Mediaboss Marketing

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

1

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

Well when our high government position are picked solely by Washington and Multnomah counties and bypasses the rest of the voters, you get the likes of Gov. Brown. Proclaiming Oregon to be a sanctuary state!

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

Statesman Journal 10:55 a.m. PT Feb. 10, 2017

Letter to the editor.(Photo: Stock art)

Well when our high government position are picked solely by Washington and Multnomah counties and bypasses the rest of the voters, you get the likes of Gov. Brown. Proclaiming Oregon to be a sanctuary state!

Has it ever crossed her mind that her real job is to care more about the actual citizens of this state? Citizenswho pay the taxes, citizenswho have been reduced to third-class waifs,who have been told money is short and wait in line for any leftovers not needed by benefactors of her social engineering?

The answer is no, because it is more sexy to progressives to care about people from other countries.

This is a mystery to me as, like most of you, I was raised to believe charity begins at home.

Progressives dont care that most of these folks hate us, our culture, our country and especially our Constitution. They ask us to change our way of life for the invaders and give up everything we hold dear, least we offend the very people we have to care for lock, stock and barrel.

Keep it up, progressives; you are becoming irrelevant. This is the reason you lost the election.

Stephen A. Moser

Salem

Read or Share this story: http://stjr.nl/2kXL8os

0:55

0) { %>

0) { %>

Continued here:
Progressives put undocumented immigrants before citizens - Statesman Journal

U.S. Rep. Jim Himes, D-4th District

Baltimore U.S. Rep. Jim Himes, the co-chair of a group of centrist Democrats, on Thursday criticized efforts by progressives to try to sideline centrist messages at the annual gathering of House Democrats.

All human institutions my marriage, the Ford Motor Company, the Democratic Caucus, the Roman Empire they win and survive when they adapt, listen to lots of different points of view, challenge orthodoxies, invite people who think differently than they do into the conversation, and have a really robust conversation, said Himes. Thats a winning organization.

He said a losing organization, in contrast is one in which you are convinced that the orthodoxy is exactly right, and you shut down other points of view. Himes is a co-chairman of a group of business-friendly House Democrats called the New Democrat Coalition.

Progressives protested the scheduled appearance of Jim Kessler, the senior vice president for policy of Third Way, a prominent centrist think tank, at the Democratic retreat on Wednesday.

Kessler says the Democratic Party needs to grow geographically, demographically and ideologically not move decisively to the left to regain power

For House Democrats to seek advice from a Wall Street-funded think tank that preaches timidity, that shows them learning the exactly wrong lesson in the Trump era, said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. I think Democrats need to fight more strongly, with backbone, and not let Trump steal the mantle of economic populism.

Himes said the policy of exclusion is counterproductive.

So, we bristle a little bit at the idea, that my gosh, that this person should not even be allowed in the room, Himes said.

The retreat aimed at party unity and at agreeing to a strategy that would allow the battered Democratic Party to move forward after their electoral loses in the fall.

Some Democrats argued party members should work with President Donald Trump on infrastructure and other areas of common interests. But others vowed their only job is to resist the White House.

The Democrats began their retreat in Baltimore on Wednesday and will wrap up their meeting Friday afternoon.

Here is the original post:
Himes knocks progressives for rejecting centrist speaker at Dem retreat - The CT Mirror

We read that the local progressives, which we define as including all Democrats, are disappointed that their anti-President Trump events have accomplished very little, if anything, and are now considering whether they should spend their time and money to obtain offices, at the city, county and even state levels.

Assuming you decide to run for local offices, we have some questions for you: If you lose, will you seek to delegitimize the winner or support and work with him or her in order to help serve the public?

Will you join with others to protest a decision of action made by the winner, even though its the subject matter of the winners platform? Or will you tell others to cool it and give the winner a chance?

Youre going to face a lot of people, who, like us, will not support you, perhaps ever, if youve got a D next to your name. Your brand is damaged, perhaps beyond repair. Youre shown yourselves to be sore losers, antagonistic and really mean people.

Such obstructionist tactics dont do anything for this country.

