Cori Bush: I’m going to make sure I have private security but defunding the police needs to happen.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

You'd think this was a right wing straw argument but it's actualy something she said and the full context doesn't actually make it better
https://twitter.com/MikeKBerg/status/1423257378993147907?s=19


Full video
https://youtu.be/LGSglr5C7y0

[Bootes Void]

Police for me but not for thee

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I'm starting to get tempted to think Cori Bush is the worst House Democrat at this point.

[GP270watch]

 Stop threatening her life and she won't need private security!

 The police by the way are nobody's private security except for the richest and most connected Americans. In many marginalized communities they are an aggravating force to normal people and even potentially abusive and dangerous.

[Alben Barkley]

Stop threatening her life and she won't need private security!

 The police by the way are nobody's private security except for the richest and most connected Americans. In many marginalized communities they are an aggravating force to normal people and even potentially abusive and dangerous.

Yeah, that’s why polls consistently show people in marginalized communities want more, not less, policing and why Eric Adams dominated in the most marginalized areas in NYC.

Also, threats on your life specifically or not, it’s pretty damn privileged to be able to afford private security while stripping public security from those who can’t afford it. I would argue physical safety is just as fundamental a right as healthcare, so this line of thinking is just as disgusting as the people who can afford health insurance so they don’t care if it’s not available to others. But something tells me Cori Bush would think that’s totally different for some reason.

[GP270watch]

Stop threatening her life and she won't need private security!

 The police by the way are nobody's private security except for the richest and most connected Americans. In many marginalized communities they are an aggravating force to normal people and even potentially abusive and dangerous.

Yeah, that’s why polls consistently show people in marginalized communities want more, not less, policing and why Eric Adams dominated in the most marginalized areas in NYC.

Also, threats on your life specifically or not, it’s pretty damn privileged to be able to afford private security while stripping public security from those who can’t afford it. I would argue physical safety is just as fundamental a right as healthcare, so this line of thinking is just as disgusting as the people who can afford health insurance so they don’t care if it’s not available to others. But something tells me Cori Bush would think that’s totally different for some reason.

 She's been cast as a polarizing public figure and given the serious threats that politicians have faced on both the left and right the last few years the threats against her should be taken very seriously.

 People in marginalized community don't want more police, they want less crime and more infrastructure spending and how that is achieved varies in answers. The community in Ferguson didn't want more police. Black and Latino New Yorkers didn't want more stop and frisk. More research on these polls has shown that what Black people actually want is more infrastructure spending in their community, and the answer "more police" when actually broken down is really the only way for them to answer in a poll that didn't bother to even ask, that they want better police.

What Black People Really Think About the Police


 Eric Adams came from an activist background and joined the police to become a reformer after experiencing extreme police brutality as a teenager. So that argument is pretty silly.

[beaver2.0]

The way she expressed this is not good and I have criticisms of segments of the Defund the Police movement, but a nationally-known politician having security makes sense to me. 

Even if she does believe in a world where no one has guns and therefore no one can hurt her, she still lives in a world with guns and it makes sense that she would take precautions against injury or death.

[jamestroll]

impeach her now!!

[President Johnson]

Is she a Republican plant? Sometimes she makes me think that. Stop giving them free ammunition with nonsense that neither the president, the speaker nor the leader of her wing (Bernie) are supporting.

From what I'm observing, the American police needs some broad reforms to reduce unnecessary violence and resolve racial issues, but the right way forward is not cutting their budgets. Instead, reallocate their funds to certain training (deescalation, racial issues, community work etc.). However, that can only be done with the majority of cops who actually take their job serious to protect their communities.

[beaver2.0]

The way she expressed this is not good and I have criticisms of segments of the Defund the Police movement, but a nationally-known politician having security makes sense to me. 

Even if she does believe in a world where no one has guns and therefore no one can hurt her, she still lives in a world with guns and it makes sense that she would take precautions against injury or death.

True enough, but so do the rest of us.

