AOC and other new House progressives are tweeting their dissatisfaction with orientation at Harvard

[sl8]

From https://www.businessinsider.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-and-house-freshmen-are-protesting-orientation-harvard-2018-12

'I was not sent to Washington to play nice': Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other new House progressives are tweeting their dissatisfaction with orientation at Harvard

Eliza Relman 1h


Newly elected House Democrats Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, left, Ayanna Pressley, right, and Lori Trahan, second from right. Michael Dwyer/AP

• A group of newly elected progressive House Democrats are protesting their own congressional orientation program at Harvard Kennedy School this week.

• The future lawmakers have staged rallies and are tweeting their protests of the bipartisan events, which are cosponsored by the American Enterprise Institute and the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

• "Lobbyists are here. Goldman Sachs is here. Where's labor? Activists? Frontline community leaders?" Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez tweeted Thursday.

Newly elected progressive members of the US House of Representatives, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley, abandoned their new-member orientation at Harvard Kennedy School on Tuesday night to lead a rally in support of single-payer healthcare, gun control, and laws to fight climate change outside in the freezing cold.

...

More at link.

[vlyons]

1. What don't they like about it?

nt

[shanny]

5. ...

"Lobbyists are here. Goldman Sachs is here. Where's labor? Activists? Frontline community leaders?"

[watoos]

15. Corporate right wing indoctrination before they are even sworn in.

Just think, these right wing groups, the Kochs, give money to universities and then they control who is hired and what is taught.

[bottomofthehill]

67. A little about the program before we kick the shit out of it

Last edited Sat Dec 8, 2018, 02:31 PM - Edit history (1)

I will agree that they could probably learn as much at Charlies Kitchen across the street, but maybe a little bit of listening will go a long way. As my Nana would say "two ears and one mouth for a reason". The world is not better because 10 fingers and twitter are really fucking things up.

The Bipartisan Program for Newly Elected Members of Congress is nationally recognized as the preeminent educational and preparatory program for newly elected Republican and Democratic Members of the House of Representatives. More than 700 current and former representatives from both parties have attended the program since its inception in 1972.

The biennial program will be held December 4-6, 2018 in collaboration with the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and Congressional Institute.

Our program is unique. The agenda is designed to ensure thoughtful bipartisan discussions on a variety of public policy issues. Experts and practitioners from a wide range of backgrounds will cover topics including the federal budget process, key issues in domestic and foreign policy, Congressional reform and current issues related to technology. The program also provides guidance on a host of practical issues including: setting up and staffing congressional offices; best practices for media relations; and managing family/work life balance. Members will also have an opportunity to visit and tour the John F. Kennedy Library and Museum.

Most importantly, the program offers one of the few opportunities new members have to meet and get acquainted with colleagues from both sides of the aisle in a neutral environment. Based on feedback from previous years, we anticipate many lasting friendships and great working relationships beginning here in Cambridge.

For more information about the Program for Newly-Elected Members of Congress or the Institute of Politics, please contact Christian Flynn.

[Caliman73]

86. Neutral environment?

The American Enterprise Institute is right wing. The CSIS is supposedly bipartisan, but is headed by people who lead multinational corporations former Republican politicians, and Henry Kissenger is on the board of trustees along with Brent Snowcroft.

Where is the Center for American Progress or the Brookings Institue in this supposedly "neutral" gathering?

[Red Oak]

91. Agree

Glad to see Representative Ocasio-Cortez pointing out the obvious issues with the "orientation".

Enough of having Democrats run saying they will do one thing, getting elected, then heading to Congress and doing the bidding of their billionaire masters asking them to head to the "center" for the greater good.

I wish Rep. Ocasio-Cortez all the best in speaking truth to power and representing people in the US that are not billionaires and millionaires.

[orleans]

142. same here n/t

[Hassin Bin Sober]

99. Lol. The American Enterprise Institute? They are almost solely responsible for inventing Tea Baggers

Just a friendly Koch invented “institute” with nothing but the well being of their fellow man in mind. LOL.

[GeorgeGist]

135. Somebody forgot to mention lobbyists in their promotion literature.

[Blue_true]

78. Did you read the summary of their concerns?

The orientation is a big business, 1% affair. No people that work with the poor is there to give their advice, no labor leaders, no civil justice leaders. A lot is wrong with it.

[bottomofthehill]

140. Did you read who the speakers are keeping in mind that there are both D's and R's Members-elect

This is not a right wing crowd. It is strongly left of center. It is Camelot High for Christ Sake, most of the faculty leans left:

There are more, but my typing finger is tired.



Mark Gearan Democrat former Director of the Peace Corps
Elaine Chao Republican Secretary of Transportation
Bryan Stevenson Democrat Executive Director of the Equal Justice Initiative
Sarah Wald Unknown, Harvard Faculty
Bill Delahunt Democrat Former House Member, Massachusetts
Lawrence Bacow Unknown, President of Harvard
Maya MacGuineas Republican I think President, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (Many D&R Directors)
Doug Elmendorf Unknown Harvard Faculty
Matt Weidinger, Republican Resident Fellow, AEI
Ashton Carter Democrat Sec of Defense, Obama
Mary Barra CEO GM
Alex Gorsky CEO Johnson & Johnson
Dennis Muilenburg CEO Boeing
Juliette Kayyem Democrat department of Justice and Homeland. Ran for Governor of Massachusetts,
Mitch Landreau Democrat, Mayor New Orleans
Phil Sharp Democrat, 20 year member of US House
Rob Stavins Unknown Harvard Faculty Economics and Environment
Nancy Cordes Unknown CBS News
Raj Chetty Unknown Harvard Faculty
Robby Mook Democrat, Hillary Clinton Manager
John Noonan Republican, Jeb for President Senate Armed Services Staff
Eric Rosenbach Democrat DOD, Obama Harvard Faculty
Amy Howell Unknown Harvard Faculty
Dan Meyer Republican, Newt Gingrich COS
Amy Rosenbaum Democrat, Pelosi and Obama healthcare policy
Josh Pitcock Republican VP Pence COS
Anne Wall Democrat, Floor Staff Durbin
David King Unknown Harvard Faculty
Danielle Allen Unknown Harvard Ethics Faculty
Arthur Brooks Republican AEI President
David Gergen Republican and Democrat COS and Harvard Faculty
Gary Cohn Republican Appointee NEC
Jason Furman Democrat NEC
Karen Dynan Harvard Faculty, Obama Appointee
Michael Strain Republican AEI
Nancy Gibbs Unknown, Harvard Faculty, TIME MAGAZINE
Amy Dacy Democrat, Congressional Staff, Chairwoman Slaughter
Joe Heck Republican Member, US House
Brittany Packnett Executive Director Teach For Americe

[Blue_true]

166. Ok, you proved your point. There are many very strong democrats in the speaker lineup.

My sincere apologies.

