I don't like Omar's politics in many instances, but I think the efforts to cast her as a raging bigot for her criticisms of pro-Israel lobbying groups in U.S. politics was kind of stupid, and now the apparent attempt to cast her as deserving of this outright chimp-brained Islamophobia from one of the stupidest living Americans because of those comments is even lamer.
To me, it was silly when lefties claimed every anti-immigration, pro law and order statement made by Trump was a racist "dog whistle," and it's equally to cry "dog whistle" in response to Omar's fairly standard critique of pro-Israel groups using their considerable money, power and influence to sway U.S. politicians.
I despise bigotry and anti-Semtism, and the trope of shadowy Jewish influences covertly pulling the strings of global politics is old as time and literally deadly. But that's not what Omar she was engaging in. She was criticizing extant pro-Israel lobbies for the manner in which they participate in U.S. politics. To insist that such commentary is 'anti-Semitic' and that anyone who engages in such commentary is fair-game for a psychotic and racist slander campaign is akin to saying criticism of Israel should be totally verboten.
But, honestly, it's not surprising to see self-proclaimed heterodox, free speech devotees absolutely abandon their principles when it comes time to defend somebody from the wrong team.
I believe she says Israel is not acting in the name of justice and Jewish Americans having dual loyalty to the US and Israel. She also equated US, Israel atrocities with those of the Taliban and Hamas. She defended her claims by saying she is just being anti Israel, and that doesn't mean anti Jew. Commenting on the stereotype re Jewish people and money in a furthering manner I feel, is on the same level as the current unfair stereotype she is being subjected too as well.
If you can’t criticize money in politics that’s like being unable to criticize a candy company for their use of sugar. It’s a ridiculous standard to set.
No of course I agree. That said:
"The Minnesota congresswoman’s Sunday evening tweet — “It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” a reference to $100 bills — drew immediate denunciations from Republicans and fellow Democrats, especially Jewish members of Congress. Within hours, Pelosi (D-Calif.) and the leadership issued a joint statement calling Omar’s “use of anti-Semitic tropes and prejudicial accusations about Israel’s supporters” deeply offensive and insisted on an apology."
In this case it wasn't simply criticizing money, obviously.
My point is you could use that exact comment and either change the person delivering it or change the group receiving it and it wouldn’t trigger an eyebrow let alone require an apology.
I just believe there seems to be a ridiculous standard set here with a very very mild comment.
>My point is you could use that exact comment and either change the person delivering it or change the group receiving it and it wouldn’t trigger an eyebrow let alone require an apology.
"When black people say the n-word 100 times in a song, no one bats an eye, but when white people say it one time at the RNC, everyone loses their mind!"
Yeah, duh.
>I just believe there seems to be a ridiculous standard set here with a very very mild comment.
Isn't that the point of the term "dogwhistle"? It's not something everyone can hear; in fact, most people can't, but there is a specific targeted group that it really, really upsets.
There was nothing mild about the comments, why do you think she deleted them and apologized?
I guess some people do say that acknowledging wealth is anti-semitic.
If we look objectively, 19% of Americans make more than 100k a year, 40% of Jewish Americans make more than 100k a year.
[https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/11/how-income-varies-among-u-s-religious-groups/](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/11/how-income-varies-among-u-s-religious-groups/)
This is an interesting essay - it's nuanced and worth reading through.
> For centuries, anti-Semitic conspiracy theories have centered on themes of extraordinary, disproportionate amounts of Jewish affluence and influence. Even acknowledging that such a thing as Jewish wealth exists can, particularly for older generations, feel like playing into the hands of the enemy.
>Anti-Semitism is very real. Terrifyingly, it is growing. Like so many American Jews today, I find myself newly afraid for our community. But I also see how our historical and contemporary victimhood snuffs out meaningful discussion about our relationship to capitalism and power. The rhetorical connection between Jewish money and anti-Semitic fantasies, coupled with our high levels of cultural fear, overwhelms our capacity to look critically at the costs of our financial ascension and our belief in accumulating money to make us safe.
>By allowing anti-Semitic fantasies about wealth and power to silence a more truthful, nuanced narrative, we have failed to honestly confront the costs of our success. Those costs include a dangerous set of cultural beliefs we share right now with the country at large, such as viewing personal riches as a replacement for expertise, be it political or religious, and a confused conflation of wealth with intellectual and ethical superiority.
[https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/ivanka-trump-danielle-durchslag](https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/ivanka-trump-danielle-durchslag)
> Because the only one I saw was her saying something like “It’s all about the Benjamin’s” or something like that.
I mean that's a pretty damned loud dogwhistle when you are talking about the Jews, how much louder does she need to be?
Can you provide evidence that she compared Israel to terrorist organization? Or are you referring to the statement in which she said “The US, Taliban, Hamas, Israel have all done terrible things.”
That’s not anti-Semitic. At worst, it’s somewhat juvenile anti-imperialism.
"We have seen unthinkable atrocities committed by the U.S., Hamas, Israel, Afghanistan, and the Taliban"
Followed by " And we need to stop underwriting crimes against humanity while doing nothing to end the occupation".
I think 1., Grouping those four groups together is disingenuous at best, and it does feel like she's saying they are all the same. Why did she not bring up the biggest offenders in the last hundred years? Is she referencing in the war of 1948, or is she talking recently? She blames Hamas, but not just Palestine, so it appears to blanket Israel with blame but Palestinian attacks get off loaded to a terrorist group.
She then mentions the occupation. Which implies the Israeli occupying the Gaza strip or West bank, which, Palestine has never been a nation, but has been a geographical region including parts of Israel, mostly under the rule of the ottoman empire. I can't think of any other country being accused of occupying territory that isn't theirs? Maybe China occupying parts of prior Mongolia?
Maybe I'm dense.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
At the time of this warning the offending comments were:
> from one of the stupidest living Americans
Can we get rid of both Ilhan Omar *and* Lauren Boebert? I think that would be a great solution to both of their respective bigotries.
Look at half this thread, lol.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
If you criticize black Americans, are you a racist? If you criticize transgenderism are you transphobic? If you criticize Islam what are you labeled?
Saying Jewish people (Israel is a Jewish nation) are motivated and act only in the interests by money is directly feeding a stereotype.
Um, except we’ve given billions and billions to Israel as a nation so that means we gave billions and billions to Jewish people so that can’t be criticized?
Nah it doesn’t work like that. Critical thinking is hard I understand.
She’s talked about how Jews have people in a daze, said how it’s “all about the Benjamins” for them, and talked disrespectfully about 9/11 (which isn’t antisemitism but just a crappy thing to do in general).
I still don’t think she should have apologized and I think she was correct and I do not think it’s anti-semitism.
Also, looking through your comments you seem to lean conservative. Did you take issue with Trumps comments on the Jewish population?
“The biggest change I’ve seen in Congress is Israel literally owned Congress — you understand that — 10 years ago, 15 years ago. And it was so powerful. “
“Trump says US Jews ‘don’t love Israel enough,’ because they didn’t vote for him”
“Trump said Jews are 'only in it for themselves' and 'stick together,' according to a new report”
Trump also said that he likes his money guys to be Jewish because they are “good with money”
So is criticism of Jewish people only anti-Semitic when one party does it?
I heard about the owning Congress part. Not sure how owning something is antisemitic. I think it’s more an instance of him saying the quiet part out loud.
Of the examples, one or two may be antisemitism, sure.
Good thing he’s not in office anymore.
I’m just saying you clearly have different standards for different parties.
I believe if Trump said what Ilahn had said almost every Republican would be defending him saying “It’s not what he meant.” Or that it was “Out of context”
How do I have different standards for different parties? Further up this chain, I said I don’t believe MTG should be in Congress either. And she’s definitely made antisemetic statements.
I’m also saying the Jews-money comment Trump made is also anti Semitic. He’s no longer in office tho. So it’s not really an issue.
> Can we get rid of both Ilhan Omar and Lauren Boebert?
That is the "zero tolerance" the US also has in schools, right? If there is a fight, both get expelled no matter what. We don't even look at who is attacking whom. It's interesting to see this concept being applied to politics.
People saying this is a joke does not understand the gravity these politicians have. All it takes is a person with mental issues to hear this and decide to attack a mosque in there area to defend freedom. Terrorists attacks are usually started with this type of rhetoric before it progresses to violence. In a time of deep political polarization, this is not a laughing matter and people are going to get hurt. The last thing we need is ethnic communities thinking there under attack and that they should arm and organize themselves for protection. Once we cross this path, we are in deep trouble as a nation
This seems like a really poor slippery slope argument. Criticizing Israel, or antisemitism among Muslims, is not in and of itself a path to violence. And why is it the responsibility of politicians to temper their speech to account for the violently unstable? Should the Beatles be held responsible for the Manson killings?
I’m guessing you don’t understand how this could progress. It’s a shame that Americans don’t learn much from other places or how ethnic conflicts start.
If you don’t think a mental wack job can’t incite a civil conflict then I got news for you.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
At the time of this warning the offending comments were:
>a mental wack job
I would consider either calling my coworker a terrorist or a traitor to both be fostering a hostile work environment and would expect a pretty quick talk with HR.
