Skip to main content

View Diary: Have Dems sold out too early on immigration? Not if they want something to actually pass (317 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You make some good points (9+ / 0-)

    but did you really have to say it like this?

    If this was an exercise in political grandstanding, then sure, make the bill perfect and trumpet its purity to the high heavens.
    Basic rights and equality isn't "purity" and to frame it that way toward people who just get knocked down over and over again all their lives... it's just not right.  


    "Justice is a commodity"

    by joanneleon on Wed May 22, 2013 at 12:41:11 PM PDT

    •  Perhaps the invocation of the term "purity" (10+ / 0-)

      was a bit of a provocation, but it was bound to be bandied about in the comments anyway.

      And this is EXACTLY an example of the purity-vs-pragmatism debate, which is not going to go away because there is merit on both sides.  Yes, comproming principles is a real committment-dampener, AND, yes, refraining from accomplishing at least a little would be dumb.  

      "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

      by lgmcp on Wed May 22, 2013 at 12:50:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Depends on whose ox is being gored (5+ / 0-)

        I see no point in harming American workers to help immigrants.   But then I see no point in cutting Social Security benefits for Americans who've worked for 45 years either.  

      •  In This Case, Purity IS Pragmatism (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lgmcp, Dallasdoc

        The Republicans are over a barrel, trying to keep enough of the Latino vote to prevent the Southwest from Nevada to Texas from turning first purple and then blue.

        Making them actually suffer consequences from their obstructionism is the only way to stop it, either by reforming them or removing them. Asking nicely and compromising has been repeatedly tried and proven ineffective.

        On the Internet, nobody knows if you're a dog... but everybody knows if you're a jackass.

        by stevemb on Wed May 22, 2013 at 03:25:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  When it comes to "teh gayz" . . . (0+ / 0-)

      asking for equal treatment is always, always some kind of contemptible "purity."  See, we gay people are just politically toxic, and we just have to accept that societal homophobia can't be fought by the politicians who are allegedly our allies.  Supporting us would be the death of all good legislation, and so we can't insist on laws that would alleviate existing de jure discrimination, since that would be really, really selfish of us.

      Markos's argument is self-refuting.  He says:

      The place to fight that battle is over DOMA, particularly if the Supreme Court doesn't do the right thing by invalidating it. Get rid of that, and same-sex couples are on equal immigration footing.
      In other words, we need to get DOMA repealed separately.  In his view, we can't jeopardize passage of this bill by including pro-gay provisions in it, because although Republicans very much need to see immigration reform pass, they'll kill this bill if it lifts a finger to help bi-national gay couples.

      But if we can't get pro-gay legislation passed even when it's attached to a must-pass bill, we surely can't get it passed as a stand-alone.  At least with CIR, we have leverage against the Republicans, since they desperately want to make the immigration issue go away.  With stand-alone DOMA repeal, we'll have no such leverage, and Markos knows that, or at least he should.

      This argument simply makes no sense at all.  It's a fig leaf and nothing more.

      "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

      by FogCityJohn on Thu May 23, 2013 at 12:58:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site