[bottomofthehill]

167. I have been lucky in my life to talk to many Freshman Members of Congress

Last edited Sat Dec 8, 2018, 02:35 PM - Edit history (1)

They have the opportunity to go to the Committee on House Administration's New Member training, the Congressional Research Service new member program, the Harvard New Member program, the Heritage Foundation has a program. The program most often talked about is the Harvard program.

I am not Harvard Alum, they would not have let me in even if I had applied. They do work to put on a good bi-partisan program for new members of congress.

When Newt Gingrich was the Speaker, he tried to kill the program, but due to its popularity and reputation he was not able to.

[Bettie]

2. I'm glad they are asking the questions

why do new congresscritters get orientation solely from the representatives of "corporate persons" and hear nothing from leaders in other areas?

[pangaia]

8. WHY? Surely you jest.. :)))))

[lagomorph777]

12. WTF? Congressional orientation has been privatized? That's apalling!

[Hangingon]

40. Freshmen orientation was in Washington in November

This was was at Harvard’s Kennedy School. Apparently they didn’t doa very good job.

[True Blue American]

149. That list does not look Democratic

To me. It is fully Corporate.

The Representatives are right. Democrats were elected to represent the worker and middle class. Many forget this once in office. The people elected Trump because of his lies. They have now elected Democrats to the House to fix things! Democrats would be wise to remember that!

I can not tell you how many workers I know that despise and blame both parties! Starting with NAFTA!

I appreciate the new Reps speaking out.

I also think Pelosi and her team understand that.

[ananda]

3. Excellent!

A great anti-corporate stance!

I like it.

[California_Republic]

33. Yup

[delisen]

4. Good move on their part. n/t

[BeyondGeography]

6. Whose bad idea was it to corporate force-feed AOC, Pressley, Tlaib et al?

What could possibly go wrong?

[bottomofthehill]

168. They signed up to go, no one was forced

[Sherman A1]

7. Excellent!

[Ferrets are Cool]

9. The change of "status quo" must start somewhere. Why not HERE?

[True Blue American]

150. I think it is great!

[Dopers_Greed]

10. "Millennials are destroying the congressional orientation industry"

[eppur_se_muova]

45. I'm guessing this editorial might interest you ...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016221492

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

11. Gotta start somewhere...

and complaining about too much corporate influence is a great place to start.

[Honeycombe8]

13. I had no idea that corporate interests were involved from the get-go.

Kudos for letting everyone know. Goldman Sachs is htere? Are you shi**ing me?

[flibbitygiblets]

27. +1! Nothing like fresh, un-compromised, un-indoctrinated minds to question the status quo!

Funny that those eager-beaver tea-baggers that came in big waves in 2010 etc. to shake things up, never made a peep out of any of this shit.

[KPN]

85. Great observation.

[DemocracyMouse]

139. AND WHERE ARE THE 21st CENTURY UNIONS????

(And I blame the unions themselves for not lobbying in places where they would get some publicity and influence (and with up to date, savvy graphics please!)

[True Blue American]

154. Mary Barro?

The woman shutting down plants? Stock goes up?

[lark]

14. So proud of these young women for shaking up the boat.

It's corrupt and needs to be changed and I love them for staying true to their beliefs and not getting immediately co-opted like so many newcomers do.

Good job, ladies, I am very proud of you!

[Equinox Moon]

16. Fantastic!

[Tom Rinaldo]

17. We need more of this. And i think we're going to get it! n/t

[kairos12]

18. Corporate lobbyists are crapping their linen

pants.

[EffieBlack]

19. I'd prefer the headline not read ""AOC and others ..."

I know that she's the "name" right now - but the main reason she's the name is that she keeps getting named while the others who are doing much of the same things that she's doing are treated as "others."

That's not only bad for them, it's also not good for her since it puts her in danger of appearing to be showboating, through no fault of her own.

[Tom Rinaldo]

23. This headline was actually better than most in that regard, but I generally agree.

I don't blame AOC. She not only is doing what virtually all politicians do to increase their leverage (maximize their public footprint) and she is using her celebrity to shine light on issues of income inequality and corporate dominance that otherwise receive too little media attention.

We line in a celebrity oriented media environment and culture. That worked to our advantage when it boosted the public standing of Barack Obama before he ran for president - because he is such a force for good in our nation. It worked to our disadvantage when it boosted the public standing of Donald Trump before he ran for president - because he is such a force for evil in our nation.

AOC became a celebrity because she 1) is the youngest female ever elected to Congress and 2) she unexpectedly defeated a very powerful Democratic incumbent in a primary and 3) acts like a breath of fresh air compared to most politics as usual (she is not alone in this regard among the freshman class of new Democratic Representatives.)

There are others who are very well equipped to share this new spotlight with her. I'm seeing some indication (this latest statement among them) that AOC is making some moves to share her new stage with others. That is a good move that will help make them all more powerful

[EffieBlack]

26. I agree

She should - and it looks like she's trying to - take a cue from bother Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. They both went into the Senate as celebrities but went out of their way never appear to be grandstanding. Hillary particularly made a point of never doing a solo press conference - the only time she appeared in front of a mic, she was flanking several of her colleagues and always took her turn as a junior senator. Obama repeatedly reminded people that he was a junior senator 99th in seniority and he was learning his way.

And neither of them took up any major initiative alone in the beginning. They did everything as part of a coalition with other senators. They kept their heads down, worked really hard and strived to prove themselves as team players. Then when they were ready to step out, they had earned the goodwill and respect of a broad range of their colleagues on bother sides of the aisle.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

41. Doesn't look like she's keeping her head down, and I don't think she should.

She has been making waves from the get go. And good on her. We need more voices like this.

