Mediaboss Marketing

After a scheduled meeting in Wisconsin was cancelled, President Trump met with executives from Harley-Davidson in Washington, D.C on Feb. 2. (The Washington Post)

DETROIT President Trump welcomed executives of Harley-Davidson to the White House this week, alongside union representatives, and spent much of a camera spray reminiscing about how union members spurned their leaders to vote for him.

Sometimes your top people didnt support me, but the steelworkers supported me, right? Trump said. The workers supported us big league.

Twenty-four hours earlier,at a thinly attended news conference at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, Reps. Steve King (R-Iowa) and Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) reintroduced their right to work legislation to prevent private-sector unions from compelling members to pay dues. They were joined by Mark Mix of the National Right to Work Committee, which is working toward turning New Hampshire into aright to work state.

During the primary, Mix said, President Trump indicated that he would sign a right to work bill if it got to his desk.

In his first, hectic weeks in power, Trump has tried to capitalize on the support he won from union members with high-profile meetings and some direct actions, like the official end of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the go-ahead for new natural gas pipelines. Fissures between labor and the Democratic Party, which were papered over as long as they held the White House, have allowed Trump to deliver on promises that set unions against environmental groups and regulators.

But the presidents ambitions are running against the priorities of his party in Congress, and the advisers who have his ear. They may also be undercut by his nomination of Neil Gorsuch for the Supreme Court, an appointment that conservatives say would provide a 5-to-4 winning margin for a lawsuit that would use the First Amendment to end public sector unions ability to compel the payment of dues.

Im hopeful he does stand in the way, because the Republican are going to come after labor hot and heavy, said Greg Junemann, president of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers. His chances of getting reelected are stronger if he does that. Even if it maybe alienates somebody he golfs with.

As Democrats rebuild their party, the collapse of the labor vote has stood out as 2016s hardest lesson. Trump won the presidency, in part, because of a surge among voters who belonged to unions especially white, male union members. In Michigan, where Barack Obama had defeated Mitt Romney in union households by 33 points, Clinton won that group by just 13 points.

Organizers in Michigan, and across the Rust Belt, saw several crises colliding at just the right moment for Trump. The 2016 election was the first since Republicans in Wisconsin and Michigan pushed through right-to-work laws. That not only began to weaken the political power of unions; save right-to-work was an argument that fell out of the unions persuasion playbook.

And Clinton was a uniquely hard sell for union members. In a speech here, at one of the Democratic National Committees future forums,United Steelworkers 1999 President Chuck Jones said that he watched members burn with enthusiasm for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), then drop out after the primary.

Trump was close to getting the majority of our 3,000 members, said Jones, whose Indianapolis-based union is best known for representing workers at a Carrier plant Trump cut a deal to partially save from outsourcing. What the hell was Hillary going to argue on? She couldnt argue anything. Her husband was the one who gave us NAFTA. We had a candidate that we couldnt get people excited about.

In conversations this week, labor organizers said Trump could do a few things to build on that support. He could persuade the Republican Congress to pass a free-spending infrastructure bill; he could end the Cadillac tax on labor health insurance plans; he could renegotiate or simply abandon the North American Free Trade Agreement; he could continue jawboning companies into keeping business in the United States; and he could continue allowing energy production to increase against the demands of green groups.

Weve been talking about changing NAFTA forever, and no one would ever do it, Teamsters President James Hoffa Jr. said on Fox News last month. It can be done, and, you know, I applaud the president by having, being so bold to say well just rip it up and negotiate a new one. Thats unheard of. But it really is what needs to be done.

Trump could, they say, wind all of that with the high-profile personal meetings hes been holding with union leaders. Two weeks ago, Laborers International Union of North America General President TerryOSullivan said that the Trump presidency felt like a new day for the working class, and the pipeline orders might be just a start to a new Era of Good Feelings.

President Trump has shown that it is not difficult to put country above politics and create an energy-independent America, OSullivan said. He has shown that he respects laborers who build our great nation, and that they will be abandoned no more.