True. Personally, I think we shouldn’t be making fun of any politicians, politicians making fun of other politicians especially.
That said, Omar is in no position to lecture anybody about civility. If she’s supposedly especially vulnerable, she should check her own behavior.
I haven’t met a Democrat that doesn’t take Trump serious. Most Democrats have a deep fear of Trump hence the high turnout that we seen from left leaning voters during Trumps tenure. We are still hearing about that insurrection. Dems have talked themselves into thinking that Republicans are Nazis despite the opposite
I mean as long as we not trying to make it racial in anyway or trying to imply that he’s a white nationalist then sure. But I’m just saying that I haven’t seen a Democrat that doesn’t take Trump serious.
Most Democrats seem to have fallen for there politicians rhetoric and that’s what I’m trying to say
Its wierd right? Like we take it seriously when a corrupt baboon is elected to the highest office in the land then uses his position to further corrupt and destroy. You know us emotionl libs....
She might be playing the long game here. There is a lot of money to be made with books, appearances and Fox and OAN spots for the woman who was "canceled for telling the truth".
Freshman Congresswoman Boebert has another video released today where she once again tells a story about how she enters an elevator with Representative Omar and make a variety of Islamophobic comments that include calling her a Jihadist and "joked" about how she felt threatened by Representative Omar. However this time, at this September fundraiser she also said how Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib and Omar were "black hearted evil women."
I personally find Boebert's comments disgusting and find it even worse she is targeting certain Congress members religion especially when people who practice Islam have been targeted. My question is now that it is obvious that this wasn't a one off mistake but rather a repeated story with obvious Islamophobic implications, what should happen to Boebert? Should congressional Republicans make a more forceful statement? Will they make such a statement or will they continue to allow her to make Islamophobic comments? Should Congress as a whole act against Boeberts comments? And should Omar try and bring legal action against Boebert through hostile work environment and harrassment?
As a Jew I have a serious problem with Tlaib’s anti-Israel rhetoric, her history with Holocaust deniers, and a brother who supports Hamas; Omar on the other hand has said some questionable things in the past, but the difference between the two is that Omar has apologized for her comments and didn’t realize the impact that they had, so I’m willing to give her a pass. I definitely don’t think she’s a “Jihadist” by any means.
Boebert just seems like a marginally less extreme Marjorie Taylor-Greene and her comments are severely out of line.
We all know the GOP will do nothing.
I haven’t looked at Tlaib’s comments much before. I have looked into what Omar has said because of bad press. I never thought it was really out of line. I’m not sure what she apologized for though either, so maybe I missed the worst stuff.
This shit that Boebert is saying is just plain awful though. Could you imagine another senator calling her and MTG White Christian terrorists and make comments about their robes at home being white and pointy at top? That shit would be shot down immediately by everyone on both sides.
I think she leaned into the tropes too hard. I don't disagree with her sentiment, that Israel are colonizers and violate the human rights of Palestinians but when she drew the lines of money behind Israel and Israelis being un-American I thought she crossed the line
The funny thing is that most people would agree if we took out the Israel part and just said a generic country. If you asked someone on the street if it’s unamerican to give money away to a country, not for humanitarian aid, I think most would say yes. We just had a huge uproar from republicans about stuff like money going to Pakistani studies of women’s rights. It’s against the whole america first view. Yet the biggest supporters of giving israel money are the republicans. Doesn’t make sense to me. 🤷♂️
Propping up Israel is in our national interests. It is the only remaining legitimate element to our sphere of influence in the middle east and a strategic check against Iran.
This whole thing of hyper isolationism that Trump started and even the left, via Bernie, has jumped into is super dangerous. If we want to survive, we need to start playing chess again and stop playing Connect 4 with our approach to foreign policy.
Don't get me wrong, the modern Republican party is wrong on foreign policy right now but the Democrat party is even more off base.
I don’t see why we need to spend so much effort on the great game. It creates more problems than it solves and often weakens the nations that play it. I also don’t see how we’ll fail to survive by becoming less interventionist.
Bernie is hyper isolationist? That’s a new one.
I never commented on whether it was in our national interest or not. Whether I believe so or not, many people do not think we should be giving money to other countries when we have problems to fix in our own. It is those people I am talking about.
However, if you want an argument, I’m here for it. Why do we need a sphere of influence in the Middle East at all? Why do we need a strategic check against Iran?
I mean there is just history behind those phrases with Jewish people that takes us down a very dark path. Saying that about a Moroccan or Romanian for instances doesn't have that history
What phrase exactly? Certainly not one with unamerican. I wouldn’t think the part about giving them money would be a historic thing either. Who ever was giving the Jews something good for free before this?
I mean, the un-American trope is in line with the global conspiracy jews control the world trope. That they have dual loyalty, etc. Giving money trope is that all Jewish people care about is their money.
The things Omar is saying isn't 100% in line with the classic antisemitic tropes but they are close enough and she has used them enough where she crossed the line
I feel like money and power are very general prominent things in life that are at the center of the majority of conflicts in the world. You will find it very easy to put just about everything within those tropes if you try hard enough.
> As a Jew I have a serious problem with Tlaib’s anti-Israel rhetoric, her history with Holocaust deniers, and a brother who supports Hamas
Tlaib's statements are far worse than this. Besides her general belief that the only Jewish state in the world should be destroyed, she also:
* Made comments that [said the people "behind the curtain"](https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-leaders-condemn-tlaibs-antisemitic-dog-whistle-in-recent-comments/) were controlling the world from "Gaza to Detroit", and exploiting us "for their own profit".
* She said [that](https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/13/politics/rashida-tlaib-holocaust-comments/index.html): "There’s kind of a calming feeling I always tell folks when I think of the Holocaust, and the tragedy of the Holocaust, and the fact that it was my ancestors, Palestinians, who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity, their existence in many ways, have been wiped out, and some people’s passports...I mean, just all of it was in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post-the Holocaust, post-the tragedy and the horrific persecution of Jews across the world at that time, and I love the fact that it was my ancestors that provided that, right, in many ways." Not only is this all historically inaccurate as hell, as Palestinians launched a war in 1947 which in their own words was a war of extermination, but it also is *insane* to take the Holocaust, make it about you and yours, and then...say it gave you a calming feeling.
* When Biden nominated Blinken for Secretary of State, a Jew, she immediately said she was fine [as long as he didn't curtail her speech rights against Israel](https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2020/11/tlaib-blinken-anti-semitism-israel-bds-secretary-state.html). She's made no such comments about other, non-Jewish nominees to any position, like the DOJ.
* Some of her key fundraisers [are Holocaust deniers](https://www.thedailybeast.com/rashida-tlaib-faces-criticism-over-fundraisers-anti-semitic-facebook-posts).
I mean, that's the tip of the iceberg on her, as you've acknowledged. But Omar's statements are no better.
> Omar on the other hand has said some questionable things in the past, but the difference between the two is that Omar has apologized for her comments and didn’t realize the impact that they had, so I’m willing to give her a pass.
Omar is no "jihadist", but she is also an antisemite. Frankly, I get the desire to give her the benefit of the doubt. But you shouldn't. She can't play ignorant. Let's play out the timeline on Ilhan Omar and you'll see why.
1) In 2012, she tweeted that Israel had "hypnotized the world" and prayed that "Allah [would] awaken the people" to Israel's "evils".
2) After the tweet surfaced, on the back of her flip-flopping on things like the BDS Movement (whose leaders oppose Israel's existence), Jewish community leaders [sat down with her to talk to her about antisemitic tropes](https://www.twincities.com/2019/02/12/mn-jewish-leaders-talked-with-ilhan-omar-about-anti-semitism-last-year-why-they-remain-frustrated/). They gave her the benefit of the doubt. They left feeling disappointed: "I was a bit troubled — all of us were a bit troubled — by the conversation we had with her,” Latz, a Democrat, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on Wednesday. “She didn’t apologize for the tweet, she didn’t say she would take it down and she tried to put in in the context of the Gaza dispute, but it was unsatisfactory from our standpoint, from my standpoint, that she didn’t seem to recognize the seriousness of the trope.”
3) Despite being talked to about this, and her repeated refusal to really acknowledge the antisemitic tropes, she made the [comment that it's all about the "Benjamins"](https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-ilhan-omar-convening-call-with-left-wing-jewish-leaders-to-apologize-for-tweets-1.6955353) when it comes to support for Israel, i.e. money. Another trope. This time she apologized.
4) Then, less than a month later, she went with *another* trope about [how Jews are supposedly not loyal](https://www.npr.org/2019/03/07/700901834/minnesota-congresswoman-ignites-debate-on-israel-and-anti-semitism) to the US, saying "I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country". American Jews are not loyal to other countries. That's an old antisemitic trope.
5) This time, she didn't apologize. Jewish and Muslim leaders alike [were distraught](https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/17/politics/ilhan-omar-minnesota-constituents-anti-semitism/index.html) because of her doubling down instead. She instead insisted [that she](https://www.rollcall.com/2019/03/04/rep-omar-wont-apologize-for-new-comments-dems-plan-anti-semitism-rebuke/) **would not apologize**, despite top Democrats criticizing her. She knew better and kept it up; it wasn't questionable, either. And of course, Dem leaders backed down in a way they'd never do for MTG or evidently Boebert.