Bush et al. have been telling the country that we need to focus on "root causes," but when it comes to their personal security they are not hiring psychologists and social workers. Actions speak louder than words.

It's certainly true that they face more specific threats than the average American, but their actual risk of coming to harm isn't that different from someone living in one of this country's most violent neighborhoods. The United States is a violent country. Security should not be the special privilege of politicians who can pay for it out of public coffers.

I agree with you that the hypocrisy aspect is very bad and I don't want to defend that.

[Helsinkian]

When a socialist suddenly turns into an anarcho-capitalist.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

The Squad needs Democrats to lose. 2020 was absolutely devastating to their long-term goals, but they're working hard on the rebound.

[Pyro]

Not the best segue or choice of words, but police and private security detail are not at all the same and it's disingenuous to try to twist the meaning of her words into something else. All government officials have some form of security, and especially with rising right-wing lunacy and an increased amount of death threats thrown around, she's right that she deserves to be safe.

Her proposals on reforming the police and reallocating some funds to social services do not, to my knowledge, include anything resembling abolition. Putting more money into social response units is effective in dealing with public disputes and mental health crises, and should be implemented nationwide. This doesn't mean opposing the presence of police to keep communities safe, but rather keeping them accountable and trained in de-escalation techniques to limit preventable issues.

Anyway I see how her wording left herself open to criticism, but there's no need to be intellectually dishonest.

[Horus]

Not the best segue or choice of words, but police and private security detail are not at all the same and it's disingenuous to try to twist the meaning of her words into something else. All government officials have some form of security, and especially with rising right-wing lunacy and an increased amount of death threats thrown around, she's right that she deserves to be safe.

Her proposals on reforming the police and reallocating some funds to social services do not, to my knowledge, include anything resembling abolition. Putting more money into social response units is effective in dealing with public disputes and mental health crises, and should be implemented nationwide. This doesn't mean opposing the presence of police to keep communities safe, but rather keeping them accountable and trained in de-escalation techniques to limit preventable issues.

Anyway I see how her wording left herself open to criticism, but there's no need to be intellectually dishonest.

This seems to be a pattern with the squad though, sans Bowman and Pressley. I probably agree with 95% of their proposals but their word choice is often intentionally inflammatory and divisive, the "activist" rhetoric so to speak.

[Geoffrey Howe]

Why do these people use "spending more on social services" as a reason to defund the police? Why not spend more on social services and maintain the police budgets? It's not like they seem particularly keen elsewhere on maintaining fiscal equilibrium.

[Indy Texas]

The idea that reducing spending on law enforcement will lead to better law enforcement services is something you would intuitively expect people on the Right to say.

And notice that when people on the Right talk about defunding public services, be it public education or public healthcare, they never use that kind of language because they know it will go over badly with voters.

It's crazy to say "Defund the police" for the same reason it would be crazy to say "Defund the schools" or "Defund the hospitals."

People like police, just like they like teachers and doctors and nurses.

[Suburbia]

Stop threatening her life and she won't need private security!

 The police by the way are nobody's private security except for the richest and most connected Americans. In many marginalized communities they are an aggravating force to normal people and even potentially abusive and dangerous.

This stuff is what Sean Patrick Maloney is scared about. It gives the GOP ammo to take back control of the House and Senate.

You can reallocate funds and promote de-escalation training.

But police should solve more crimes. You need a police force---or else---the 2nd Amendment is what is left. I hope the Left uses the 2A and stop pushing so much gun control.....

[Pyro]

Not the best segue or choice of words, but police and private security detail are not at all the same and it's disingenuous to try to twist the meaning of her words into something else. All government officials have some form of security, and especially with rising right-wing lunacy and an increased amount of death threats thrown around, she's right that she deserves to be safe.

Why is it that "right-wing lunatics" are treated as the sole exception to the idea that crime is best addressed in terms of root causes? What makes them any different from common criminals? Most of you who believe yourselves to be a part of something called "the left" seem to believe that the only people beyond rehabilitation are your political enemies.