But the rest of the Republican agenda cuts against what the Teamsters, LIUNA and every other union is asking for. OSullivan quickly condemned the national right to work bill, and other leading unions have warned against Sen. Jeff Flakes (R-Ariz.) legislation to suspend the Davis-Bacon Act requirements for higher wages on infrastructure projects.

Labor is also girding for a fight that the Trump transition team appears to have manhandled the nomination of Andy Puzder for labor secretary. The AFL-CIOs Richard Trumka has teamed up with Senate Democrats to pummel Puzders record, portraying him as an icon of worker wage theft, referring to him in a December call with voters as the classic example of a millionaire CEO who nickels and dimes workers while raking in profits for himself.

He has spoken out against increasing the minimum wage, Trumka said. He opposes President Obamas updated overtime rule. He is dismissive of workplace discrimination issues. He appears comfortable reinforcing harmful stereotypes about women, and I could go on.

Puzders nomination hearing has been delayed several times, amid concerns that he might pull out entirely. Thats saved Trump from a fight with organized labor during what is typically a presidential honeymoon period but it may have also pushed the fight to a time when Democrats are even readier to oppose.

While Congress and the administration present risks for Trumps outreach strategy, he hassucceeded beyond even Democrats fears in cleaving law enforcement unions from the broader labor movement. He secured campaign endorsements from the national Fraternal Order of Police, the unions representing Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents as well as Border Patrol agents, a number of local police unions across the country including those in Chicago, Philadelphia, Denver and Cleveland.

Union leaders say their members were impressed by Trumps law and order rhetoric, his promise to undo Obama cutbacks on their access to military surplus equipment and to pursue legislation to make it a federal crime to kill a police officer, and how accessible and engaging they found his staff many noting that they still communicate with former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski and White House policy adviser Stephen Miller.

Unlike some other unions, we dont just endorse someone just because they have D listed after the end of their name, said Jerry Flynn, the executive director of the New England Police Benevolent Association, which was the first labor union to endorse Trump, throwing their support behind him in December 2015. The 5,000-member law enforcement union representing officers across Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine and Vermont sent letters detailing its endorsement process to every candidate in both the Democratic and Republican primaries.

Flynn says they only heard back from two Jeb Bush, who said he could not make it to their endorsement meetings, and Trump, who said he would be there and who invited the unions leaders to meet with him in Trump Tower. A half- dozen union leaders traveled to New York City for a two-hour meeting with Trump.

He didnt come riding in on a white horse and get the endorsement, Flynn said. There was some heated discussion. But the union leadership was swayed, in part, by Trumps affinity for law enforcement and his promises to oversee a law and order administration. A week after their meeting, Trump traveled to New Hampshire to accept the unions endorsement.

For eightlong years weve been treated as less than desirable by a president who has nothing but hatred for us, said Flynn, who after the Trump Tower meeting posted on Facebook a picture of him and Trump, both smiling with thumbs up, in front of a wall of Trumps framed magazine covers and newspaper clippings. Trump has been a breath of fresh air for us.

Police union officials in Cleveland describe a similarly involved courtship. First, the union got an email from Robert Paduchik, then Trumps Ohio campaign manager, asking about the unions endorsement process. Next, Cleveland Police Patrolmens Association President Steve Loomis said several friends invited him to attend an August 2016 Trump rally in nearby Akron, and that when Trump staffers spotted him in uniform, they invited him out to dinner.

It kind of blossomed from there, Loomis said. In September, Loomis was among Ohio labor officials who met with Trump and his running mate, then-Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, during a two-hour Labor Day meeting, after which he recommended to his fellow union members that they endorse Trump. After votes of both the unions board of directors and full 1,300-person membership, the decision was final: They would back Trump.

Mr. Trump said he was going to be a law and order guy, Loomis said, describing candidates Trumps three-prong plan. He said: Were going to give you the resources that you need. Were going to give the neighborhoods and the schools the things they need, and Im going to bring the jobs back.

While he doesnt call the White House on every issue, Loomis has made several calls to Trump associates since they took over the White House. Loomis says that one such call happened after a protester spit in the eye of a Cleveland police officer during demonstrations in that city during the inauguration. The union wanted the young man charged, but local prosecutors balked.