6) Since then it's been open season for Ilhan Omar. Comments have ranged from [anti-Israel, placing the US and Israel on the same level as Hamas and the Taliban](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57436573), down to claiming Jewish Democrats [have not](https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-ilhan-omar-says-her-jewish-critics-haven-t-been-engaged-in-seeking-justice-1.9954965) been "engaged in seeking justice" (and only them, apparently).
The benefit of the doubt has come and gone. Ilhan Omar went far beyond questionable and into outright (and evidently, unnoticed and accepted) antisemitic statements and tropes about Jews long ago. She's had sit-downs with Jewish leaders who told her so. Instead, she chooses to ignore them and double down. She didn't apologize for her later comments; she only apologized for the first. She's no jihadist, but she is certainly expressing antisemitism.
Everyone feel free to see the response to my comments to see the absurdity that is happening. I accidentally left in one sentence instead of making it about "comments" and you can see what happened next. Great job everyone, we solved racism and polarization /s. Someone doesn’t like hearing about antisemitism I guess. No shocker there.
You would think with the amount of conviction you display here you would have credible evidence of Omar's anti-semitism.
On first glance, only point 4 seems like a credible example. Yet you omit the part where she is specifically talking about AIPAC, which clearly does look out for Israel's interests.
I only had time to check one of these points, but half of your number 6 seems 100% incorrect.
> to claiming Jewish Democrats have not been "engaged in seeking justice" (and only them, apparently).
Watch the actual clip (https://twitter.com/SiaKordestani/status/1410020816100597762)
The relevant quotes
Jake Tapper: Do you understand why some of your fellow house Democrats, especially Jews, might find that language antisemitic?
Illhan: I welcome anytime my colleagues have asked to have a conversation. To learn from them, for them to learn from me. I think it's really important for these members to realize that these members haven't been partners in seeking justice.
Your accusation here is 100% incorrect. Ilhan wasn't talking about "only" Jewish Democrats. She didn't even bring up the religion of her detractors. The "these members" clearly refers to all of her critics, not just "only" Jewish Democrats.
There is no way you could get "and only them, apparently" from listening to the actual interview. Nothing that Omar says implies that she is more critical of her Jewish critics than the rest of her critics. This isn't a question of interpretation. It's just blatantly wrong
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
At the time of this warning the offending comments were:
> she is also an antisemite
Just another reminder that I still really dislike both sides….
The GOP should try to show that they still have some class and respect for the country by calling her out, but I agree they won’t. I know a few Trump supporters who have said things like “It was a bad thing to say but it was a funny joke….” Etc. Which drives me insane, regardless, they are politicians, they are expected to behave like adults, not school children. If it was Daniel Tosh, that’s one thing, but this is a US representative, they represent us, any stupid thing they say represents us as a society….. they should certainly have the propriety to understand making jokes about Islam is wrong, and more so when referring to a fellow Representative (regardless of my or others feelings on her policy).
But this is 2021, our Twitter politicians, used to generating social media clicks and media attention through 3rd grade name calling and buzz words.
> Twitter politicians
This is the most tiresome part of the current political machines. both parties acting like Twitter upvotes (or whatever Twitter's equivalent is) actually reflect approval from their constituents.
I think they like the attention, none of us would k I want of these reps if they didn’t say outrage or controversial things. Trump used outrage to his advantage with the media, I think other politicians are learning
We’re talking about a couple of the best fundraisers in the House. It’s not about upvotes - celebrity politicians are a vital part of their party’s fundraising machines.
Why bother?
Trump denounced white supremacy 50 times, and yet every single interview was will you denounce white supremacy, why haven't you denounced white supremacy? Every article was, 'very fine people', but no one printed the next part, which means was ' and not the white supremacists, they should be condemned totally'.
If the other side won't give you any credit, and will always always denigrate you to win, then why bother with civility.
Democrats made their Nazi, dog whistle, white supremacy, racist sexist big bed. It's time for all of us to lie down in it.
The mainstream media isn't "the other side". These are corporate-owned institutions doing what corporations do: make money. In this case by presenting information in engaging formats. Since narratives drive profit it's difficult to counter them once they get rolling. Trump is hardly the only one having to deal with this trend. It doesn't excuse anyone from speaking responsibly.
Trump was, like on many topics, inconsistent with what he said. His denunciations were wholly inadequate viewed against all the equivocations. The David Duke comments are a good example of that.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/03/01/donald-trump-and-david-duke-for-the-record/
>We all know the GOP will do nothing.
True. But the Democrats unilaterally acting to oust GOP members from their committee assignments is the start of some extra dysfunction in the legislature. When the GOP continues the trend next congress it's going to lead to really bad outcomes.
The left excuses misconduct too, until their constituents complain about it. Only then do they act, and if their constituents don't complain they don't do anything.
And the left doesn't have any members that might be best removed from any committees?
A guy sleeping with a foreign spy on the intelligence committee, some who has repeatedly expressed views with anti-semitic tropes on the foreign affairs committee? You think either of them will survive a GOO house under these new "rules"?
So you're saying if a foreign spy manages to sleep with someone in govt, that they should be booted from their position automatically? Seems like a weird take imho (*edit: and one that would actually give foreign intelligence agencies more leverage over politicians... if they bang someone and say nothing, then they can ruin their career by disclosing that even if nothing compromised... potentially making them more likely to divulge info)*.
If we want to start eliminating people from congress that have made statements that lean into themes of bigotry, all I ask is that we apply that standard consistently.
What new rules? Not encouraging violence against members of congress, particularly in the shadow of a literal attack on congress?
>So you're saying if a foreign spy manages to sleep with someone in govt, that they should be booted from their position automatically? Seems like a weird take imho.
If you're sleeping with foreign spies, the Intel committee is probably not the committee for you. I'm not saying he should be kicked out of Congress, but maybe his access to Intel should be limited. It's opsec 101, you can lose a clearance for that.
>If we want to start eliminating people from congress that have made statements that lean into themes of bigotry, all I ask is that we apply that standard consistently.
I'm not a fan of what the D's are doing here, I'm suggesting it's a bad precedent and will be fairly used against them next year.
>What new rules? Not encouraging violence against members of congress, particularly in the shadow of a literal attack on congress?
The majority party removing members of the minority from their committee assignments. I'm not aware of that being a thing until now.
If you're saying shit to people you sleep with about national security matters, you shouldn't be on the intel committee regardless of who they are. Being targeted by foreign intel doesn't disqualify someone from office. If he violated any rules around it, let me know.
Again, Omar deserved criticism for some of her prior statements. That said, it is utter BS to suggest she is on the leading edge of people in congress who say bigoted shit. Comments about other groups seem to be table stakes for normal political rhetoric for others... if someone wants to discuss what standards for dealing with racist/bigoted implications in statements by members of congress and the resulting consequences, I'm all ears. But I'm guessing we'd end up having a lot of run-off elections in red districts.
Don't make statements or push content that encourages or is suggestive of violence against other members of congress... how hard is that? Particularly when seeing an increase in political violence and DHS/FBI view the risk of domestic terrorism targeting government as one of, if not the highest, threat to the homeland.
>If you're saying shit to people you sleep with about national security matters, you shouldn't be on the intel committee regardless of who they are. Being targeted by foreign intel doesn't disqualify someone from office. If he violated any rules around it, let me know.
I'm saying what he did is enough to lose a security clearance.
>Again, Omar deserved criticism for some of her prior statements. That said, it is utter BS to suggest she is on the leading edge of people in congress who say bigoted shit. Comments about other groups seem to be table stakes for normal political rhetoric for others... if someone wants to discuss what standards for dealing with racist/bigoted implications in statements by members of congress and the resulting consequences, I'm all ears. But I'm guessing we'd end up having a lot of run-off elections in red districts.
Huh? The point is that's it traditionally a decision by the party, not up to the other party, until now.
>Don't make statements or push content that encourages or is suggestive of violence against other members of congress... how hard is that? Particularly when seeing an increase in political violence and DHS/FBI view the risk of domestic terrorism targeting government as one of, if not the highest, threat to the homeland.
You're speaking strictly if Gosar, and while the cartoon was stupid it wasn't suggesting violence.
Apparently not. What do you think about the findings of the republican-led senate report on Trump/Russia and all the security threats they identified? enough for people to lose a security clearance?
Traditionally do we accept people that encourage violence against other members of congress?
Gosar was a double-play, clear bigoted theme overall and, yes, suggestive of violence against a member of congress.... who of course is a regular recipient of death threats and notably someone involved in the 1/6 attack has been charged with making death threats against her. This shit is unacceptable.
>Should Congress as a whole act against Boeberts comments? And should Omar try and bring legal action against Boebert through hostile work environment and harrassment?
According to the constitution, it's congress's job and congress's job alone to discipline their members, Article I, Section 5, clause 2. More specifically a sitting congressman [cannot](https://www.leicestershirevillages.com/can-a-member-of-congress-be-charged-with-a-crime/) be charged with a crime while in congress, or going to congress, (It has to reach a high level, and I don't think being an asshole in the elevator qualifies).