[Canoe52]

73. +1000 this is not the time in our history to be quiet and keep ones head down!

[EffieBlack]

75. She needs to find a balance

She was elected to represent her constituents, to get work done - which usually is hard, unsexy, unglamorous work. A Member who forgets that, who focuses more time and attention to "making waves" and being a prominent national "voice" than on getting things done at home becomes a former Member pretty quickly.

I hope that while she's raising her national profile, she's also getting her ducks in a row, hiring a strong staff with solid constituent services and legislative experience and a commitment to focus on those things rather than staffing a potential star, and is willing to learn from them and more seasoned Members how to be an effective representative for her district.

And it's really important that she not let the cheers of her excited fans from around the country drown out the voices of the people in her community who need a Congresswoman, not a rising superstar.

If she finds the right balance, the sky's the limit for her.

[Tom Rinaldo]

107. Members of the House have a unique role

They are elected both to represent the local concerns of their constituents AND to effect national policy, since national policies effect each and every one of us no matter where we live. The same in a sense could be said of Senators, but not so much in populous states anyway. So you are obviously correct that AOC, like all House members, needs to deliver for her own constituents on matters that matter locally. But she was also sent to Congress to help change the course of Congress itself as a member of our national government. That's why national issues factor into local campaigns for Congress, more so than in races for State bodies of government.

I know you know this Effie and that I'm not saying anything that you don't understand extremely well. This just seemed like an appropriate place to make this point on this thread.

[EffieBlack]

120. We agree

She needs to balance the two roles.

[hueymahl]

112. "She needs to find a balance"

Sounds to my ears an awful lot like "she needs to know her place"

I am proud of her for speaking out at injustice and corruption where she finds it. I hope she keeps it up.

[womanofthehills]

116. I am also proud of her for speaking out - she is definitely a social media person

She is very comfortable with Twitter, media, etc.

[EffieBlack]

118. If I had meant "she needs to know her place," I would have said that

I meant exactly what I said. She needs to find a balance. If you don't know the difference between finding a balance and staying in one's place, that's on you.

[hueymahl]

119. I know the difference

And I bet you do too. I'm sure your words were picked very carefully.

I just find it curious that so many Democrats keep finding reasons to attack her.

[EffieBlack]

123. Surely you're not including me in the category of people you think are "attacking" her

since I've done nothing of the kind.

[hueymahl]

124. Maybe attack is too strong a word

But you have certainly found fault with her repeatedly, at least on this thread.

I'm just a big fan, and I do not understand why others continue to find fault. Her speaking up about this event, about unpaid interns, about all the other issues she has raised, are good things. The last thing she needs to do is "find balance".

[EffieBlack]

126. Where did I find fault with her?

And if you may not think a Member of Congress needs to balance her role as a national figure with her constituent services duties. But when a constituent needs their Social Security check or to get a passport application expedited so they can visit their dying son overseas or to figure out who to talk to get their father's VA benefits untangled but can't get any help from their Member's office because everyone is too busy getting ready for a big press conference about a national issue, the Member learns the hard way about why balance matters.

This has happened many times in the past to all manner of rising stars and it never ends well - and all the love and devotion from excited, inspired supporters around country doesn't do a thing to pull their butts out of the fire when their own constituents turn on them.

Pointing this out and urging her to avoid this by "striking a balance" is hardly a criticism or finding fault. Of course, I don't know her and doubt that she's reading my posts anyway, but I hope that people close to her are telling her exactly the same thing because it's excellent advice.

[hueymahl]

128. Ok. Whatever you say

[Progressive2020]

137. I Believe That AOC Started Out In Constituent Services

In Ted Kennedy's Office. I don't think she is going to neglect her constituents. I think you are right that she will need to balance her national fame with bread and butter legislative work, but I see no reason why she won't be able to do that.

[True Blue American]

151. Balance!

[flibbitygiblets]

30. Generally agree. Some of the other freshwomen should take turns being the leader

AOC is being singled out and I suspect that some of it is because she's "easy on the eyes". It's somewhat human nature to favor attractiveness. The solution is a strategic plan to have others like her take the lead at different times, and/or for her to say, "here's another person who also has something to say!" and flip the focus to whoever else is there.

[oberliner]

160. What would have been your headline?

[Hortensis]

20. Perspective: 6 (?) out of 100 new members. The rest are inside

taking notes. Of those, 66 are Democrats and 44 are Republicans.

Now, for further perspective, note which of those two groups is being lavishly covered by some media as if they were the other 94 and had 94 votes in congress -- instead of 6.

I'm not saying this doesn't matter, just to try to evaluate it as part of the whole picture, whatever that is.

And while appreciating this media coverage, remember this faction is not the only one playing this game. Maybe spare a thought for the other, much larger groups behind and intending to benefit from it. This little group is in the big leagues now.

[BeyondGeography]

21. Six is five more than one

[Hortensis]

25. Yes, but either McConnell or Putin could easily

punt the lot of them without breaking stride, and the Republican leadership and Russia are temporarily playing on the same team with the goal of destroying our democracy -- and with it progressive government. I'm pretty sure these newbies don't realize what they're up against, or the stakes.

As for Obama, you do realize he arrived ready to explain the workings to everyone else, right? In a totally different class.

Amended "they" to "the Republican leadership and Russia" to make meaning clear for Melman.

[BeyondGeography]

28. On the contrary, they're speaking up because they know very well what they're up against

Six people speaking the truth just might have a much bigger impact than dozens of note takers. And be careful with the "newbie" label. Rashida Tlaib, eg, is 42 years old and spent 10 years in the MI state legislature. She's about as much of a lightweight as Barack Obama was in 2006.

[Hortensis]

37. 2016, Beyond. If that reminder doesn't scare you,

CNN: Stunning MICHIGAN state power grabs expose a GOP uneasy with democracy itself

NYT: Michigan GOP Starts Limiting Power of Incoming Democratic Leaders

NBC: First Wisconsin did it. Now Republicans in Michigan move to strip Democrats' power. Bblatant power grab that would fly in the face of voters.