AOC and Cori Bush face targeted threats for special reasons, but that doesn't make them special. Many will respond that police often are actively harmful when it comes to responding to stalking and domestic abuse, which is true in many cases. But if not them, then who? Not every woman can afford a security detail.

I don't think anyone believes we should ignore preventative measures to combat the rise in right-wing extremism. That's why "the left" is a major proponent of increased funding to education and making public colleges and universities tuition-free. Improving public education is probably the best preventative tool we have. Tackling racism and hate speech online, particularly when websites like Youtube and Facebook are pressured to remove content that incites violence, is another tool to get at the root. Yet death threats are death threats, and political terrorism, like all forms of violence, needs to be taken seriously.

[Real Texan Politics]

How about the millions or maybe even billions of dollars in donations that the BLM organization made go towards social services for the black community instead of Bel Air mansions?

[THG]

This lummox has given the GOP attack ads for free.

I’m here for it.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Pelosi needs to reign her in ASAP. She's turning into a messaging nightmare for the Democrats.

[Saint Milei]

Stop threatening her life and she won't need private security!

 The police by the way are nobody's private security except for the richest and most connected Americans. In many marginalized communities they are an aggravating force to normal people and even potentially abusive and dangerous.

Yeah, that’s why polls consistently show people in marginalized communities want more, not less, policing and why Eric Adams dominated in the most marginalized areas in NYC.

Also, threats on your life specifically or not, it’s pretty damn privileged to be able to afford private security while stripping public security from those who can’t afford it. I would argue physical safety is just as fundamental a right as healthcare, so this line of thinking is just as disgusting as the people who can afford health insurance so they don’t care if it’s not available to others. But something tells me Cori Bush would think that’s totally different for some reason.

 She's been cast as a polarizing public figure and given the serious threats that politicians have faced on both the left and right the last few years the threats against her should be taken very seriously.

 People in marginalized community don't want more police, they want less crime and more infrastructure spending and how that is achieved varies in answers. The community in Ferguson didn't want more police. Black and Latino New Yorkers didn't want more stop and frisk. More research on these polls has shown that what Black people actually want is more infrastructure spending in their community, and the answer "more police" when actually broken down is really the only way for them to answer in a poll that didn't bother to even ask, that they want better police.

What Black People Really Think About the Police


 Eric Adams came from an activist background and joined the police to become a reformer after experiencing extreme police brutality as a teenager. So that argument is pretty silly.

Typical white liberal take

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Pelosi should silence the entire squad: Strip them of their committee assignments, never let any bill by them get a vote regardless of its content, publicly reject their ideas and slogans regularly (i.e. Say: "We empathetically oppose defunding the police"), and sponsor more moderate primary challengers.

They are just ruining the electoral prospects of the democratic party.

[7,052,770]

Pelosi should silence the entire squad: Strip them of their committee assignments, never let any bill by them get a vote regardless of its content, publicly reject their ideas and slogans regularly (i.e. Say: "We empathetically oppose defunding the police"), and sponsor more moderate primary challengers.

They are just ruining the electoral prospects of the democratic party.

AOC and Pressley have done nothing to deserve any of that. Neither of them ever say anything this stupid, in fact, they have been net positives for the Democratic Party in drumming up support.

[Horus]

Pelosi should silence the entire squad: Strip them of their committee assignments, never let any bill by them get a vote regardless of its content, publicly reject their ideas and slogans regularly (i.e. Say: "We empathetically oppose defunding the police"), and sponsor more moderate primary challengers.

They are just ruining the electoral prospects of the democratic party.

AOC and Pressley have done nothing to deserve any of that. Neither of them ever say anything this stupid, in fact, they have been net positives for the Democratic Party in drumming up support.

Anyone who lumps the entire squad together shouldn't be listened to. Bowman, Pressley and AOC (despite her problems) are great progressives who younger voters love. Tlaib is a workhorse for her district and does a good job as well.

Bush and Omar otoh are intentionally inflammatory, divisive and cold. They are the problem here, certainly not the squad as a whole.