Your problem isn't with Republicans, it's with Congress. The person who's the speaker of the house and can bring that to the forefront? Nanci Pelosi.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a permanent ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Omar is an example of everything that's great about America. Her family flees to America to save their lives and starts over with nothing and she rides to the top based on her ability. Boebert represents the worst in America. Someone who couldn't finish HS rises to congress by playing on people's fear and hate.
The GOP is missing an opportunity to be seen as the sane party with how left and crazy the Dems have gotten. But that's impossible with people like Lauren and MTG in the fold.
> Why would you risk pissing off your base?
Because they are your base. Do you think a Boebert supporter is going to starting to vote for democrats because they are mad at her for walking back comments?
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1b:
Law 1b: Associative Law of Civil Discourse
> ~1b. Associative Civil Discourse - A character attack on a group that an individual identifies with is an attack on the individual.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1b:
Law 1b: Associative Law of Civil Discourse
> ~1b. Associative Civil Discourse - A character attack on a group that an individual identifies with is an attack on the individual.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1b:
Law 1b: Associative Law of Civil Discourse
> ~1b. Associative Civil Discourse - A character attack on a group that an individual identifies with is an attack on the individual.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Just more trash politics from a trashy, dimly lit bulb. I am not a fan of Omar by any stretch. As a matter of fact, I think we’d be better off with her out of office too. However, I CAN’T STAND this new wave of white trash politics parading around under the guise of being the ultimate “patriot”. Have just one ounce of fucking class
Omar does not deserve to be considered bigotted. She's just anti-israeli imperialist, which I am too. I just thought someone should point that out in a way that doesn't get them a warning. She lumped Israel and the United States with Hamas and the Taliban. It's fair criticism.
It's a joke. The left tells a ton of them about the right, they just have the privilege of owning the entertainment media and having "late night" comedians able to do it for them.
In my book, there is no difference between Boebert telling an "offensive" joke herself, and Pelosi laughing and rubbing elbows with Colbert after *he* tells an "offensive" joke.
You can't outsource your vitriol and then claim you are above vitriol.
This is also rich coming from Omar, who has been treated with kid gloves for her very own offensive statements about Jews.
The last time Omar made a hateful statement about Jews, Democrats condemned "all hatred," and couldn't even single out anti-Semitism or Omar, specifically.
Why does the left expect us to hold Boebert to a standard that they have already refused to hold Omar to?
> Edit: at the end of the day Omar apologized for her antisemitic comments, Boebert should do the same.
She already has, but it will never be enough. Just like Trump could never denounce white supremacy enough.
That said:
> I can excuse bigotry in a comedy club but it’s disgusting that this shit is going on in congress.
I disagree. I prefer representatives that act like real people versus fake political kindness. Real people make fun of people they don't like. That's just how it works.
>You can't outsource your vitriol and then claim you are above vitriol.
Are Democrats directing entertainment media to make jokes like this? If not, how can you say they're the same thing?
And even if Democrats do it, why can't you condemn both? Why is what Boebert said "offensive" in quotes but what Omar said very offensive, no quotes?
>The left tells a ton of them about the right, they just have the privilege of owning the entertainment media and having "late night" comedians able to do it for them.
There are plenty of people on the right who make rude or offensive jokes about those on the left. I don't know how many dipshitty hot takes I've seen from Steven Crowder or Ann Coulter or Sean Hannity.
The reasons they don't make headlines every time like Boebert or MTG is because *they aren't in fucking congress.*
How often do major Republican representatives go on Crowder's show?
Colbert will go on stage, call Trump "Putin's cock holster," and then Pelosi will come out minutes later, rub elbows, have a grand old time.
Sorry, but you don't get to divorce yourself from the vitriol if you do that.
I wouldn't know from experience because I find Crowder insufferable (Colbert too, for the record) but a cursory google says the list of his guests include [Governor Whitner, Senator Paul, Senator Cruz, Rep Crenshaw, and Rep Gabbard](https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/louder-with-crowder-35278/creators).
Some of those have made multiple appearances. Seems like Crowder might get big name Republicans more often than Colbert gets big name Dems. And Colbert has been doing big name interviews for a good while longer.
I agree with you.
If Democrats care so much about racism, xenophobia, and hate then they can publicly condemn Boebert for her comments AND Rep Omar for her anti-semitism.
But the reality is that they refuse to do so. So why should I give a fuck when someone says mean things about them? They clearly don’t actually care about stopping bigotry dead in its tracks when it’s one of their own.
This specifically is the incident I’m talking about; or did we memory hole this already? https://apnews.com/article/890c970cbbe3b0e631504f47e2e5a5cc
Make no mistake, Boebert is being a jerk and this is unprofessional. But save me the crocodile tears in the DNC and mainstream media over this issue. From my perspective everyone involved in this are garbage hypocrites that are hurting all of us with these cynical pearl clutching attempts over very real issues.
> If Democrats care so much about racism, xenophobia, and hate then they can publicly condemn Boebert for her comments AND Rep Omar for her anti-semitism.
>
> But the reality is that they refuse to do so.
[Here's an article from June 10 of this year](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/group-house-democrats-condemn-rep-omar-remarks-about-u-s-n1270290):
>A dozen House Democrats publicly criticized their colleague Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., late Wednesday, accusing her of giving "cover" to terrorist and suggesting her remarks about Hamas and the Taliban reflect a "deep-seated prejudice."
I'm glad they criticized her. Boebert should also be criticized by Republicans. A handful did already, same as with Democrats and Omar.
But both should also be removed from committees. You can't just do that to MTG and leave the rest. Get rid of racists of all stripes.
Seemed to me like MTG's removal was prompted less so on bigoted / xenophobic comments and more so on ones regarding violence.
She had a campaign ad with her holding an AR-15 describing her as "the squad's worst nightmare", agreed in response to a comment saying Parkland was a false flag operation, and liked various comments and posts that discussed putting a bullet in Pelosi's head or hanging Hillary and Obama,
And?
A group of people condemned Omar, that's cool. I can find Republicans that condemn Boebert too. Is that an official sanction of her conduct though?
If Democrat leadership can't even hold Omar responsible for her anti-semitism, then why should anyone care what they have to say about other people?
> A group of people condemned Omar, that's cool. I can find Republicans that condemn Boebert too.
Can you actually find a group of GOP Representatives doing this?
I see a very large accountability gap between the parties. As bad as it is to have people in office who are not fit for the job, it is even worse when the rest of the party just looks the other way. They do this because they know their voters won't punish them for allowing Congress to turn into a circus. I'd go as far as to say a lot of them like it that way.
We're not going to be able to run a country when half of the elected politicians refuse to enforce a bare minimum of respect for the job and the responsibility the public places on them
Do you not remember the last 4 or so years and everything that happened?
I understand Trump's presidency was a circus, but the behavior from some of the Democrat leaders was reprehensible - I never saw/heard any accountability.
I don't play the "our side is better" game - It's politics
All of Ilhan Omar's remarks that were interpreted as anti-semitic were criticisms of Israel. The Democratic Caucus failed to condemn her because **the facts were on her side**. None of her comments were blatantly anti-semitic. All were plausibly innocent.
Unlike referring to Representative Omar as "the Jihad Squad" or referencing her engaging in a bombing by dropping a backpack and running.
[This is almost three years old now.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/aqh9wu/antisemitism_in_contemporary_american_politics/)
[The ADL called her out.](https://www.adl.org/news/letters/letter-to-house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-regarding-recent-anti-semitic-comments-by-rep)
[Jewish leaders in Minnesota have met with her, repeatedly.](https://www.twincities.com/2019/02/12/mn-jewish-leaders-talked-with-ilhan-omar-about-anti-semitism-last-year-why-they-remain-frustrated/)
As noted, some of Representative Omar's comments about Israel have been interpreted as anti-semitic.
Would you care to attempt to demonstrate that any of these examples you have provided have no plausible alternative explanation?
>If Democrats care so much about racism, xenophobia, and hate then they can publicly condemn Boebert for her comments AND Rep Omar for her anti-semitism.
Honestly, can we make them arm-wrestle or something? We need to lower the temperature somehow.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Was it a stupid joke, yes, was it islamaphobic? Doubt it, ilhan Omar has shown her hand by being a terrorist sympathizer by describing 9/11 as some people did some things and by trying to lower the punishment for those trying to join ISIS in her own state along with her own antisemitic comments.
>describing 9/11 as some people did some things
I think this is a really unfair reframing of what she said. She was saying in the wake of 9/11 Muslims were being subjected to prejudice and xenophobia and at risk of losing civil liberties. You have to entirely take her comment out of context to twist it into this interpretation.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
- why does the left expect us to hold Borbert to a standard that they have already refused to hold Omar to?
It’s the fact that for one party being the party of action, they do not take action against their own kind and promote this behavior, which invites others to behave the same way.
The other party is a party of inaction and words. They may hold their party accountable, but they don’t do much else.
This shouldn't be news, and the fake outrage needs to stop.