Huff: Michigan Republicans Rush To Weaken Unions In Lame-Duck Session

Reuters: Michigan Republicans following Wisconsin's lead in curbing Democrats' power

The Atlantic: Republicans in Wisconsin and Michigan Aim to Hobble Incoming Democrats
The GOP’s lame-duck strategy foreshadows a coming political war between urban and rural America.

CNN: Wisconsin and Michigan Republicans try to undermine Democratic election wins: Republicans in Wisconsin and Michigan were wiped out of their states' top offices in November. But before Democrats can take their place next year, GOP lawmakers in both states are moving to strip the incoming leaders of key powers.

There are dozens of other articles, Beyond. This is what Rashida left behind in Michigan. I'm not blaming her for not being able to stop it, of course. But this movement to destroy our democracy includes a very large part of the right, wannabe kleptocrats, and hostile foreign nations at war with us. The only way we will stop it is by uniting against the right-wing authoritarianism rising around the planet.

If you want to someday be very afraid of what you so freely posted on social media, support those who so foolishly believe our big problems are mainstream liberals and capitalism itself as an economic system. Stupidity killed the cat, not curiosity.

[watoos]

46. Ever watch Dylan Ratigan, 4 PM on msnbc?

He explained quite well, in simple terms for me to understand, that what we have in America isn't capitalism, it is crony capitalism. Ratigan was so passionate, I tried not to miss his show. Sadly the right wing corporate controlled msnbc fired him. We couldn't have people learning the truth about who the real welfare queens are.

[Hortensis]

54. Yes, well, WHEN and IF we gain majorities in DC

in 2020, we will be able to put the leash back on capitalism. The one our grandparents were smart enough to put on and Reagan-era voters, and Republicans since, so foolishly took off. Older Americans will remember the mantra of "we have to get off the backs of business" all too well. Stupid and gullible voters were chanting it for over a decade.

Capitalism is a great economic engine, but we always install controls on machine engines. What we have is increasingly uncontrolled capitalism, and the "crony" is part of that.

Btw, the things we're learning these days: Turns out corruption in government isn't a little crumbling here and there around a corrupt politician, it is actually the systematic installation of corruption into government systems. Which is exactly what the Republicans have been doing ever since the national mood shifted conservative beginning around 1978.

We all need a sign over our desks: "It's the Republicans, Stupid."

[True Blue American]

152. I loved Dylan!

Wish he would come back. Yes,the right wing PTB, tried to control him.

One of the best shows ever on MSNBC, outside of Phil Donahue. They silenced him, but I saw him not too long ago showing he was right about the lie of the war.

I remember Phil and his first local talk show. Madeline Murray O’ Hair. and Bourbon Street Pastor, Bob Harrington i Dayton.

https://m.

[KPN]

64. I'm having a hard time understanding your point? You seem to be saying these rookies would be

better off sticking to the "go along to get along" standard that brought us to where we are today. It seems to me that they are providing a great service by day-lighting stuff that practically all other federal legislators have stayed mum on over the years. Where has that got us? What is it they call doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?

[Hortensis]

80. No, I want them to continue speaking up, exciting

a realization that we (Democrats) can fix our problems. They can be incredibly valuable if they can do that.

But the right-wing media machine of course will try to create the perception of division between any group that stands out and the rest of the party. You know, honest reformers versus corrupt Democrats? The usual. Once these lies cover America a foot deep, they can't be undone. People who don't pay much attention believe whatever gets through first.

The Republican goal is to persuade those who might vote for Democratic candidates on Tuesday, November 3, 2020, to either stay home or vote Republican. Ours is to inspire the electorate to come out in large numbers confident that in Democratic candidates they have good choices.

[KPN]

97. Thanks for the clarification. Good to know as I respect your insight.

[Hortensis]

101. :) Same right back. Here's a reminder for anyone

around of why we need the Democratic Party to be successful. This statement is carefully nonpartisan but, like healthcare reform, this is strictly a Democratic Party commitment and the Republicans will fight almost all the bills in this package tooth and nail.

CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS STATEMENT: House’s Democracy Reform Package Offers Once-in-a-Generation Opportunity to Curb Culture of Corruption

Today, U.S. House of Representatives leadership and newly elected members of Congress announced the framework for the democracy reform bill that will become H.R. 1 in the new Congress.

The historic legislative package contains bold solutions to reduce big money and dark money in politics; impose stronger ethics restrictions on public officials; and strengthen voting rights to empower American voters.

The Center for American Progress has long advocated for anti-corruption policies and has been a leading member of the Declaration for American Democracy, a diverse coalition of more than 100 organizations representing millions of Americans, that is demanding strong, clear solutions to make our democracy more representative of everyday Americans.

Following the announcement of the bill, Michael Sozan, senior fellow at CAP, released the following statement:

Voters sent an unmistakable message in the November midterm elections: The culture of corruption in Washington is out of control and must be fixed. Congress now has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to unrig the system with this comprehensive legislative package. The legislation’s bold solutions represent a giant step forward toward returning power to people, so that the government and the economy work for everybody, not just millionaires and corporations.

As Congress debates this legislation, members must be willing to take bold steps to block the avenues for corruption that rot our government and prevent progress for people, such as the huge hauls of money raised by lobbyists that give corporations improper power over policymaking. Banning lobbyists from fundraising for politicians would help change corrupting incentives and clearly show the American people that their elected representatives work for them.

Those 3 main foci include various bills each. Although reversing Citizens United will take constitutional amendment, we will be able to undermine its power in various ways, including increasing publicly funded elections at both the state and federal levels.

Only 4 of about the 88 or so members of the Democratic Progressive Caucus -- all believers in getting money out of politics -- were able to refuse big donor money in 2016 because most represent lower-income districts that don't donate enough to elect anyone. We can fix that.

Public funding will above all help create clear choices in voters' minds, making it very questionable not to be publicly funded. We also plan to require disclosure of "dark" money donations, who and how much. And, of course, we're going to close the hole the Republicans wrote making it legal for their PACs to take money from foreign powers.

Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

[LisaM]

103. Yes, and they're implying that there are existing members who don't want the same things they do.

Plenty of Democrats have been working to address climate change, dirty money in politics, and so on (including the member AOC ousted, who recently added a climate change rider to a spending bill, IIRC). I am trying to like her, but she's not forthcoming on what other people have been doing, she acts as if she invented everything.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

106. "I know you've heard this a million times before, but..." probably isn't the best way

to start something.