We were getting nowhere up here, Loomis said. I made a call and sent video of the incident to my contact up there and got a very positive response. In addition to the Trump White House, Loomis said he contact local Justice Departmentofficials. Days later, results. The local prosecutor ended up issuing a felony summons, Loomis said. I cant guarantee to you how it happened, but I know that we reached out and then things started moving.

Trumps outreach to building trades has started with the same friendliness but as the policy challenges have built up, Democrats have fought back. While the much-rumored infrastructure plan has not materialized, Democrats have proposed and unveiled their own $1 trillion plan, promising to create 15 million jobs in a decade. It mirrors what Sanders campaigned on in 2016, which appealed to rank-and-file union members whose leaders could not sell them on Clinton.

We do it in a way that protects workers rights, protects Davis-Bacon, makes sure that the products are American-made, and makes sure that were not privatizing our infrastructure, Sanders said in an interview this week. Any American, certainly any trade union member will see that what were see what were doing is far superior.

Original post:
As unions remain cozy with Trump, they remain wary of Republicans in Congress - Washington Post

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) vowed steadfast resistance to President Donald Trumps agenda in a speech at the Congressional Progressive Caucus retreat in Baltimore on Saturday.

Warren argued that it was Democrats job to both fight back against the president and to address the increasing inequality and public disempowerment that laid the groundwork for his rise to power.

Our moment of crisis didnt begin with the election of Donald Trump, she said.We were already in crisis.We were already in crisis because for years and years and years, Washington has worked just great for the rich and the powerful, but far too often, it hasnt worked for anyone else.

People dont just wake up one day and elect leaders like Donald Trump because hey, everything is awesome, but what the hell, lets roll the dice and make life interesting, she added.

Democrats frequently enabled or participated in these trends, Warren said.

Republican politicians have pushed one policy after another that has favored the rich and powerful over everyone else, and far too often, Democrats have gone right along, she said. And no matter how extreme Republicans in Washington became, Democrats might grumble or whine, but when it came time for action, our party hesitated and pushed back only with great reluctance. Far too often, Democrats have been unwilling to get out there and fight.

The progressive wing of the Democratic Party is uniquely positioned to end this weak posture, she argued.

And Warren rejected the argument that Democrats must be willing to accommodate Trump.

We are not the minority party. We are the opposition party, and we need to talk about the key difference between us and them every day, she said.

We will resist every single effort to make America into a small and spiteful place. We will resist every injustice, she concluded. We will resist every effort to divide us. We will resist every effort to disgrace our Constitution. We will resist every single step toward the takeover of our government by billionaires, bankers and bigots.

Warren, beloved by progressive activists for her unwavering criticism of Wall Street abuses and other principled advocacy, drew rare liberal criticism when shevoted to confirm Ben Carson as secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Saturdays speech represents an attempt to assure these critics that she stands with Democrats progressive base in their all-out opposition to Trumps agenda.

RYAN MCBRIDE/Getty Images

Below are Warrens prepared remarks in their entirety.

ELIZABETH WARREN:Im going to cut to the chase: Were gathered today in Baltimore during a moment of crisis for us as progressives, for us as Democrats, for us as Americans.

Were in a moment of crisis, and I want to talk honestly about it.

Lets start with a simple fact: Our moment of crisis didnt begin with the election of Donald Trump.

We were already in crisis.

We were already in crisis because for years and years and years, Washington has worked just great for the rich and the powerful, but far too often, it hasnt worked for anyone else.

We were already in a moment of crisis because for years and years and years, the economy has worked just great for those who have already made it, but far too often, it hasnt worked for anyone else.

We were already in a moment of crisis because for years and years and years, weve been living in a nation where opportunity is quietly disappearing. A country that is giving fewer and fewer kids a real chance to succeed.

We all know that this country was never perfect. That systemic racism, sexism, homophobia, and bigotry meant opportunities werent spread equally. But over the past generation, we made a shift a shift from a country bending in the right direction to one where the door to a better life to a middle class life has been getting further out of reach with every passing year.