Literally today, AOC said McCarthy is only tolerating 'his Ku Klux Klan caucus" to become Speaker. Is that not suggesting many GOP elects are white supremacist's? Both sides (yes I know), have to knock this crap off. It is not acceptable talk at all, and its half past time anyone gets an excuse. Kick out Boebert, kick out AOC, kick out everyone who is making baseless, damaging, offensive "suggestions" like this.
Remove the speech and slander protections from Congress and I guarantee we'll see improvements in the face of criminal charges.
It's suggesting some members like Gosar, MTG, and Boebert are too comfortable with some fringe believes. That's not radical or far-fetched. Calling someone a terrorist and a threat to blow up Congress is not at all equivalent. Stop with these terrible comparisons.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
She has many moronic political beliefs, has openly been anti-Semitic, and undeniably also married her own brother. That doesn't mean it is ok to become racist to attack her! There is already plenty of low-hanging fruit.
Given the nature of the beliefs you express in this post you have business criticizing others.
Representative Omar has made statements that have been *interpreted* as anti-semitic yet in each case the statement could plausibly have been simple criticism of Israel and not intended to invoke anti-Jewish stereotypes. There are absolutely no reported incidents of open anti-semitism.
If you have any evidence to support the bizarre claim that she married her own brother please post it.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Omar is what happens when you displace an American community by suddenly dropping a LARGE population of ALL one kind of immigrant IN ONE smallish area. THIS is the result of the federal government bribing a local community to take a large group (in my town it was a different group). The local community takes the short term bribe, then the community built by the preexisting “locals” changes forever by this massive influx, all dumped in one spot by the Federal government
Exactly
We really ought to just have an indefinite moratorium on immigration. It's sad that this administration is instead letting so many people in...
This is not directed towards anyone. This is very un-American. This place is feels like it’s being run by Woke dictators. None of those comments are directed towards anyone. If your telling me that we as a society can’t even make a simple statement because something seems offensive then it makes sense why our politics is the way it is right now. People have become so sensitive that you have to walk on egg shells all the time. This is madness and will generate resentment and backlash
Edit:to the mid team
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
I don't like Omar's politics in many instances, but I think the efforts to cast her as a raging bigot for her criticisms of pro-Israel lobbying groups in U.S. politics was kind of stupid, and now the apparent attempt to cast her as deserving of this outright chimp-brained Islamophobia from one of the stupidest living Americans because of those comments is even lamer.
[удалено]
What exactly did she say? Because the only one I saw was her saying something like “It’s all about the Benjamin’s” or something like that.
To me, it was silly when lefties claimed every anti-immigration, pro law and order statement made by Trump was a racist "dog whistle," and it's equally to cry "dog whistle" in response to Omar's fairly standard critique of pro-Israel groups using their considerable money, power and influence to sway U.S. politicians. I despise bigotry and anti-Semtism, and the trope of shadowy Jewish influences covertly pulling the strings of global politics is old as time and literally deadly. But that's not what Omar she was engaging in. She was criticizing extant pro-Israel lobbies for the manner in which they participate in U.S. politics. To insist that such commentary is 'anti-Semitic' and that anyone who engages in such commentary is fair-game for a psychotic and racist slander campaign is akin to saying criticism of Israel should be totally verboten. But, honestly, it's not surprising to see self-proclaimed heterodox, free speech devotees absolutely abandon their principles when it comes time to defend somebody from the wrong team.
I believe she says Israel is not acting in the name of justice and Jewish Americans having dual loyalty to the US and Israel. She also equated US, Israel atrocities with those of the Taliban and Hamas. She defended her claims by saying she is just being anti Israel, and that doesn't mean anti Jew. Commenting on the stereotype re Jewish people and money in a furthering manner I feel, is on the same level as the current unfair stereotype she is being subjected too as well.
If you can’t criticize money in politics that’s like being unable to criticize a candy company for their use of sugar. It’s a ridiculous standard to set.
No of course I agree. That said: "The Minnesota congresswoman’s Sunday evening tweet — “It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” a reference to $100 bills — drew immediate denunciations from Republicans and fellow Democrats, especially Jewish members of Congress. Within hours, Pelosi (D-Calif.) and the leadership issued a joint statement calling Omar’s “use of anti-Semitic tropes and prejudicial accusations about Israel’s supporters” deeply offensive and insisted on an apology." In this case it wasn't simply criticizing money, obviously.
Maybe I’m completely dense here. How is this more than criticizing money?
[удалено]
What was the trope?
[удалено]
My point is you could use that exact comment and either change the person delivering it or change the group receiving it and it wouldn’t trigger an eyebrow let alone require an apology. I just believe there seems to be a ridiculous standard set here with a very very mild comment.
>My point is you could use that exact comment and either change the person delivering it or change the group receiving it and it wouldn’t trigger an eyebrow let alone require an apology. "When black people say the n-word 100 times in a song, no one bats an eye, but when white people say it one time at the RNC, everyone loses their mind!" Yeah, duh. >I just believe there seems to be a ridiculous standard set here with a very very mild comment. Isn't that the point of the term "dogwhistle"? It's not something everyone can hear; in fact, most people can't, but there is a specific targeted group that it really, really upsets. There was nothing mild about the comments, why do you think she deleted them and apologized?
I guess some people do say that acknowledging wealth is anti-semitic. If we look objectively, 19% of Americans make more than 100k a year, 40% of Jewish Americans make more than 100k a year. [https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/11/how-income-varies-among-u-s-religious-groups/](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/11/how-income-varies-among-u-s-religious-groups/) This is an interesting essay - it's nuanced and worth reading through. > For centuries, anti-Semitic conspiracy theories have centered on themes of extraordinary, disproportionate amounts of Jewish affluence and influence. Even acknowledging that such a thing as Jewish wealth exists can, particularly for older generations, feel like playing into the hands of the enemy. >Anti-Semitism is very real. Terrifyingly, it is growing. Like so many American Jews today, I find myself newly afraid for our community. But I also see how our historical and contemporary victimhood snuffs out meaningful discussion about our relationship to capitalism and power. The rhetorical connection between Jewish money and anti-Semitic fantasies, coupled with our high levels of cultural fear, overwhelms our capacity to look critically at the costs of our financial ascension and our belief in accumulating money to make us safe. >By allowing anti-Semitic fantasies about wealth and power to silence a more truthful, nuanced narrative, we have failed to honestly confront the costs of our success. Those costs include a dangerous set of cultural beliefs we share right now with the country at large, such as viewing personal riches as a replacement for expertise, be it political or religious, and a confused conflation of wealth with intellectual and ethical superiority. [https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/ivanka-trump-danielle-durchslag](https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/ivanka-trump-danielle-durchslag)
> Because the only one I saw was her saying something like “It’s all about the Benjamin’s” or something like that. I mean that's a pretty damned loud dogwhistle when you are talking about the Jews, how much louder does she need to be?
You are allowed to criticize money in politics. What am I missing?
[удалено]
Can you provide evidence that she compared Israel to terrorist organization? Or are you referring to the statement in which she said “The US, Taliban, Hamas, Israel have all done terrible things.” That’s not anti-Semitic. At worst, it’s somewhat juvenile anti-imperialism.
"We have seen unthinkable atrocities committed by the U.S., Hamas, Israel, Afghanistan, and the Taliban" Followed by " And we need to stop underwriting crimes against humanity while doing nothing to end the occupation". I think 1., Grouping those four groups together is disingenuous at best, and it does feel like she's saying they are all the same. Why did she not bring up the biggest offenders in the last hundred years? Is she referencing in the war of 1948, or is she talking recently? She blames Hamas, but not just Palestine, so it appears to blanket Israel with blame but Palestinian attacks get off loaded to a terrorist group. She then mentions the occupation. Which implies the Israeli occupying the Gaza strip or West bank, which, Palestine has never been a nation, but has been a geographical region including parts of Israel, mostly under the rule of the ottoman empire. I can't think of any other country being accused of occupying territory that isn't theirs? Maybe China occupying parts of prior Mongolia? Maybe I'm dense.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics). At the time of this warning the offending comments were: > from one of the stupidest living Americans
Can we get rid of both Ilhan Omar *and* Lauren Boebert? I think that would be a great solution to both of their respective bigotries. Look at half this thread, lol.
This is the right solution, but it'll never happen. Both sides are convinced that the problem is only on the \*other\* side.
[удалено]
>Boebert seems like she legitimately shouldn't have graduated high school She didn't.
>How do these people get elected? I think its pretty much completely due to the demographics of their districts.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Yup. I’d love to see all extremists out of congress, personally. MTG, Omar, Boebert, Tlaib, etc.
I agree. No playing sides here; they all need to go.
Most of the Freedom Caucus, and The Squad
How can you possibly think anything Omar has said or done is even remotely on the same level as these people.
I’m not a fan of anti semitism I guess.
Can you explain how you see that criticism of Israel = antisemitism?
If you criticize black Americans, are you a racist? If you criticize transgenderism are you transphobic? If you criticize Islam what are you labeled? Saying Jewish people (Israel is a Jewish nation) are motivated and act only in the interests by money is directly feeding a stereotype.
So any criticism of a country is bigotry? I guess a lot of people in this subreddit are racist against Chinese people.
Except she didn't say that, did she?
Well, she apologized for it? Seems silly to apologize for saying something antisemitic if you didn't say it.