She is getting things into the discourse of our country. Why is that bad? She certainly hasn't said that she is the only or first one to be doing this. She said Pelosi was an ally of environmental issues.

[LisaM]

110. Why should I have to be schooled on Pelosi by someone in her 20s?

I know full well what Nancy Pelosi's record is. I just think AOC is really full of herself, and I'm not sure why she primaried a liberal who, by the way, was strong on climate change.

We'll see how it all plays out, of course.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

125. You said she needs to recognize those who have done what she is doing. I showed she did.

Now you think she is "schooling you"? That makes no sense.

So you are giving up on the original premise of yours that she is acting like she is the first to do this?

[Hortensis]

109. To be fair, our party still includes some conservatives

who didn't leave for the Republican Party in the great sorting out. They are exactly the sort of group Republican perception-twisters use to convince people Democrats are all like that. As you say, we're not them. But the party's attempts to keep them and the people they elect, because those only vote with the Republican caucuses HALF the time instead of letting them be replaced by Republicans, muddies the picture for people who vote for labels and catchphrases.

Our representatives' job, as always, is to get the truth out to their constituencies. I'm very hopeful these guys will be able to do that by getting people who've been agit-propped away in the past to listen to them.

[True Blue American]

153. You are absolutely Correct! We do not have to shut up because the RW Media

Thinks so! Theygave us the criminal in the WH. It is time for them to shut up!

[watoos]

29. I'm pretty sure these newly elected people

understand what they are up against, that's why they complained. I think we should be worried about the larger group who don't understand they are being fed right wing propaganda.

[EffieBlack]

89. Because these new people are savvy but the others are clueless idiots?

This attitude is one of the reasons young mavericks often crash and burn and usually don't accomplish a smidgen of what they promise. Assuming they know all, those who came before them are either stupid or corrupt, and that they're going to teach everyone how to do it is a recipe for failure.

[hueymahl]

113. Nice straw-man (straw-woman?) there

Its not that she is particularly savvy (she is) and the others are "clueless idiots" (they are not, at least I don't think they are). It's she and her colleagues are not willing to play a fixed game, and are willing to risk not being "liked and approved of" to speak the truth (or to be fair, what their perception of the truth is).

[EffieBlack]

127. I guess the words "the larger group who don't understand they are being fed right wing propaganda"

made me think you were saying that, unlike Ocasio-Cortes, her colleagues didn't understand they were being fed right wing propaganda. You know, like they were clueless or not as savvy as she is because they didn't understand they were being fed propaganda, but she did.

Thanks for clarifying.

[melman]

42. WTF

You are clearly trying to insinuate these House members are Manchurian candidates controlled by Putin. It's fucking outrageous.

[Hortensis]

48. "They" are the Republican leadership and Russia.

My belief is that, if they're not very careful, these people are likely to be used to defeat their own goals by more far larger and more clever players. It's happened before, not just in the U.S. in this century but in many nations over many centuries.

It's probably covered in the introduction to How to Destroy Democracies and Become a Dictator for Dummies.

[melman]

53. Bullshit

In post #20 you said:

And while appreciating this media coverage, remember this faction is not the only one playing this game. Maybe spare a thought for the "other, much larger groups behind and intending to benefit from it. This little group is in the big leagues now."


and in post #25 you said:

25. "Yes, but either McConnell or Putin could easily

punt the lot of them without breaking stride, and they're temporarily playing on the same team with the goal of destroying our democracy -- and with it progressive government. I'm pretty sure these newbies don't realize what they're up against, or the stakes. "


And even in this post you say "these people are likely to be used to defeat their own goals by more far larger and more clever players"

Your meaning is clear.

[Hortensis]

62. We're all on the same team, Melman.

But I amended the post so you can hopefully understand that better.

Enemies: Republican leadership. Russia. Bad!

Us: Us. Good.

[melman]

74. I understood perfectly well

Because your meaning was clear.

[Hortensis]

93. "Can it Happen Here? I'm not the enemy, Melman.

Note that the 50 years of constitutional decay Balkin speaks of and the 40 years Moyers refers to both cover the period since America's electorate brought an end to the New Deal era by shifting right, signaled by the election of Reagan in 1980.

We're in much bigger danger than most realize. The midterms were a very good sign that America doesn't want it, but we're still in serious trouble. The right intends to win.

Forbes: Technological Revolutions Bring About Fascism. Who Will Save Us This Time?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicolascolin/2018/10/19/technological-revolutions-bring-about-fascism-who-will-save-us-this-time/#2d841aa734dc

Trumping the Constitution
https://balkin.blogspot.com/2017/06/trumping-constitution.html

Fascism revisited? A warning about the rise of populism
Today’s angry political climate compels us to re-examine the meaning of democracy
https://www.ft.com/content/6d57a338-3be9-11e8-bcc8-cebcb81f1f90

Who Says It Can’t Happen Here?: We have endured 40 years of creeping authoritarianism and it now appears that it may run right over democracy. We must resist and act in solidarity.

[treestar]

72. the complainer is the squeaky wheel who always

gets the attention. I guess it is human nature. But it sure is tiresome.

[hueymahl]

114. I'm tired of people not complaining about injustice

Bring on MORE complaining. MORE squeaky wheels!

[treestar]

132. This isn't a particularly grand injustice

But merely the quality of the orientation. Nothing stops her from introducing any legislation even if the orientation speakers are all wing nuts

[disillusioned73]

90. So, the question should be..

where are the other 60 Democrats on this issue ( I already know the answer from the R's).. or do they think they were elected by corporations and not the people??

This "little group" as you like to refer to them, is blazing the path forward..

& David Cohen doesn't get to set the agenda anymore..

Link to tweet

[bottomofthehill]

169. The Discussion was called "A Discussion with Business Leaders"

I would think there would be business leaders that were speaking

[disillusioned73]

179. You might be ok with David Cohen

and his ilk setting the new congress' agenda - I'm not.

[bottomofthehill]

180. See post 140, a list of some but not all speakers

There was a 1 hour panel discussion with 3 CEO's. They are not setting the agenda but exposing them to the business perspective...This was a 4 day 3 Night program with a lot of different points of view. Many of them I would not agree with, but there is nothing wrong with exposure to issues. These are big girls and boys.