Dan and Myrna Coleman, Portville

Go here to see the original:
Letter: Questions to ask of local 'progressives' - Olean Times Herald

By Jeff Bryant / Education Opportunity Network

Betsy DeVos may have won her contest in the Senate to become the new U.S. Secretary of Education, but her opposition wasnt the only thing that went down to defeat that day.

For decades, federal education policies have been governed by a Washington Consensus that public schools are effectively broken, especially in low-income communities of color, and the only way to fix them is to apply a dose of tough love and a business philosophy of competition from charter schools and performance measurements based on standardized tests.

Since the 1990s, this consensus among Democrats and Republicans has enforced all kinds of unproven reform mandates on schools, and by 2012, as veteran education reporter Jay Mathews of The Washington Post noted that year, the two parties were happily copying each other on education.

Democrats have in recent years sounded and acted a lot like Republicans in advancing corporate education reform, which seeks to operate public schools as if they were businesses, not civic institutions, writes Valerie Strauss, the veteran education journalist who blogs for the Washington Post. By embracing many of the tenets of corporate reform including the notion of school choice and the targeting of teachers and their unions as being blind to the needs of children they helped make DeVoss education views, once seen as extreme, seem less so.

But with the election of President Donald Trump and the ascension of DeVos to secretary, that consensus appears dead.

She would start her job with no credibility, Education Week quotes Democratic Senator Patty Murray of Washington. A vote for Betsy DeVos is a vote for a secretary of education who is likely to succeed only in further dividing us on education issues.

The DeVos vote reflected the tribal, dysfunctional, polarized nature of our politics, writes Woodrow Wilson Center senior scholar Linda Killian in USA Today. It is a harbinger of things to come.

But what looks like the death of a political consensus on education could be the beginning of something else: an opportunity for progressives to press a new education agenda. Heres what should they do.

Build On The Perfect Storm

Public education advocates have long been exasperated with progressives.

When will progressives defend public education? fumed education activist Anthony Cody nearly two years ago. Cody who helped organize the largest public protest event in support of public education to date and co-founded the Network for Public Education whose membership recently passed the 300,000 mark lamented that while big money, astroturf groups such as Democrats for Education Reform continue to present the left as a partner of charter schools and corporate reform, progressive organizations generally remain silent on the issues.

These organizations need to wake up, Cody argued.

Well, consider them awake.

The DeVos nomination motivated an array of progressive groups to engage in the unprecedented outpouring of opposition to her. Similarly, civil rights organizations, that often differ with public education activists on charter schools and school vouchers, led a strong effort to oppose DeVos.

DeVos nomination was simply the perfect storm for progressives and members of the resistance to seize upon, observes Lucia Graves at The Guardian. The voter outrage was the triumph of grassroots organizing. And that is worth celebrating despite the outcome.

Now that progressive organizations are engaged in the fight against DeVos, public school advocates must continue to reach out to them and engage them in the ongoing fight against privatization DeVos will lead. In turn, public school advocates must also be ready to step outside the education silo and take up other causes progressives care about, such as Black Lives Matter and LGBTQ rights, that have impacts both inside and outside of schools.

Turn Education Into A Wedge Issue

For years, big money donors have been successful at keeping many Democratic party candidates in the charter school camp. Opposition to DeVos may disrupt that loyalty.

For instance, New Jersey Senator Cory Booker has been an ardent supporter of charters and vouchers and has deep ties to the charter school industry, yet he voted against DeVos.

Booker, who many consider a possible presidential contender in 2020, joined DeVos on the board of Alliance for School Choice, when he was mayor of Newark. In 2012, he gave a speech at a meeting held by the American Federation for Children, the advocacy group DeVos founded and once chaired. Both organizations advocate using taxpayer dollars for charter, private, and religious schools, which DeVos will surely champion. Yet Booker sided with his fellow Democrats against her.

Westcoast billionaire Eli Broad is another prominent Democrat who advocates for school choice but strongly opposed DeVos. This is more than just one billionaire school activist going against another billionaire school activist, Strauss writes in another of her blog posts. His opposition underscores what has been obvious for some time: that the opposition to DeVos goes far beyond the teachers unions.