For a long time, I have shouted from every rooftop I could find about how the middle class was on the ropes. How it was evaporating. How if we werent careful, it could be like the Arctic ice melting every year, until its gone completely, never to return. And make no mistake, as the middle class melts, the opportunities for the poor shrink to the vanishing point.

People dont just wake up one day and elect leaders like Donald Trump because hey, everything is awesome, but what the hell, lets roll the dice and make life interesting.

People dont elect leaders who break all the rules who violate all the norms when things are going pretty well.

They dont elect leaders who campaign for office by attacking communities of color, or religious groups, or immigrants, or women when things are just swell.

Men like Donald Trump come to power when their countries are already in deep trouble. When the economies of their countries are deeply flawed. When people in those countries start to lose hope for a better future and start looking for someone to blame. And men like Donald Trump rise when those with money and power get a little worried about their own privileges and decide to help out one of their own who promises to look out for them.

In November, America elected Donald Trump.

Yes, the Russians helped.

Yes, the FBI director helped.

Yes, he lost the popular vote by three million.

But we cannot let ourselves off so easy. Not as progressives, not as Democrats. The excuses end now right here in Baltimore. We hold ourselves accountable.

And we need to figure out what comes next.

There are some in the Democratic Party who urge caution. They say this is just a tactical problem. We need better data. We need better social media. We need better outreach. We need better talking points.

Better talking points? Are you kidding me? People are so desperate for economic change in this country that Donald Trump was just inaugurated as President, and people think we just have a messaging problem? What planet are they living on?

This is bigger than talking points and tactics, and yes, even than Twitter.

This country is in an economic crisis. For more than 30 years, working families, middle class families, poor families, students, seniors have been squeezed harder and harder, and now they are at the breaking point. Republican politicians have pushed one policy after another that has favored the rich and powerful over everyone else, and far too often, Democrats have gone right along. And no matter how extreme Republicans in Washington became, Democrats might grumble or whine, but when it came time for action, our party hesitated and pushed back only with great reluctance. Far too often, Democrats have been unwilling to get out there and fight.

That ends today. Its time for Democrats to grow a backbone and to get out there and fight.

Its up to usthe progressives. We need to make very clear that we, as progressives, as Democrats, as Americans, stand for a BOLD, progressive agenda. Stand for REAL solutions to this crisis. Stand for changes that will make a difference in the lives of millions of people. We need to make clear we will fight.

We fight for basic dignity and respect for every human beingeverybody counts. All people are entitled to be treated with respect.

We fight for economic opportunity not for those at the top, but for everyone. We believe that every one of our children deserves a fighting chance to build a real future.

We are not the minority party. We are the opposition party, and we need to talk about the key difference between us and them every dayand we need to say it in the plainest possible way:

Donald Trump has stirred ugly racism, sexism, and hatred in this country, and the Republican politicians smiled and climbed right into bed with him. That stink will be on them for decades to come. The national party that embraced bigotry. To every person in America, we need to say loud and clear: You dont like how women are treated? Or Latinos? Or Muslims? Or African Americans? Always remember that the bigotry stirred up by Donald Trump is perfectly ok with the Republicans in Washington. They will confirm his Attorney General, they will look the other way on religious bans, they will shuffle their feet over a Supreme Court nominee who thinks employers should decide what kind of birth control women get. Republicans are afraid to stand up for what is right. Afraid to stand up for basic American values.

Well they can nurse their fear. We are not afraid. Democrats are the party of all the people every single one. We believe everybody counts and everybody gets a chance. Nobody nobody gets cast aside. Thats the difference between Republicans and Democrats in Washington.

And one more: Donald Trump and the Republicans in Washington are on the side of the rich and powerful, and they are using every tool of government to help them get richer and more powerful. To every person in America, we need to say loud and clear: You think Wall Street has too much power in Washington? You think giant corporations call too many shots in government? You think billionaires get all the breaks while your family has to watch every nickel? Always remember: the Republicans are not on your side. Theyre rushing to unleash the big banks. Theyre rushing to gut the consumer agency that has forced banks to give $12B back to customers they cheated. They just pushed a backroom deal for giveaways to big oil companies and another for giveaways to investment advisers who cheat seniors. Theyre ramming through a cabinet of ethically challenged billionaires with long histories of grinding working people into the dirt. And the corporate CEOs and the Wall Street bankers and the lobbyists are so happy they are doing little money dances in the halls of Congress.