[seaglass]

22. Malala spoke.

Link to tweet

[PoliticAverse]

24. Nice of the former head of Goldman Sachs to clue them in on who really runs things...

Link to tweet

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1070739212213862401

[flibbitygiblets]

32. Way to shine a spotlight on where corruption starts! Way to ACTUALLY drain a fucking swamp, ladies!

[JudyM]

39. Love this. We are building a wall.

[still_one]

31. Sorry, but this is bullshit. If they really wanted to make an impact, they should attend the

orientation, and either during that orientation or after the orientation, voice their disagreements and arguments.


Representative Cortez is notorous for making off the cuff assumptions without even observing the process. She did this against her opponent Crowley after the election, jumping to wrong assumptions without getting the facts, and she seems to do this on almost everything.

When someone starts a new job, the first thing to do is observe. Then you do what you need to do to make things better.

No doubt I will get slammed for this comment, but the fact is that someone is not even willing to attend an orientation because they do NOT approve of those giving it, does not signify someone willing to listen

[flibbitygiblets]

34. I think after the 4th CEO came in to tell me how to do my job, I'd tell others too, and then leave

and do something useful. Right from the start. Corporate-sponsored congress orientation? Call that out publicly! Thank you ladies, you are doing what we voted you in to do!!

[still_one]

35. I got the impression that they didn't even attend the orientation? Is that correct?

[Autumn]

43. "Lobbyists are here. Goldman Sachs is here." From the use of the words "is here" and "are here"

I get the impression that AOC was "there". At least for a while. If they walked out more power to them.

[still_one]

47. OK, but I would like to know if they at least attended the event initially. I can understand them

walking out of the orientation after listening to some of the speakers, and then protesting it, but it is not clear to me if that is what happened or not

[Autumn]

51. Sounds like they attended some and left other events.

The Bronx native documented some of the week's events on Instagram, including the Tuesday night demonstration, which she and a handful of other lawmakers attended in lieu of an event featuring US Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, who is also Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's wife.

"Opening remarks is from Trump admin, so we're holding a presser on healthcare & gun violence instead, with @AyannaPressley leading the charge," she wrote in an Instagram story.

Love that they skipped out on the Elaine Chao event, and used their time better than listening to remarks by the Trump admin. No one needs that shit.

And then there's this

The Center for Popular Democracy, a progressive advocacy group, held something of an alternative orientation in Boston this week and joined with other activists to protest Harvard's program.

[still_one]

69. Then I am cool with that. My disdain toward Elaine Chao go back to the bush administration where

she was such an arrogant ass, with no compassion or empathy for those out of work.

I would have walked out of an Elaine Chao presentation also

[crazycatlady]

122. Look who she's married to

He's even worse

[still_one]

129. ++++++++++++++++++++++++

[seaglass]

50. I do not believe my Rep Lori Trahan would refuse to attend and not listen. Anything I've heard

from her has been positive. She was interviewed by NECN and her take was that this was a rally for health care etc., not a whine session about freshman orientation.

Honestly I do not know her well. We had 10 Dems run in our Rep. race (Niki Tsongas retired) and Lori won with 20% of the vote. I did not vote for her in the primary. She is fairly low key and most of the pics I have seen of her are with other women reps, not the AOC crew.

[still_one]

57. That is fine, I just was curious if they had at least initially attended the orientation, or did

they just assume certain things.

[Mariana]

104. You could have read the article, instead of assuming certain things. nt.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

44. Why should she listen to Goldman Sachs spout their bullshit?

Why should she sit through just to see if GS is going to fight for democracy.

Fuck that. We know what they are going to say. I love that Cortez is calling bullshit on bullshit. We need more of that, frankly.

[still_one]

49. You are going to go real far only listening to people you agree with.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

55. So what do you think Goldman Sachs was going to tell them that was worthwhile?

Do you agree that lobbyists should even be there at the orientation?

I don't. It's not that she said she wasn't going to listen to Republican leadership people about how Congress runs. She said she didn't want to listen to corporate voices when there were no activists or other voices from the "other side" present.

[still_one]

65. Don't throw nonesense at me implying that I agree that lobbyists should be at the orientation, I

Last edited Fri Dec 7, 2018, 07:23 PM - Edit history (1)

never said anything of the sort, but to make it clear, lobbyists have no business conducting the orientation

If corporations are your enemy, then it would serve your purposes to hear what they say at that orientation, so you would be effective in working toward changing that.


I still haven't got an answer if at least they attended the orenttation initially before walking out, or they didn't attend it at all. It isn't clear

[Loki Liesmith]

87. Goldman Sachs has a shit ton of financial expertise

They have got some smart people working there. You may not like their industry but they do know it well.

Of course there should be a better balance of speakers though.

[still_one]

130. If you are fighting for a specific Agenda, it helps to know what you are dealing with

to make effective arguments

[PoliticAverse]

147. They certainly know how to cheat people...

From 2016:
Goldman Sachs to pay record $5 billion penalty over sale of mortgage bonds
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/goldman-sachs-to-pay-record-5-billion-penalty-over-sale-of-mortgage-bonds-2016-01-15

[ProfessorPlum]

59. I am slamming you for this comment

Being polite and silent isn't going to un-corrupt our system. Noisy, uncorrupted politicians will get the ball rolling, though!

[still_one]

77. I NEVER said one should be polite and silent. All I said is it would serve their interests to at

least attend the orientation, and either voice disagreement during the orientation with what the speakers said, or walk out in protest, but at least initially attended


Also, if what you are doing is slamming me, I guess you definitely do NOT have an anger control issue, because your comment sure ISN'T a slam. Just a possible disagreement

[ProfessorPlum]

102. you said you were sure you were going to get slammed

i agree with your comments - but I think these reps are smart enough not to act like rowdy class clowns.

[Marrah_Goodman]

63. I want her to continue to speak out.

To continue to shine a light on the bullshit we all know goes on in DC.

She is a strong, smart outspoken young woman and I hope she never sits down and shuts up like a "good girl".

I like her more every week.

[KPN]

83. I'm trying to understand your rationale for saying this is BS. It seems to be nothing more than

this isn't the way things are or should be done ... without any real analytical argument for why. Why would "voicing their disagreements" during the orientation (which is an assumption by the way) have a greater impact as you imply?