Of course, not all Democrats whove been supportive of the corporate reform movement made strong public statements in opposition to DeVos.

As reporters for Education Week note, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who once received praise from DeVos for his support for charter schools, was reluctant to publically criticize her during her nomination.

Cuomo recently announced his intention to abolish the cap that limits the number of charter schools in New York City, despite Mayor Bill De Blasios strong opposition a proposal Secretary DeVos will certainly praise. Given the Democratic partys total antipathy for DeVos, public school advocates can now easily pivot from opposing DeVos to opposing Cuomo and smear him with her negative brand.

Sensing an opportunity to do just that, the Alliance for Quality Education, a public school advocacy group that frequently battles the governor, issued a statement opposing Cuomos recent education proposals, including lifting the charter cap, immediately after DeVos was confirmed. It stated, Betsy DeVos is a disastrous choice that spurred massive public resistance to her nomination. In New York State it is time for resistance to focus on Governor Cuomo Just as New Yorkers have been leaders in the fight to resist Trump and dump DeVos, we will now fight back against Cuomo and his attacks on public education.

Press For Positive Change

Resistance is all well and good. But my colleague Richard Eskow is correct when he writes, In todays political climate, opposing or worse, merely withstanding isnt enough. It will take a countervailing force for change to stop Trump and the Republicans.

Whats the countervailing force public school advocates need? Progressive Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives recently answered that.

As Politico reports, on the same day of the final vote on DeVos in the Senate, Democrats in the House issued a new Progressive Education Agenda. The agenda was drafted by California Democratic Representative Mark Takano and endorsed by the House Public Education Caucus.

The Agenda begins as it should, proclaiming education as a fundamental civil right in the United States of America and calling for education approaches that address equity in the public school system and considering both the instruction our children receive and the conditions they need in and out of the classroom to succeed.

In a complete departure from the corporate reform ideas Democrats have embraced, the Agenda completely abandons the language of competition and performance measurement and instead calls for defending and investing in our public schools as universally accessible and inherently democratic institutions.

Among the 6 policy goals in the agenda are proposals to expand access to early childhood education, ensure equitable access and resources at all grade levels, and support educators and their training programs.

Certainly, those are positive reforms all progressives can get behind.

Not A Time For Compromise

The torrent of protests that have greeted the advent of the Trump regime is evidence of a popular unwillingness to compromise with the nations new leadership.

Is there any reason to believe this unwillingness to compromise doesnt extend to education?

The Progressive Education Agenda Takano and his colleagues are pushing reveals the wide gap between progressive Democrats and Betsy DeVos in terms of both education policy priorities and expertise, states a press release from Takanos office. Good. The gap needs to be wide.

Via Big Education Ape blog

Jeff Bryant is an Associate Fellow at Campaign for Americas Future and the editor of the Education Opportunity Network website. Prior to joining OurFuture.org he was one of the principal writers for Open Left. He owns a marketing and communications consultancy in Chapel Hill, N.C. He has written extensively about public education

Visit link:
Progressives Lost The Vote On DeVos But Won Something Else - San Diego Free Press

February 10, 2017 NEW YORKWhen Supreme Court nominee Judge Neil Gorsuch chose the words disheartening and demoralizing to describe attacks on the integrity of the federal judiciary this week, many took them to be a cautious but not-so-subtle message to Senate Democrats.

Navigating the noreasters of Washingtons confirmation process means winning over at least eight Democrats. And with those two words, Judge Gorsuch appeared to be distancing himself from President Trump, carefully asserting his own independence and demonstrating a willingness to stand up to the man who nominated him.

Yet even before the saga over the meaning and original intent of the nominees words began to unfold on Thursday with President Trump arguing that the media was misinterpreting his words many liberals were already making this case for the deeply conservative jurist, calling Mr. Trumps nominee one of the most independent-minded judges in the country.

It is a difficult pivot for many Democrats to make. Republican senators refusal even to schedule a hearing for President Obamas nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, last year still rankles. But some are wondering how far to take the fight when Gorsuch, in some ways, presents a relatively attractive conservative option.

