I'll say this and then peace out from this thread because I can't sit here and read responses from people that pretend to care about immigration yet immigration related news threads get zero replies during Trump's admin. Y'all have zero clue what you are talking about, don't have any understanding about what is going on, you've never worked in this area, yet are prepared to tear people down to win the internet moral high ground.
Unless you can point to evidence that Munoz came up with the "harsh" Obama era policies you are criticizing her for defending when it was her job to do so, you can hush. Why do you not direct any energy at Biden who was Vice President during all of this and also backed the Obama administration? Munoz has worked in immigration advocacy and reform for the majority of her life. She knows all the problems, she's worked with non-profits and within the government bureaucracy. I'm all for her coming on-board if it leads to immigration reform.
lmao, yes, we know nothing and don't know history.
It's not our job to educate you and other here, but at least y'all can be pointed in the right direction so you can all hop off this strawman, "I'm intelligent and you're not" bullshit.
Celia Munoz is not a victim here. She knew what she was doing and had power to effect and influence positive change instead of the negative shit she defended and argued for years with:
A once-fierce advocate of immigrant right turns into the Obama administration's mouthpiece on deportations.
prospect.org
When president-elect Barack Obama named Cecilia Muñoz as director of intergovernmental affairs at the White House, Latino nonprofits and media outlets celebrated. Her appointment was viewed as a sign of inclusion for Latinos in government and an example of our growing political power.
Instead, Muñoz has become the administration's Spanish-language mouthpiece on immigration policy.
When answering questions about the rising number of deportations and detentions; the rapid expansion of immigration-enforcement programs like Secure Communities; and the failure to provide short-term, administrative relief in the absence of an immigration-reform bill, Muñoz sounds as if she is reading a script from the Bush era. She has called non-criminals who face deportation or have already been deported "collateral damage" and has repeatedly said halting some deportations via executive order isn't possible, even after 22 Democratic senators penned a letter to the president urging him to do so.
As if reading from the Democratic Party's cue cards, Muñoz has joined the chorus of legislators who blame Republicans for Congress's failure to pass a comprehensive immigration-reform bill or provide relief to the children of undocumented immigrants in the form of the DREAM Act. Most recently, she was quoted in a PBS Frontline special report, Lost in Detention, stating that "as long as Congress gives us money to deport 400,000, that's what we're going to do."
Some independent journalists and organizations have targeted Muñoz for her complicity in sugarcoating the negative impact of Obama's immigration policies on Latino communities. Presente.org currently has a petition demanding she come clean: The organization and signatories have asked Muñoz to return to her advocacy roots and renounce Secure Communities and other policies she is perceived as defending. Some, including progressive radio host Mario Solis-Marich, have called for her resignation.
As a Latina who called for Muñoz's resignation in April of this year,
I think it's dangerous to refrain from criticizing high-ranking members of our own community simply because of their representational value.
Muñoz's value for the White House is clear: As the 2012 election draws closer and the focus narrows on those elusive and mysterious Latino swing votes, Muñoz can put a Latina face on a "commonsense" immigration policy from an administration that has deported over a million people and plans to deport more. The question Cecilia Muñoz must ask herself is what's more important: a political career that betrays her past advocacy or defending the safety and sustainability of immigrants as they face strident immigration laws?
Having your latina advocate do an about face and literally help spearhead some of the worst immigration policies in the country up to that date, and defend it? Yeah, fuck all that.
Hell, I'll help you out and give you something that has a sympathetic bent towards Munoz, but honestly I'm just putting it out there to highlight that people smarter than you or I or anyone else here, who know Munoz unlike you and I or anyone else here, were fighting her constantly. And for a damn good reason
Last week, she was among the West Wing staffers delivering the news to Democrats on Capitol Hill and to activists that Obama would postpone plans to use executive action to defer deportations for many of the nation's 11 million undocumented immigrants.
For Muñoz, 52, it's a role she has played since joining Obama's staff in 2009 after a two-decade career as an outspoken immigrant rights leader. Time and again, Obama has relied on her to justify the immigration policies she fought so fiercely when she was on the other side of the table. Muñoz has been called upon to defend an administration that has deported more than 2 million people, most of them Hispanic. And time and again, she has had to defend a president whose inability to stem many of the removals has disappointed Latino voters, who supported him in record numbers.
The collapse of comprehensive immigration legislation in Congress this summer has raised the stakes for Obama. He pledged in June to use executive authority to remake border-control policies by summer's end. But the White House announced Saturday that he would not act until after the midterm elections in November because of political concerns from jittery Democrats. The news only added to the list of disappointments for Latinos, activists and some Democratic lawmakers.
Advocates who are pushing Obama to grant deportation relief to millions of undocumented immigrants say this represents the last chance for the president — and, by extension, Muñoz — to salvage their legacy in the Hispanic community.
Oh, and you want to talk about holding others accountable? We do and did. One example, lots of interesting stuff mixed up in other threads throughout the years too.
I'm not really a big thread creator but I stirred myself for this one. I have often heard people (usually conservatives) discuss the idea that Democrats marginalize the issues of people of color because they have no choice but to vote against Republicans. I have never before seen a Democrat come...
www.resetera.com
and then the debates in general, remember those and the defenses as soon as Dems started calling out the Obama era immigration policy?
It’s about immigration ... sort of.
www.vox.com
I saw a Bloomberg headline asking "Why Are Democrats Attacking Obama?", a Politico article headline reading "'Stay away from Barack': Dems seethe over criticism of Obama," and a piece in the Hill titled "Hey, Democrats: Stop attacking our most beloved president in recent history."
This was not at all the debate I saw, but it is useful spin for several different groups. That includes
Donald Trump, who quipped to a Thursday night crowd in Cincinnati that "the Democrats spent more time attacking Barack Obama than they did attacking me, practically." It's also, of course, useful spin for former Vice President Joe Biden, who popped out of a diner stop in Detroit on Thursday to say, "I must tell you, I was a little surprised how much the incoming was about Barack."
The timing of this sequence of events should tell you something. The fact that this narrative emerged after actual debate coverage suggested that it stems from Biden spinning it that way. Trump for his own reasons spun it that way, and left-wing intellectuals who really are sharply critical of Obama have also spun it that way.
Turns out when you offer even a little bit of criticism when it comes to the records of Obama and Biden, there's certain people that have defensive reflex, go into protect mode, and try to drive the convo away from pointing at past atrocities or talking about them.
Fuck your internet moral highground strawman dodge, we're arguing for human rights here and there are bad people who have done bad things that escape any and all criticism. Because there's never a time to have a honest talk about it.