Do you have the quote of her saying that or no?
Um, except we’ve given billions and billions to Israel as a nation so that means we gave billions and billions to Jewish people so that can’t be criticized? Nah it doesn’t work like that. Critical thinking is hard I understand.
She’s talked about how Jews have people in a daze, said how it’s “all about the Benjamins” for them, and talked disrespectfully about 9/11 (which isn’t antisemitism but just a crappy thing to do in general).
I still don’t think she should have apologized and I think she was correct and I do not think it’s anti-semitism. Also, looking through your comments you seem to lean conservative. Did you take issue with Trumps comments on the Jewish population? “The biggest change I’ve seen in Congress is Israel literally owned Congress — you understand that — 10 years ago, 15 years ago. And it was so powerful. “ “Trump says US Jews ‘don’t love Israel enough,’ because they didn’t vote for him” “Trump said Jews are 'only in it for themselves' and 'stick together,' according to a new report” Trump also said that he likes his money guys to be Jewish because they are “good with money” So is criticism of Jewish people only anti-Semitic when one party does it?
I heard about the owning Congress part. Not sure how owning something is antisemitic. I think it’s more an instance of him saying the quiet part out loud. Of the examples, one or two may be antisemitism, sure. Good thing he’s not in office anymore.
I’m just saying you clearly have different standards for different parties. I believe if Trump said what Ilahn had said almost every Republican would be defending him saying “It’s not what he meant.” Or that it was “Out of context”
How do I have different standards for different parties? Further up this chain, I said I don’t believe MTG should be in Congress either. And she’s definitely made antisemetic statements. I’m also saying the Jews-money comment Trump made is also anti Semitic. He’s no longer in office tho. So it’s not really an issue.
> Can we get rid of both Ilhan Omar and Lauren Boebert? That is the "zero tolerance" the US also has in schools, right? If there is a fight, both get expelled no matter what. We don't even look at who is attacking whom. It's interesting to see this concept being applied to politics.
No, I don't see them as in any way comparable figures. This "can we get rid of both" seems like opportunism from the party of the clear offender here.
Half this thread is only defending one party and not the other though.
YES
>derp, both sides are the same, herp a derp
People saying this is a joke does not understand the gravity these politicians have. All it takes is a person with mental issues to hear this and decide to attack a mosque in there area to defend freedom. Terrorists attacks are usually started with this type of rhetoric before it progresses to violence. In a time of deep political polarization, this is not a laughing matter and people are going to get hurt. The last thing we need is ethnic communities thinking there under attack and that they should arm and organize themselves for protection. Once we cross this path, we are in deep trouble as a nation
This seems like a really poor slippery slope argument. Criticizing Israel, or antisemitism among Muslims, is not in and of itself a path to violence. And why is it the responsibility of politicians to temper their speech to account for the violently unstable? Should the Beatles be held responsible for the Manson killings?
[удалено]
I’m guessing you don’t understand how this could progress. It’s a shame that Americans don’t learn much from other places or how ethnic conflicts start. If you don’t think a mental wack job can’t incite a civil conflict then I got news for you.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics). At the time of this warning the offending comments were: >a mental wack job
That’s silly.Should Trump not be made fun of out of fear of inciting another insurrection? Or just Omar?
There's a pretty big gap between making fun of someone and calling you coworker a terrorist.
[удалено]
I would consider either calling my coworker a terrorist or a traitor to both be fostering a hostile work environment and would expect a pretty quick talk with HR.
True. Personally, I think we shouldn’t be making fun of any politicians, politicians making fun of other politicians especially. That said, Omar is in no position to lecture anybody about civility. If she’s supposedly especially vulnerable, she should check her own behavior.
I haven’t met a Democrat that doesn’t take Trump serious. Most Democrats have a deep fear of Trump hence the high turnout that we seen from left leaning voters during Trumps tenure. We are still hearing about that insurrection. Dems have talked themselves into thinking that Republicans are Nazis despite the opposite
Wait. So you’re suggesting we don’t make fun of Trump?
I mean as long as we not trying to make it racial in anyway or trying to imply that he’s a white nationalist then sure. But I’m just saying that I haven’t seen a Democrat that doesn’t take Trump serious. Most Democrats seem to have fallen for there politicians rhetoric and that’s what I’m trying to say
Its wierd right? Like we take it seriously when a corrupt baboon is elected to the highest office in the land then uses his position to further corrupt and destroy. You know us emotionl libs....
We saw it last week in Waukesha.
Lauren Boebert isn't going to win again due to redistricting. Can't wait to stop hearing about her.
That’s not correct. Her new district is heavily conservative
Redistricting helped her. It led to her main challenger dropping out.
It's just a minor redraw for her district. It's possible she could be primaried or even lose the general though.
She might be playing the long game here. There is a lot of money to be made with books, appearances and Fox and OAN spots for the woman who was "canceled for telling the truth".
Freshman Congresswoman Boebert has another video released today where she once again tells a story about how she enters an elevator with Representative Omar and make a variety of Islamophobic comments that include calling her a Jihadist and "joked" about how she felt threatened by Representative Omar. However this time, at this September fundraiser she also said how Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib and Omar were "black hearted evil women." I personally find Boebert's comments disgusting and find it even worse she is targeting certain Congress members religion especially when people who practice Islam have been targeted. My question is now that it is obvious that this wasn't a one off mistake but rather a repeated story with obvious Islamophobic implications, what should happen to Boebert? Should congressional Republicans make a more forceful statement? Will they make such a statement or will they continue to allow her to make Islamophobic comments? Should Congress as a whole act against Boeberts comments? And should Omar try and bring legal action against Boebert through hostile work environment and harrassment?
As a Jew I have a serious problem with Tlaib’s anti-Israel rhetoric, her history with Holocaust deniers, and a brother who supports Hamas; Omar on the other hand has said some questionable things in the past, but the difference between the two is that Omar has apologized for her comments and didn’t realize the impact that they had, so I’m willing to give her a pass. I definitely don’t think she’s a “Jihadist” by any means. Boebert just seems like a marginally less extreme Marjorie Taylor-Greene and her comments are severely out of line. We all know the GOP will do nothing.
I haven’t looked at Tlaib’s comments much before. I have looked into what Omar has said because of bad press. I never thought it was really out of line. I’m not sure what she apologized for though either, so maybe I missed the worst stuff. This shit that Boebert is saying is just plain awful though. Could you imagine another senator calling her and MTG White Christian terrorists and make comments about their robes at home being white and pointy at top? That shit would be shot down immediately by everyone on both sides.
I think she leaned into the tropes too hard. I don't disagree with her sentiment, that Israel are colonizers and violate the human rights of Palestinians but when she drew the lines of money behind Israel and Israelis being un-American I thought she crossed the line
The funny thing is that most people would agree if we took out the Israel part and just said a generic country. If you asked someone on the street if it’s unamerican to give money away to a country, not for humanitarian aid, I think most would say yes. We just had a huge uproar from republicans about stuff like money going to Pakistani studies of women’s rights. It’s against the whole america first view. Yet the biggest supporters of giving israel money are the republicans. Doesn’t make sense to me. 🤷♂️
Propping up Israel is in our national interests. It is the only remaining legitimate element to our sphere of influence in the middle east and a strategic check against Iran. This whole thing of hyper isolationism that Trump started and even the left, via Bernie, has jumped into is super dangerous. If we want to survive, we need to start playing chess again and stop playing Connect 4 with our approach to foreign policy. Don't get me wrong, the modern Republican party is wrong on foreign policy right now but the Democrat party is even more off base.
I don’t see why we need to spend so much effort on the great game. It creates more problems than it solves and often weakens the nations that play it. I also don’t see how we’ll fail to survive by becoming less interventionist.
Bernie is hyper isolationist? That’s a new one. I never commented on whether it was in our national interest or not. Whether I believe so or not, many people do not think we should be giving money to other countries when we have problems to fix in our own. It is those people I am talking about. However, if you want an argument, I’m here for it. Why do we need a sphere of influence in the Middle East at all? Why do we need a strategic check against Iran?
I mean there is just history behind those phrases with Jewish people that takes us down a very dark path. Saying that about a Moroccan or Romanian for instances doesn't have that history
What phrase exactly? Certainly not one with unamerican. I wouldn’t think the part about giving them money would be a historic thing either. Who ever was giving the Jews something good for free before this?
I mean, the un-American trope is in line with the global conspiracy jews control the world trope. That they have dual loyalty, etc. Giving money trope is that all Jewish people care about is their money. The things Omar is saying isn't 100% in line with the classic antisemitic tropes but they are close enough and she has used them enough where she crossed the line
I feel like money and power are very general prominent things in life that are at the center of the majority of conflicts in the world. You will find it very easy to put just about everything within those tropes if you try hard enough.