Of all the judges President Trump could have nominated, Gorsuch seems to me as good as anybody, liberal or conservative, who would stand up to unlawful actions by the Trump administration, if need be, says Daniel Epps, a professor at Washington University Law School in St. Louis, who puts himself on the liberal side of jurisprudence.

Hes someone who seems to believe in a fairly robust role for the judicial branch in checking the legality of the actions of the other branches, adds Professor Epps, who, like Gorsuch, once clerked for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. So theres reason for optimism, I think, in that hes not going to just be a reflexive vote for conservative opinions in every case.

Like the late Justice Antonin Scalia, whose seat he will take if confirmed, Gorsuch has often ruled in favor of criminal defendants over the government rulings not uncommon for strict textualists and their razor-close readings of the statutory texts.

And unlike many other federal judges, Gorsuch has been a fierce critic of the so-called Chevron doctrine, which holds that judges should generally defer to the executive branch and its agencies when they have any reasonable interpretation of federal statutes.

That basically gives people comfort that didn't have comfort, said Sen. Joe Manchin, the conservative Democrat from West Virginia after meeting Gorsuch. That has helped him in his quest for confirmation, he said.

Yet Gorsuch has come to Washington at a rancorous political moment and will face vehement Democratic opposition.

Certainly, the base of the Democratic party is saying, You absolutely must stand strong against Trumps nominees, even if you dont have the numbers, says F. Michael Higginbotham, the Joseph Curtis Professor of Law at the University of Baltimore School of Law. What kind of message does it send to the Republicans, and to the country, if there are then no political consequences, if you believe what the Republicans did to Judge Garland was wrong? And youre not willing to stand up to that?

Indeed, many Democratic senators believe the Supreme Court seat was stolen last year, when Senate Republicans refused to even hold a hearing for Judge Garland for 293 days.

Theres no doubt that Judge Gorsuch is well qualified and a person of integrity, says David Cohen, a professor at Drexel Universitys Thomas R. Kline School of Law in Philadelphia. But my own personal view is that liberal Democrats who think thats good enough for him to get a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court are basically rolling over and playing dead in a game in which Republicans are playing in a very dirty way.

Or, as Dahlia Lithwick, a senior editor at Slate put it recently, it would be like holding out a cupcake at a knife fight.

For them, the perfect scenario would be Democrats blocking Gorsuchs nomination, forcing Trump to come back with a more moderate nominee like Garland.

Its an unlikely gamble, and one with profound risks, however, many experts say.

Republicans could nix the cloture rule, the basis for the filibuster and the 60-vote threshold to hold a vote, allowing Gorsuch to join the high court with only 50 votes. That could fundamentally undermine the Senates larger role as a body that demands bipartisan compromise.

Moreover, looking ahead to possible Supreme Court retirements, Trump could easily appoint much more hardline conservative, leaving the Supreme Court with a five- to six-seat majority that could last a generation. That is a more important battle, some say.

This is part of the strategic calculus that makes me think this is such hard question, says Epps at Washington University. On the one hand, Senate Democrats can say, What McConnell did with Garland was just ridiculous. But youve got to be thinking ahead to the next battle. And, yeah, in a world in which the filibuster has been nuked, then maybe it will be a lot easier for Republicans to fill any vacancy with whoever they want.

Gorsuch is facing a perilous moment in his confirmation. Trump this week lashed out against the judicial branch, demeaning the district court judge who first blocked his travel ban, calling him a so-called judge and his opinion ridiculous.

Then the president lashed out against the Ninth Circuit court panel hearing his emergency appeal, calling its proceedings disgraceful even before it ruled 3-to-0 on Thursday to continue to block his order.

The White House insisted on Thursday that Gorsuchs words, disheartening and demoralizing, were not referring to the presidents outburst, even though at least two senators and a White House official said they were.

One of the senators, Nebraska Republican Ben Sasse, even said the nominee got pretty passionate about Trumps attack of the judiciary.

"People all across the political spectrum should love the fact that he's going to be a warrior for a constitutional system of executive restraint and limits," Senator Sasse said.

Read the rest here:
'Disheartening'? Some liberals warm up to Trump Supreme Court pick. - Christian Science Monitor