under which those children are being held, only because the bill wasn't "pure" enough.

At least with passage of the bill many of those children will be getting soap and toothpaste and blankets and beds. I guess to some Democrats that's no good.

All of it.

Spot on.

No response? Not surprised.

....was voting against humanitarian care.

Hypothetically let's say there is $4B for humanitarian care (soap, toothpaste, blankets, beds) and the republicans spend only $1B on those things. That's $1B more than if the bill failed.

"What assurances do we have that SNAP recipients will spend that money on nutritious food? You know they'll just buy candy bars with food stamps or sell them for beer money. Why should we be helping Democrats fund alcoholism?"

"Medicaid fraud is rampant - let's cut off the spigot to these doctors! Planned Parenthood will spend taxpayer dollars on abortion, not contraception or cancer screenings, no matter if it's illegal or not! They'll just move it around - they can't be trusted! They will push contraception onto teenagers - why should we be funding people who protect child molesters? "

"Social Security is just a hammock!"

"Let obstruct everything, and let people depending on these programs get mad and go to the media - then we can blame it on Obama!"

I haven't heard any actual alternative that doesn't harm those kids even more from people who think Pelosi "did the wrong thing."

Perhaps you could do what no others have and produce one?

....about the children would rather see them with NO beds instead of them being provided by the government agency that's charged with purchasing and distributing them.

so you think Nancy Pelosi is a right winger and an appeaser? Easy enough words to throw around from a computer.

this episode was pretty bad, and Schumer was the main problem.

from what I read.

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a28224647/senate-democrats-border-bill-vote-nancy-pelosi-chuck-schumer/

quoth Charles Pierce, time for him to go.

If course there are differences in how we all look at situations. Look at how much is debated here.

But labelling and name calling is a trump strategy. It alienates me when this is done by anyone. We are all frustrated, but turning on each other helps no one but the republicans. They are the ones who deserve our wrath.

I think the Speaker deserves better from that Freshman than to be called such an ugly epithet not to mention how counterproductive it is.

She ain't wrong, though.

Saying what she said about the dems caving? Not saying it, I guess. But fuck that.

Using the trigger word? There's a thousand other ways she could've said it without triggering the pearl-clutchers.

I know what appeasement means and I also know what concentration camp means, and neither of those recent omg's bothered me. But I also know the message falls on deaf ears if you don't watch not just what you say, but how you say it.

Is that clearer?

What was the alternative congress had to help those kids in any way shape or form?

I was talking about what Omar said and how she should have measured her words better.

You took off on a side track, so I did too.

Sucks when people do that, huh.

Last edited Mon Jul 1, 2019, 07:51 AM - Edit history (1)

That tough, to answer was it?

Could do that.

I stand w/Omar.

So, I will tell you.. Neville Chamberlain, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom..was called an Appeaser. Why? because he made a deal with Hitler, to make sure that there would not be a war...He said, "We have ...Peace for our time."

About a year later..WWII started. There was no peace. Tens of millions were killed in that war.

"Peace for our time" was a declaration made by the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Neville Chamberlain in his 30 September 1938 speech concerning the Munich Agreement and the Anglo-German Declaration.

So when someone calls us..."Appeasers" , they are referring to those who gave in to Hitler before WWII. In the end, Great Britain did ..not appease. Great Britain fought with us, and the Soviet Union (Russia). Again, Tens of millions died to defeat Hitler and later Japan. We are not ..."Appeasers."
...We are fighters. It is an awful term for anyone who knows World History to use....................................

Rep Omar doesn't have a clue. She doesn't know about this. And this is very sad...

refer to one singular historical event.

Wow, I can remember when the Rs used to call accuse the Dems of "appeasement" any time they would advocate for improved relations with any country they regarded as an adversary.

I don't ever recall anyone getting their panties in a wad over that misuse. Probably because the Dems were already so used to letting the Rs say outrageous things without ever saying anything to counter them.

And it never has been before in American discourse.

I don't see any reason to suddenly make it off limits right at this particular moment in history. JMHO.

It certainly has been. Give google a check and see what comes up first, second and so on. It still remains the primary reference. And the reason not to use it because it is both untrue and meant to be deliberately insulting to her colleagues. Interesting that someone in Congress for a scant six months would be so 'undiplomatic'. It is certainly no way to win the support of others.

I would not miss her.

isn’t helping matters.

and would like their support in the future. Just on a practical level, there are four of them who want to keep firing rockets. We'll see how long that lasts.

Seems you wish she was gone.

Meanwhile, I'm glad that she's on the scene.

Time to shake up, and shake out, the Democratic Party.

Give me a fucking break.

To each his own. I find nothing wrong with her answer- I did not hear call the Speaker any epithets but I guess people can have different interpretations after watching the same thing. I encourage others to watch the video themselves and come to their own conclusions


[link:https://www.msnbc.com/am-joy/watch/rep-ilhan-omar-discusses-democrats-split-on-border-funding-bill-62983237720|

a word later picked up by Joy.

I am perfectly fine with Rep. Omar's response. Period! Full Stop. End of Story.

Says so much.

I think it's all around the 8:00 mark. Why did Omar bring up John Kelly?




https://www.msnbc.com/am-joy/watch/rep-ilhan-omar-discusses-democrats-split-on-border-funding-bill-62983237720

using that word several times. She seems to have it in for the House Dems, Nancy in particular, as Nancy won't impeach upon Joy's command.

She has been pissing me off lately.

Today may just decide it

...She doesn't know what she is talking about. Sometimes we wait to do battle. Timing is everything in politics. Long time observers know that. This is not the time to fight the "Battle of All Battles. There will be a time, but the time is not now.
..Perhaps next year at this time or in July, August, September and October of next year. There will be time to fight the..." big battle". Pelosi knows more about timing in politics in her little finger, then most people know in their whole bodies. Opening up your mouth at the wrong time in politics, can often be very dangerous. Sometimes it is best to let the opposition blow their own heads off then doing it to yourself. Give Trump a chance, he will show us how to blow his head off. .
... But more important than that. We have to stay together. Rep Omar has opened up her mouth in a way that could tear us apart. (or already has started to tear us apart) She should just shut up and watch a while. And never use that word on us...that word is.."Appeasers."

..........We are not .."Appeasers" We are fighters.

way to get called an appeaser, in my book.

not even allowed to enter the places where the kids are kept. Trump's police keeps some members from entering just to verify the awful conditions. Is that a lie? You try to enter to inspect, and the border patrol does not allow you in. Trying to enter to inspect and see what is going on, is not being an "Appeaser"

and the Senate Dems who voted for it?

but not the Cons aside from McConnell

calling fellow Dems "appeasers" because they want to try and help the kids.. first and foremost..

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Thanks, Me.. I don't know who on this list are the "progressive" who voted Yes.. but here it is.

16 Progressives voted for the bill so it is Rep Omar and her 3 pals who didn't. I guess the other progressives thought it was important to get help to the kids rather than get their way.

with her.

to you