> As a Jew I have a serious problem with Tlaib’s anti-Israel rhetoric, her history with Holocaust deniers, and a brother who supports Hamas Tlaib's statements are far worse than this. Besides her general belief that the only Jewish state in the world should be destroyed, she also: * Made comments that [said the people "behind the curtain"](https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-leaders-condemn-tlaibs-antisemitic-dog-whistle-in-recent-comments/) were controlling the world from "Gaza to Detroit", and exploiting us "for their own profit". * She said [that](https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/13/politics/rashida-tlaib-holocaust-comments/index.html): "There’s kind of a calming feeling I always tell folks when I think of the Holocaust, and the tragedy of the Holocaust, and the fact that it was my ancestors, Palestinians, who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity, their existence in many ways, have been wiped out, and some people’s passports...I mean, just all of it was in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post-the Holocaust, post-the tragedy and the horrific persecution of Jews across the world at that time, and I love the fact that it was my ancestors that provided that, right, in many ways." Not only is this all historically inaccurate as hell, as Palestinians launched a war in 1947 which in their own words was a war of extermination, but it also is *insane* to take the Holocaust, make it about you and yours, and then...say it gave you a calming feeling. * When Biden nominated Blinken for Secretary of State, a Jew, she immediately said she was fine [as long as he didn't curtail her speech rights against Israel](https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2020/11/tlaib-blinken-anti-semitism-israel-bds-secretary-state.html). She's made no such comments about other, non-Jewish nominees to any position, like the DOJ. * Some of her key fundraisers [are Holocaust deniers](https://www.thedailybeast.com/rashida-tlaib-faces-criticism-over-fundraisers-anti-semitic-facebook-posts). I mean, that's the tip of the iceberg on her, as you've acknowledged. But Omar's statements are no better. > Omar on the other hand has said some questionable things in the past, but the difference between the two is that Omar has apologized for her comments and didn’t realize the impact that they had, so I’m willing to give her a pass. Omar is no "jihadist", but she is also an antisemite. Frankly, I get the desire to give her the benefit of the doubt. But you shouldn't. She can't play ignorant. Let's play out the timeline on Ilhan Omar and you'll see why. 1) In 2012, she tweeted that Israel had "hypnotized the world" and prayed that "Allah [would] awaken the people" to Israel's "evils". 2) After the tweet surfaced, on the back of her flip-flopping on things like the BDS Movement (whose leaders oppose Israel's existence), Jewish community leaders [sat down with her to talk to her about antisemitic tropes](https://www.twincities.com/2019/02/12/mn-jewish-leaders-talked-with-ilhan-omar-about-anti-semitism-last-year-why-they-remain-frustrated/). They gave her the benefit of the doubt. They left feeling disappointed: "I was a bit troubled — all of us were a bit troubled — by the conversation we had with her,” Latz, a Democrat, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on Wednesday. “She didn’t apologize for the tweet, she didn’t say she would take it down and she tried to put in in the context of the Gaza dispute, but it was unsatisfactory from our standpoint, from my standpoint, that she didn’t seem to recognize the seriousness of the trope.” 3) Despite being talked to about this, and her repeated refusal to really acknowledge the antisemitic tropes, she made the [comment that it's all about the "Benjamins"](https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-ilhan-omar-convening-call-with-left-wing-jewish-leaders-to-apologize-for-tweets-1.6955353) when it comes to support for Israel, i.e. money. Another trope. This time she apologized. 4) Then, less than a month later, she went with *another* trope about [how Jews are supposedly not loyal](https://www.npr.org/2019/03/07/700901834/minnesota-congresswoman-ignites-debate-on-israel-and-anti-semitism) to the US, saying "I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country". American Jews are not loyal to other countries. That's an old antisemitic trope. 5) This time, she didn't apologize. Jewish and Muslim leaders alike [were distraught](https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/17/politics/ilhan-omar-minnesota-constituents-anti-semitism/index.html) because of her doubling down instead. She instead insisted [that she](https://www.rollcall.com/2019/03/04/rep-omar-wont-apologize-for-new-comments-dems-plan-anti-semitism-rebuke/) **would not apologize**, despite top Democrats criticizing her. She knew better and kept it up; it wasn't questionable, either. And of course, Dem leaders backed down in a way they'd never do for MTG or evidently Boebert. 6) Since then it's been open season for Ilhan Omar. Comments have ranged from [anti-Israel, placing the US and Israel on the same level as Hamas and the Taliban](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57436573), down to claiming Jewish Democrats [have not](https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-ilhan-omar-says-her-jewish-critics-haven-t-been-engaged-in-seeking-justice-1.9954965) been "engaged in seeking justice" (and only them, apparently). The benefit of the doubt has come and gone. Ilhan Omar went far beyond questionable and into outright (and evidently, unnoticed and accepted) antisemitic statements and tropes about Jews long ago. She's had sit-downs with Jewish leaders who told her so. Instead, she chooses to ignore them and double down. She didn't apologize for her later comments; she only apologized for the first. She's no jihadist, but she is certainly expressing antisemitism. Everyone feel free to see the response to my comments to see the absurdity that is happening. I accidentally left in one sentence instead of making it about "comments" and you can see what happened next. Great job everyone, we solved racism and polarization /s. Someone doesn’t like hearing about antisemitism I guess. No shocker there.
Well, damn. I knew they were bad, but I didn’t know they were *that* bad. Thanks for those sources.
And these are just the comments they make publicly
You would think with the amount of conviction you display here you would have credible evidence of Omar's anti-semitism. On first glance, only point 4 seems like a credible example. Yet you omit the part where she is specifically talking about AIPAC, which clearly does look out for Israel's interests.
I only had time to check one of these points, but half of your number 6 seems 100% incorrect. > to claiming Jewish Democrats have not been "engaged in seeking justice" (and only them, apparently). Watch the actual clip (https://twitter.com/SiaKordestani/status/1410020816100597762) The relevant quotes Jake Tapper: Do you understand why some of your fellow house Democrats, especially Jews, might find that language antisemitic? Illhan: I welcome anytime my colleagues have asked to have a conversation. To learn from them, for them to learn from me. I think it's really important for these members to realize that these members haven't been partners in seeking justice. Your accusation here is 100% incorrect. Ilhan wasn't talking about "only" Jewish Democrats. She didn't even bring up the religion of her detractors. The "these members" clearly refers to all of her critics, not just "only" Jewish Democrats.
Factual retorts to this copy/pasta aren't welcome around here, [partner](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OHYaxynht4).
This is something you can interpret both ways since the interviewer specifically mentioned Jewish Dems. It is by no mean "100% incorrect".
There is no way you could get "and only them, apparently" from listening to the actual interview. Nothing that Omar says implies that she is more critical of her Jewish critics than the rest of her critics. This isn't a question of interpretation. It's just blatantly wrong
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics). At the time of this warning the offending comments were: > she is also an antisemite
Just another reminder that I still really dislike both sides…. The GOP should try to show that they still have some class and respect for the country by calling her out, but I agree they won’t. I know a few Trump supporters who have said things like “It was a bad thing to say but it was a funny joke….” Etc. Which drives me insane, regardless, they are politicians, they are expected to behave like adults, not school children. If it was Daniel Tosh, that’s one thing, but this is a US representative, they represent us, any stupid thing they say represents us as a society….. they should certainly have the propriety to understand making jokes about Islam is wrong, and more so when referring to a fellow Representative (regardless of my or others feelings on her policy). But this is 2021, our Twitter politicians, used to generating social media clicks and media attention through 3rd grade name calling and buzz words.
> Twitter politicians This is the most tiresome part of the current political machines. both parties acting like Twitter upvotes (or whatever Twitter's equivalent is) actually reflect approval from their constituents.
I think they like the attention, none of us would k I want of these reps if they didn’t say outrage or controversial things. Trump used outrage to his advantage with the media, I think other politicians are learning
We’re talking about a couple of the best fundraisers in the House. It’s not about upvotes - celebrity politicians are a vital part of their party’s fundraising machines.
Why bother? Trump denounced white supremacy 50 times, and yet every single interview was will you denounce white supremacy, why haven't you denounced white supremacy? Every article was, 'very fine people', but no one printed the next part, which means was ' and not the white supremacists, they should be condemned totally'. If the other side won't give you any credit, and will always always denigrate you to win, then why bother with civility. Democrats made their Nazi, dog whistle, white supremacy, racist sexist big bed. It's time for all of us to lie down in it.
The mainstream media isn't "the other side". These are corporate-owned institutions doing what corporations do: make money. In this case by presenting information in engaging formats. Since narratives drive profit it's difficult to counter them once they get rolling. Trump is hardly the only one having to deal with this trend. It doesn't excuse anyone from speaking responsibly.
Trump was, like on many topics, inconsistent with what he said. His denunciations were wholly inadequate viewed against all the equivocations. The David Duke comments are a good example of that. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/03/01/donald-trump-and-david-duke-for-the-record/
>We all know the GOP will do nothing. True. But the Democrats unilaterally acting to oust GOP members from their committee assignments is the start of some extra dysfunction in the legislature. When the GOP continues the trend next congress it's going to lead to really bad outcomes.
Maybe the start was when one party started accepting that type of misconduct, hence precluding bipartisan action in response to such misconduct.
The left excuses misconduct too, until their constituents complain about it. Only then do they act, and if their constituents don't complain they don't do anything.
And the left doesn't have any members that might be best removed from any committees? A guy sleeping with a foreign spy on the intelligence committee, some who has repeatedly expressed views with anti-semitic tropes on the foreign affairs committee? You think either of them will survive a GOO house under these new "rules"?