The so-called leaders of the Republican Party can keep their rich friends.

Thats on them. But whats on us? We need to be the party of hardworking people every single one. We need to be the party of every family and every small businesses and every person who hasnt made it yet. We need to be the party of every person who believes we should all get a chance to build something for ourselves and our families.

We need to say what we believe in, then we need to fight for those beliefs.

The world has changed a lot over the past few months, and lets be honest theres no hotline number we can call to learn how best to deal with rising right-wing extremism in this country. Like a lot of you, Im still finding my way, finding my footing, day by day, step by step. We make mistakes. But with each passing day, we learn.

The lesson of history is that when faced with a danger like Donald Trump, opposition needs to grow. Opposition needs to be focused. Opposition needs to be bold. Most of all, opposition needs to be willing to fight.

Things are moving fast, and time is running out for us to grasp what has happened, and for us to make clear in every way, from every mountaintop we can that we will fight back.

You bet we will fight back! And you better believe well keep fighting for our progressive agenda.

Next week, many of us in this room return to Washington. Eyes will be on us. We do not control the government. Many times, our side wont win. But we have our voices.

And we will add our voices to the voices of millions of people in this country who are standing up to say that the character of this nation is not the character of its President.

No. In our democracy, We the People decide the character of this nation.

When we protest, when we make phone calls, when we carry signs and ask questions, when we make our voices heard that is when we affirm our uniquely American character. We will resist every single effort to make America into a small and spiteful place. We will resist every injustice. We will resist every effort to divide us. We will resist every effort to disgrace our Constitution. We will resist every single step toward the takeover of our government by billionaires, bankers and bigots.

This is not the moment we asked for, but it is the moment we have been called to. This is our test.

The hour to fight is upon us and we are ready. We will fight back, side by side. We will fight back.

See original here:
Elizabeth Warren Gives Progressives In Congress A Rousing Call To Arms Against Trump - Huffington Post

posted at 10:01 am on February 4, 2017 by Jazz Shaw

Yesterday, the legendary Andrew Malcolm published a piece here which speculates about other Supreme Court seats which may come up for grabs while Donald Trump is in office and what the fallout from such a turn of events might be. This is a grim game at the best of times because pondering an opening on the Supreme Court is frequently only thought of as meaning one thing, and it involves six people carrying a casket. But thats not the reality in most cases. Many of us tend to think that accepting a seat on that court winds up turning into a life sentence thats nearly as certain as the one Charles Manson received. However, as Zachary Goldfarb and Lydia DePillis wrote shortly after the death of Antonin Scalia, its actually a rarity. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist died in office in 2005, but the last time it happened before that was in 1954. All the other ex-justices in the intervening half century left the building under their own power.

With that optimistic outlook in mind, its still worth considering whether any of the current crop are considering spending their golden years doing anything more relaxing. We would generally expect that sort of decision from the oldest members which means the Notorious RBG (83), Kennedy (80) or Breyer (78). The oldest conservative justice (Thomas) is still in his sixties. This has progressives and their liberal allies in the media in a panic at the moment. Two examples cropped up at the WaPo this week, with the first being a plaintive cry from Ruth Marcus for Anthony Kennedy to stick around until the last dog is hung or risk seeing his legacy go up in smoke.

Justice Kennedy, if youre reading this, my message is simple: Please dont retire. It could put your legacy at risk; even more, it would be terrible for the country at a moment that demands healing, not another bitter fight ripping at the seams of national unity.

Its natural, of course, that stepping down would be on your mind. At 80, you are the courts longest-serving justice 29 years this month. Appointed by a Republican president, you might decide that a Republican president should have the chance to name your successor.

Please dont.