Personally, I'd rather see them making statements like this out in the open, to the press. It's expository and will get far more attention than voicing their concerns within the orientation setting where there is no press, i.e., no pressure.

[Devil Child]

146. +1 n/t

[Snackshack]

36. Goldman Sach

...and special interests are at new rep orientation?

Why?

[ProfessorPlum]

58. giving their marching orders to their servants, of course

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

38. The network evening news often includes a regular business report, but

never a regular labor report. Newspapers have a business section, never a labor section. For far too long the emphasis has been on what best serves the elite, and it's long past time that changed.

[aggiesal]

94. The newspapers have the Jobs Section ...

that a labor section.

But I get what you're saying.
Labor needs to step up as well, if their voice is not heard.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

96. Jobs section as in Help Wanted?

That's hardly news about labor and working people.

[jmowreader]

143. Okay, I'm game...

What would you like to see in a newspaper labor section?

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

148. Information about wages, about job training, about jobs that are available,

about companies moving jobs to other countries.

I'd like to see who in Congress is advocating for a higher minimum wage, for parental leave, for decent health care. I'd like to see stories about people who work for a living, what their day to day life is like, how they manage child care, or caring for their parents.

I'm sure I'm not thinking of a lot, but this is a start.

[jrthin]

52. Good for them! nt

[ellie]

56. This is excellent

Keep calling them out!

[dchill]

60. Good.

At the least, we will learn about this sordid activity.

[ConnorMarc]

61. This is good news...

Very, very, VERY good news!

[Hotler]

66. "I was not sent to Washington to play nice."

Last edited Fri Dec 7, 2018, 02:21 PM - Edit history (1)

I've been waiting a long time to hear words like that from a democratic politician. Hopefully this kind of spirit will catch on up on the hill. Go team. Take no shit from the repugs.

[Caliman73]

92. That is a good statement from AOC.

It doesn't necessarily mean that she won't work with others, but it clearly means that she is not going to sacrifice her policies and principles just to get along.

[Grins]

68. "cosponsored by the American Enterprise Institute..."?

The American Enterprise Institute? A Reich-wing propaganda factory for the world's worst ideas?

How the hell, Harvard...?

[KPN]

70. Good news for modern man! This is exactly what AOC was elected to do. Kudos to her and

these other Democratic freshmen for being principled. It's time to drop the BS Lee Iacocca motto "Principles will kill you". That old saw is goal dependent, and usually if not always tied to self-serving goals.

[EffieBlack]

81. Is that why she was elected?

Or is that what lots of her fans outside of her district expect of her?

She was elected, first and foremost, to represent her constituents

[KPN]

100. As far as I can tell, yes. She has been consistent in her messaging, including in

her campaign messaging in the primary and the general. Just because there are lots of folks outside of her congressional district who are fans does not mean she isn't representing her constituency.

Why do you seem to dislike her so much? Let me edit that. I'm not sure you dislike her so much as doubt her (I don't know -- ability, commitment to doing the work of legislating as opposed to being in the media). Two different things.

[JCanete]

105. Yes, but this is the kind of thing she ran on. Giving power back to the people. Fighting

against powerful special interests...so, yeah?

[treestar]

71. Why are they getting orientation at all, this is not a school

and the stuff like where the cafeteria is they can figure out. Good grief.

That said, she is one of 435, if she thinks not "playing nice" is going to get her anything, she will learn that it is not so.

[jalan48]

76. Goldman Sachs again, just trying to help make government work better? AOC is never going

to get one of those six figure speaking gigs from GS when she gets out of office at the rate she is going.

[aggiesal]

95. You forgot the sarcasm thingee ...

Here's one you can use

[jalan48]

98. Thanks. I forgot it again!

[MyNameGoesHere]

79. LOOK AT ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bottomofthehill]

82. This is not an attendance mandatory program. I think the Members-Elect actually pay to attend

After paying, if you dont feel like attending, go for it.

[hueymahl]

115. No thanks. I would rather look at AOC and her group of six.

[MyNameGoesHere]

121. No! LOOK AT ME!!!!!!!!!!

[whathehell]

84. Good going!

I'm liking this woman more all the time!

[disillusioned73]

88. As they should..

[link:https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211519737|

[ooky]

108. Sounds like "Play the game our way and give up your backbone" orientation.

Republican views orientation my ass! Glad to see our new members rejecting their crap.

Really liking what I'm seeing from AOC and our other new members of Congress. Its about doing the work of the people instead of accepting old paradigms. I have a lot of hope with these new members.

[NNadir]

111. I like her style at shaking things up. It's Mr. Smith...

Last edited Fri Dec 7, 2018, 03:15 PM - Edit history (1)

...goed to Washington. A real human being enters the halls of Congress.

[hueymahl]

117. Great Analogy!

Don't understand at all why people are put out that she is doing that or throwing shade here way in general.

[pdsimdars]

131. God I love her.

Cenk pointed out that they tell them that they need to spend 4-6 hours a day fundraising. And 1 hour on their constituents. (something like that).
This is what it means where the rubber hits the road when you talk about corporate funded politicians. Justice Democrats are the only ones who will fight for us and not spend all day on the phone with lobbyists. That's what it sounds like to me.

[betsuni]

133. It's bipartisan. Of course the Republicans ruin everything.

[tammywammy]

134. I agree they should add in a labor portion.

Overall this does seem like it balances speakers in the groups.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/12/harvard-orientation-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-rashida-tlaib.html

I hope she returned from her protest to listen to Malala Yousafzai.

[sl8]

136. It looks like she did.

From https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/12/7/malala-accepts-gleitsman-award/

Malala Yousafzai Accepts Award from Harvard Kennedy School, Urges Students to Embrace Activism

By Jonah S. Berger, Sydnie M. Cobb, and Amanda Y. Su, Crimson Staff Writers

...

New York Representative-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — in attendance with other participants in the Bipartisan Program — asked Yousafzai what role men play in the “liberation” of women.

“A very large amount of successful women, whether they’re female CEOs of Fortune 500s, or female heads of state, one of the most … common things that they talk about is that they all report a strong relationship with their fathers,” Ocasio-Cortez noted.