That one is actually fairly tame when compared to a stunning offer made by Rachel Manteuffel to Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Rather than appealing to the tiny cancer survivors better angels in terms of retirement, Manteuffel cuts straight to the chase and lets Ginsburg know that shes ready to go under the knife and donate her bodily organs if it will keep RBG on the bench until Trump is gone.

I just wanted you to know that I admire you very much and have some tokens of my esteem that you might enjoy. Such as blood. If you have any need for blood, you can have the eight or so units of A-positive that are right here in my body. Theres also a gently used liver in here, lobes of it just lying around if you need them

My kidneys function well. I have two. Either one is yours for the taking. Both, if need be. ..

I have scads of nerves that you can have. Just take them. My skin would graft onto you beautifully. Bones, stem cells, a whole eyeball I dont need, feet of intestines, feet. Just a ridiculous amount of health, way more than should rightly belong to someone with my standing in the world. It is not just. And I know you like justice

I am somewhat bigger than you are, so my heart might not be a perfect fit. Have it cut to size.

I realize that Manteuffels essay is ostensibly written tongue in cheek, but these are not the thoughts of a rational person. That last line in particular about having her heart cut to size summons up images of an Aztec high priest plunging an obsidian blade into the chest cavity of a sacrificial captive on an ancient pyramid. This isnt comedy its a desperate plea from the truly unhinged, convinced that a monster (Trump) has risen up from the depths of Mordor to take over the world and there are no hobbits with magic rings of power to be found anywhere. It is, in short, thinly disguised religious fervor.

I suppose thats understandable to a certain degree. Younger political activists are facing the very real possibility of witnessing something which has almost never happened in their adult lifetime the swing of a SCOTUS seat from the far left to the far right. Kagan and Sotomayor replaced Stevens and Souter respectively both were reliably liberal. (Souter was appointed by Bush 41, but wound up voting almost exclusively with the liberal block.) Roberts replaced Rehnquist, a Nixon appointee who was considered a conservative federalist. Breyer replaced Harry Blackmun who was another Nixon appointee but went on to become one of the most liberal justices in the modern era, eventually authoring Roe v. Wade. And RBG (appointed almost a quarter century ago) replaced Byron White, a JFK appointee. In fact it could be argued that the only real ideological shift of note which younger liberals have witnessed was Alito replacing Sandra Day OConnor. Even there, OConnor was viewed as more of a swing vote and was a Regan appointee.

Now, the three members most likely to retire (or, God forbid, expire) are the current swing vote and two of the most reliable liberals on the court. If one of them is replaced by someone on Trumps current list of possible nominees it will be a seismic shift to the Right which liberals are simply not prepared to witness. And that shift would most likely continue to resonate until the current crop of liberal protesters are ready to collect Social Security. (Assuming the program lives that long without going broke.)

With all that in mind, perhaps Manteuffels offer wont bee seen as such a crazy bargain after all. And Im taking her at her word that she has a simply lovely liver to offer. Lord only knows that nobody would want mine.

Excerpt from:
Progressives are finding religion as they pray for the health of liberal SCOTUS justices - Hot Air

Progressive activists are demanding that Democrats do everything in their power to stop President Trump from putting another conservative on the Supreme Court.

When Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., suggested he might stop short of filibustering Trump's nominee Neil Gorsuch, the response from liberal groups was swift and firm.

"There is zero appetite among the public for weakness from Democratic politicians," said Progressive Change Campaign Committee co-founder Stephanie Taylor.

"Especially after Republicans stole a Supreme Court seat, Coons and all Senate Democrats should join Sen. Jeff Merkley's filibuster of Trump's Supreme Court nominee, Gorsuch. That's the kind of backbone the public needs to see right now."

Stay abreast of the latest developments from nation's capital and beyond with curated News Alerts from the Washington Examiner news desk and delivered to your inbox.

Sorry, there was a problem processing your email signup. Please try again later.

Processing...

Thank you for signing up for Washington Examiner News Alerts. You should receive your first alert soon!

In case the point was missed, the group sent out an email to supporters urging them to call Coons. "Tell him that Democrats are counting on him to FIGHT WITH BACKBONE," the message read (emphasis in the original).

CREDO Action issued a blistering statement that opened with the suggestion that virtually anyone the president nominated would have been worthy of Democratic opposition, saying it was issued "in response to Donald Trump's nomination of [insert anti-women, anti-worker, anti-environment white male here] to the U.S. Supreme Court."

"Democrats cannot allow the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice picked by a racist, fascist, sexual predator who lost the majority vote by almost 3 million votes," the group's political director Murshed Zaheed said.

"The progressive base of the Democratic Party wants Democrats to fight Trump's fascist regime, not enable it," Zaheed added.

"There is no room for collaboration with a thin-skinned, tantrum-prone tyrant who, in just the first few days of his administration, has already displayed a reckless disregard for the rule of law and shown he is willing to undermine our Constitution."

Also from the Washington Examiner

Lawmakers race against a 60-day clock to repeal a slew of Obama administration regulations.

02/05/17 12:01 AM

Many of these groups and activists threatened Democratic senators who didn't do their part with future primary challenges.

"Senate Dems, let's be very clear," tweeted liberal filmmaker Michael Moore. "You will filibuster & block this SC nom or will we find a true progressive and primary u in next election."

Many progressives want to see Democrats become part of the "resistance" against Trump, obstructing and opposing him wherever possible.

Their efforts are patterned partly on the Tea Party's pressure to get Republicans to fight President Obama and partly on the unsuccessful liberal campaigns against Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker.

But liberals are also angry that Senate Republicans denied a hearing or vote to Obama's last Supreme Court nominee, Judge Merrick Garland. Garland would have given the liberal bloc control of the court. Now Republicans have the opportunity to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia with another conservative.

Also from the Washington Examiner

Republicans are pushing back on claims that they are softening their language about Obamacare's future.

02/05/17 12:00 AM

"The Democrats should treat Trump's SCOTUS pick with the exact same courtesy the GOP showed Merrick Garland," tweeted former Obama senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer. "Don't flinch, don't back down."

Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., quickly became the leader of this effort in Congress.

"The most fundamental thing that must be understood about tonight's announcement is that this is a stolen seat," he said when Gorsuch was nominated. Merkley called for a Democratic filibuster.

"This is a stolen seat being filled by an illegitimate and extreme nominee, and I will do everything in my power to stand up against this assault on the Court," he added.

A filibuster would require 60 votes to end debate and vote on the nomination. Republicans control 52 seats to the Democrats' 48.

Nevertheless, some Democrats are reluctant to go down this road. It is possible Republicans would change the rules to allow future Supreme Court nominees through by majority vote. This would leave Senate Democrats powerless to stop Trump if he got to replace a more liberal justice and change the balance of power on the court, unless they have retaken the majority by then.

Judging from the reaction Democrats like Coons have elicited, this is going to be a losing argument with the progressive base.

"But I'm not going to do to President Trump's nominee what the Republicans in the Senate did to President Obama's," Coons, a member of the Judiciary Committee, told CNN. "I will push for a hearing and I will push for a vote."

Thousands have poured into the streets to protest Trump's immigration order and other policies. Even before Trump, Supreme Court nomination fights had become increasingly contentious over the past thirty years, since Democrats defeated President Reagan's nomination of Judge Robert Bork.

Top Story

Notice sent about 24 hours after judge ordered the restraining order.

02/04/17 7:27 PM

Read the original here:
Filibuster or bust: Progressives demand Democrats block Supreme Court nominee - Washington Examiner

Among the many terrifying questions that Donald Trumps presidency poses is this: How do you oppose an indecent leader while still behaving decently yourself?

When it comes to the habits of deference extended to previous presidents, Im fine with breaking the rules. If Democrats want to oppose all of Trumps nominees on the basis that he himself is dangerous and illegitimate, that strikes me as fine. If performers who have traditionally performed at governmental functions want to boycott his, Im fine with that, too. Trump practices demagoguery, bigotry, and cruelty. He does not deserve the deference granted a normal president.