Yousafzai cited her own father’s evolution growing up in an environment in which women had almost no rights to becoming a wholehearted supporter of his daughter’s work.

“He knew that it was unfair,” she said. “He knew that he had to change, so he challenged himself first and said, ‘I’m not going to treat my daughter this way. I’m going to send her to school. I’m going to let her speak out.’”

...

More at link.

[Progressive2020]

138. God Bless AOC, Pressley, and The New Progressive Members Of Congress.

We need a 100 more like them. They were not sent to Congress to protect Goldman Sachs and a bunch of Lobbyists. They were sent to Congress to fight for the Working Class People who voted for them. More Power To Them!

[R B Garr]

141. God bless Adam Schiff and Ted Lieu, two brilliant fighters

who are handling reality. No need to insinuate that other Democrats don’t measure up.

[Devil Child]

144. I read no such insinuation in the post you replied to

Your finger waving seems misplaced in this case. If finger waving is needed I'd direct it towards your post which throws shade on Rep. Cortez and Rep. Pressley as incapable of "handling reality."

[R B Garr]

157. You don't have to read an "insinuation", since the meaning

is spelled right out in the post. What a disgusting message about other Democrats,

[Progressive2020]

172. Strange

There was zero insinuation in the original post. I think that you are paranoid and seeing things that are not there. Why are you so threatened by Progressive Democrats? The success of AOC, Pressley and others takes nothing away from other good Dems such as Schiff and Lieu. Why so sensitive?

[R B Garr]

173. I just said there was no insinuation. LOL

Exactly. The words were derogatory towards other Democrats, and for no legitimate reasons.

I’m in very progressive California, so you’re wrong again about “progressives”. Populists and ex-Republicans aren’t necessarily “progressive”. You should be more concerned about why California rejected those groups the last two election cycles.

[Progressive2020]

171. Not Insinuating That

Ted Lieu and Adam Schiff are great.

[R B Garr]

174. Maxine Waters is also great. There are so many GREAT Democrats.

No need to run other hard working Democrats down because of one election a month ago.

[Progressive2020]

178. Who Is Running Other Democrats Down?

Not me. It is a Straw Man argument. Have a good day.

[Devil Child]

145. I'm loving our new freshman representatives! Some real fighters in this group

[Hortensis]

155. Yes, looks like we got an especially good crop this year. :)

Every 2 years congress gets an infusion of new blood from around the nation. These midterm elections more than most, though, and they show there's more than one way of giving things a healthy little shake-up and wake-up.

Link to tweet

Debbie's our first Ecuadorian American in congress.

Link to tweet

[True Blue American]

156. And the right wing

Media are not going to like this at all.

Watch them drop the Trump attacks and go after the Democratic House. They have been attacking Pelosi for years.

I am pleased that Nancy is putting young blood in her Leadership to train.

[Hortensis]

158. :) Oh,and they will! The house just became what

they will insist is their and America's biggest enemy, instead of the loyal opposition. Sigh.

Pelosi actually put experienced progressive blood in the leadership itself, newbies years from ready, but notably including Barbara Lee, for whom she created a new leadership position after Lee lost the one she ran for to another (progressive) candidate, rising star Hakeem Jeffries, who was younger and male and played an important role in our blue wave.

Our top leaders' duties have always included identifying and developing new incoming talent, and an important function of Barbara's new position will be specifically to bring along new and/or younger members. Most in this class already know her from all the time she spent traveling the country helping them get elected.


https://www.vox.com/2018/12/5/18124378/barbara-lee-democratic-leadership-nancy-pelosi

[True Blue American]

161. Of course

But the Leadership is the best quality.

https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/new-democratic-elected-leadership-team-is-more-progressive-and-diverse

Republican Leadership, McCarthy and Scalise! I will never forgive Scalise for coming on the House Floor, bragging how God saved him after having the best health care in the world. Then a few weeks later he celebrated in front of the WH taking health care away from millions.

[link:https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/republicans-laugh-health-care-us_us_590ba129e4b0e7021e9620db|

[Hortensis]

164. Scalise's actions pretty much epitomized what they're doing,

all right. They took a blow in November, but they have every intention of taking power in 2020. If they do, and with the help of SCOTUS, they'll finish off not just national healthcare, the gutting of Medicare and dismantling everything they can, but they'll make rebuilding them unconstitutional. And as we see, they'll also turn this into a sham democracy with Georgia-style elections minus the noise.

They've become extremists, but national backlash after the fact could still mean at least several years before it set in enough to get them out of congress and the most extreme obstructionists out of the courts; at least a decade of privation, living in boxes for many, dying without healthcare; and a generation rebuilding -- assuming that was even possible after continued transfer of national wealth to the 0.01%, further decay of infrastructure that serves us, including dismantling of public schools and selling off of federal lands, extreme expenses from climate change, and the projected shrinkage (instead of growth) of our national GDP from climate change.

We are the ones who have to make sure it can't come to that.

[True Blue American]

165. Great summation, Hortensis!

[R B Garr]

159. Adam Schiff and Ted Lieu are highly visible every day and

have been for years. Some real fighters there! Not just Instagram stories, but real work fighting the absolute evil in the White House.

[True Blue American]

162. Along with Swalwell

We have a whole group of new Leaders in the House and Senate.

Schumer had to be careful to try and save Senate Seats. That has now changed. Republican Senate seats are up in 2020. Schumer has come out fighting,exposing Mitch and his do nothing Senate.

I just remembered, Nixon was elected to a second term. Then it all blew up.

[R B Garr]

175. And Maxine Waters. So many hard working Democrats very

popular with their constituents. I would link many more, but I’m phone typing. Yes to Swalwell! Yes to many candidates who didn’t win in a heavy Republican districts, but still made a name for themselves, like the Nunes opponent, Beto, Abrams, Gillum—just so many great Democrats.

[True Blue American]

163. Yes!

[bluecollar2]

170. Good!

[samnsara]

176. im getting bored.....

[Hortensis]

177. Rep. Barbara Lee, our new 2nd ranking woman in top leadership,

and the one I was mentioning above, was just on MSNBC speaking for the Democratic Party about Trump, etc. I don't normally watch on weekends, so I don't know if this is unusual or not, but it's the first time I've seen her since she joined the leadership.