Trump Begins to Chip Away at Banking Regulations

But when Trumps opponents use the danger he and his supporters pose to restrict basic freedoms, theres a problem. Which is what happened earlier this week at the University of California, Berkeley, when a violent protest prevented Milo Yiannopoulos, a Breitbart News writer who has made his name by viciously mocking women, trans people, and African Americans, from speaking on campus.

Judging from my Twitter feed, not many progressives defend the violence, which appears to have been carried out by masked hoodlums who arrived from off-campus. But vast numbers said Berkeley should have peacefully denied Yiannopoulos an opportunity to speak on campus. In the words of one Twitter user, Free speech every college has an obligation to give you an official platform for your speech.

The problem with this argument is that it was not Berkeley itself that invited Yiannopoulos. It was the Berkeley College Republicans, who are legally a separate entity. And as Berkeley Chancellor Nicholas Dirks explained, long-standing campus policy permits registered student organizations to invite speakers to campus and to make free use of meeting space in the Student Union for that purpose. So the issue is not whether Berkeley should have given Yiannopoulos a platform. It is whether Berkeley should have denied some of its students the ability to give him a platform. And consistent with the dictates of the First Amendment as uniformly and decisively interpreted by the courts, Dirks argued, the university cannot censor or prohibit events, or charge differential fees.

That strikes me as a strong argument. Universities should establish rules for how they treat speakers that student organizations invite. And they should not alter those rules depending on the ideas those speakers espouse, even if their ideas are hateful. (And yes, Id apply that not merely to Milo but to a neo-Nazi like Richard Spencer). At Berkeley, the rules say that student organizations get to host their speakers at the Student Union for free. If Berkeley changes that because Yiannopoulos is a misogynist, what happens if a Palestinian group invites a speaker that conservatives call anti-Semitic?

Of course, Berkeley students also have the right to protest Yiannopoulos. But the university has an obligation to ensure that their right to protest does not prevent the College Republicans from hearing their invited guest. Is the university obligated to spend extra money, which it would not expend for a normal speaker, because Yiannopouloss speech requires extra security? Im not sure. But in any case, Berkeley did not spend extra money. It required the College Republicans to come up with funds for additional security themselves; an anonymous patron contributed $6,000 to help them.

The second argument for preventing Yiannopoulos from speaking is that his ideas are more than merely offensive. His conduct at public events has constituted harassment. As a group of Berkeley professors detailed in a letter, Yiannopoulos, projected a picture of a trans student onto a screen during his speech at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, last Decemberan event that was also live-streamed on Breitbart News. He continued to ridicule and vilify her in front of the live campus audience and the online audience. The student was so disturbed by this experience that she withdrew from the university.

But this argument is weak, too. Yiannopouloss behavior at the Milwaukee campus sounds disgusting. But as Dirks wrote in response, critical statements and even the demeaning ridicule of individuals are largely protected by the Constitution. If they were not, a lot of comedians would have trouble performing live. And even if the targeted UWM student has grounds to sue, Berkeley cannot prevent the College Republicans from hosting Yiannopoulos because of the possibility that he might do something like that again.

Politically, the problem with shutting Yiannopoulos down is obvious. The reason the College Republicans invited him in the first place was because we believe there exists a dearth of intellectual diversity on this campus, and conservative thought is actively repressed. Not letting him speak on campus just makes their point. It lets Yiannopoulos depict himself as a victim of political correctness. Which is the grievance that fuels his ugly persona in the first place.

But the argument for letting Yiannopoulos speak is more than tactical. Its a matter of principle. Conservative students have the right to bring obnoxious bigots to speak on campus and other students have a right to protest. But universities should not let the protesters shut them down. That was hard for many leftists to accept even before Trumps election. Now that an obnoxious bigot occupies the White House, its even harder. But Trumps presidency is, in part, a test of whether ordinary Americans can avoid sinking to his level, whether a citizenry can respect the principles that its leaders do not. What happened to Milo Yiannopoulos this week is part of that test. Its important that progressives at Berkeley, and around the country, do not fail.

Read this article:
Milo Yiannopoulos Tested Progressivesand They Failed - The Atlantic