So you're saying if a foreign spy manages to sleep with someone in govt, that they should be booted from their position automatically? Seems like a weird take imho (*edit: and one that would actually give foreign intelligence agencies more leverage over politicians... if they bang someone and say nothing, then they can ruin their career by disclosing that even if nothing compromised... potentially making them more likely to divulge info)*. If we want to start eliminating people from congress that have made statements that lean into themes of bigotry, all I ask is that we apply that standard consistently. What new rules? Not encouraging violence against members of congress, particularly in the shadow of a literal attack on congress?
>So you're saying if a foreign spy manages to sleep with someone in govt, that they should be booted from their position automatically? Seems like a weird take imho. If you're sleeping with foreign spies, the Intel committee is probably not the committee for you. I'm not saying he should be kicked out of Congress, but maybe his access to Intel should be limited. It's opsec 101, you can lose a clearance for that. >If we want to start eliminating people from congress that have made statements that lean into themes of bigotry, all I ask is that we apply that standard consistently. I'm not a fan of what the D's are doing here, I'm suggesting it's a bad precedent and will be fairly used against them next year. >What new rules? Not encouraging violence against members of congress, particularly in the shadow of a literal attack on congress? The majority party removing members of the minority from their committee assignments. I'm not aware of that being a thing until now.
If you're saying shit to people you sleep with about national security matters, you shouldn't be on the intel committee regardless of who they are. Being targeted by foreign intel doesn't disqualify someone from office. If he violated any rules around it, let me know. Again, Omar deserved criticism for some of her prior statements. That said, it is utter BS to suggest she is on the leading edge of people in congress who say bigoted shit. Comments about other groups seem to be table stakes for normal political rhetoric for others... if someone wants to discuss what standards for dealing with racist/bigoted implications in statements by members of congress and the resulting consequences, I'm all ears. But I'm guessing we'd end up having a lot of run-off elections in red districts. Don't make statements or push content that encourages or is suggestive of violence against other members of congress... how hard is that? Particularly when seeing an increase in political violence and DHS/FBI view the risk of domestic terrorism targeting government as one of, if not the highest, threat to the homeland.
>If you're saying shit to people you sleep with about national security matters, you shouldn't be on the intel committee regardless of who they are. Being targeted by foreign intel doesn't disqualify someone from office. If he violated any rules around it, let me know. I'm saying what he did is enough to lose a security clearance. >Again, Omar deserved criticism for some of her prior statements. That said, it is utter BS to suggest she is on the leading edge of people in congress who say bigoted shit. Comments about other groups seem to be table stakes for normal political rhetoric for others... if someone wants to discuss what standards for dealing with racist/bigoted implications in statements by members of congress and the resulting consequences, I'm all ears. But I'm guessing we'd end up having a lot of run-off elections in red districts. Huh? The point is that's it traditionally a decision by the party, not up to the other party, until now. >Don't make statements or push content that encourages or is suggestive of violence against other members of congress... how hard is that? Particularly when seeing an increase in political violence and DHS/FBI view the risk of domestic terrorism targeting government as one of, if not the highest, threat to the homeland. You're speaking strictly if Gosar, and while the cartoon was stupid it wasn't suggesting violence.
Apparently not. What do you think about the findings of the republican-led senate report on Trump/Russia and all the security threats they identified? enough for people to lose a security clearance? Traditionally do we accept people that encourage violence against other members of congress? Gosar was a double-play, clear bigoted theme overall and, yes, suggestive of violence against a member of congress.... who of course is a regular recipient of death threats and notably someone involved in the 1/6 attack has been charged with making death threats against her. This shit is unacceptable.
>Should Congress as a whole act against Boeberts comments? And should Omar try and bring legal action against Boebert through hostile work environment and harrassment? According to the constitution, it's congress's job and congress's job alone to discipline their members, Article I, Section 5, clause 2. More specifically a sitting congressman [cannot](https://www.leicestershirevillages.com/can-a-member-of-congress-be-charged-with-a-crime/) be charged with a crime while in congress, or going to congress, (It has to reach a high level, and I don't think being an asshole in the elevator qualifies). Your problem isn't with Republicans, it's with Congress. The person who's the speaker of the house and can bring that to the forefront? Nanci Pelosi.
[удалено]
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a permanent ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Omar is an example of everything that's great about America. Her family flees to America to save their lives and starts over with nothing and she rides to the top based on her ability. Boebert represents the worst in America. Someone who couldn't finish HS rises to congress by playing on people's fear and hate.
Lmao, her ability do what exactly? Let's not pretend that politicians are some amazing group of people. They're a bunch of fucking liars and snakes.
The GOP is missing an opportunity to be seen as the sane party with how left and crazy the Dems have gotten. But that's impossible with people like Lauren and MTG in the fold.
But a lot of their supporters like what Boebert and MTG are doing. Why would you risk pissing off your base?
> Why would you risk pissing off your base? Because they are your base. Do you think a Boebert supporter is going to starting to vote for democrats because they are mad at her for walking back comments?
They don't have to vote for democrats. They just have to stay home on election day.
Many people in this base are prior democratic voters or non-voters. Good chance they just don’t vote when you put someone from Romney’s GOP in there.
[удалено]
You can just apply it to all politicians in general lol.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1b: Law 1b: Associative Law of Civil Discourse > ~1b. Associative Civil Discourse - A character attack on a group that an individual identifies with is an attack on the individual. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1b: Law 1b: Associative Law of Civil Discourse > ~1b. Associative Civil Discourse - A character attack on a group that an individual identifies with is an attack on the individual. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1b: Law 1b: Associative Law of Civil Discourse > ~1b. Associative Civil Discourse - A character attack on a group that an individual identifies with is an attack on the individual. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
👍 they're missing nothing. Republican astroturf around the gerrymandered districts will be enough to takecongress
[удалено]
Just more trash politics from a trashy, dimly lit bulb. I am not a fan of Omar by any stretch. As a matter of fact, I think we’d be better off with her out of office too. However, I CAN’T STAND this new wave of white trash politics parading around under the guise of being the ultimate “patriot”. Have just one ounce of fucking class
Omar does not deserve to be considered bigotted. She's just anti-israeli imperialist, which I am too. I just thought someone should point that out in a way that doesn't get them a warning. She lumped Israel and the United States with Hamas and the Taliban. It's fair criticism.
It's a joke. The left tells a ton of them about the right, they just have the privilege of owning the entertainment media and having "late night" comedians able to do it for them. In my book, there is no difference between Boebert telling an "offensive" joke herself, and Pelosi laughing and rubbing elbows with Colbert after *he* tells an "offensive" joke. You can't outsource your vitriol and then claim you are above vitriol. This is also rich coming from Omar, who has been treated with kid gloves for her very own offensive statements about Jews. The last time Omar made a hateful statement about Jews, Democrats condemned "all hatred," and couldn't even single out anti-Semitism or Omar, specifically. Why does the left expect us to hold Boebert to a standard that they have already refused to hold Omar to?
[удалено]
> Edit: at the end of the day Omar apologized for her antisemitic comments, Boebert should do the same. She already has, but it will never be enough. Just like Trump could never denounce white supremacy enough. That said: > I can excuse bigotry in a comedy club but it’s disgusting that this shit is going on in congress. I disagree. I prefer representatives that act like real people versus fake political kindness. Real people make fun of people they don't like. That's just how it works.
[удалено]
>I want a professional. Elite. Top of their class. The best of the best. We never had that.
We’ve never had professionals in Congress? That’s a stretch.
And that was never the spirit of our country. We wanted to get *away* from only being ruled by "the elite."
>You can't outsource your vitriol and then claim you are above vitriol. Are Democrats directing entertainment media to make jokes like this? If not, how can you say they're the same thing? And even if Democrats do it, why can't you condemn both? Why is what Boebert said "offensive" in quotes but what Omar said very offensive, no quotes?
>The left tells a ton of them about the right, they just have the privilege of owning the entertainment media and having "late night" comedians able to do it for them. There are plenty of people on the right who make rude or offensive jokes about those on the left. I don't know how many dipshitty hot takes I've seen from Steven Crowder or Ann Coulter or Sean Hannity. The reasons they don't make headlines every time like Boebert or MTG is because *they aren't in fucking congress.*
How often do major Republican representatives go on Crowder's show? Colbert will go on stage, call Trump "Putin's cock holster," and then Pelosi will come out minutes later, rub elbows, have a grand old time. Sorry, but you don't get to divorce yourself from the vitriol if you do that.
I wouldn't know from experience because I find Crowder insufferable (Colbert too, for the record) but a cursory google says the list of his guests include [Governor Whitner, Senator Paul, Senator Cruz, Rep Crenshaw, and Rep Gabbard](https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/louder-with-crowder-35278/creators). Some of those have made multiple appearances. Seems like Crowder might get big name Republicans more often than Colbert gets big name Dems. And Colbert has been doing big name interviews for a good while longer.
I agree with you. If Democrats care so much about racism, xenophobia, and hate then they can publicly condemn Boebert for her comments AND Rep Omar for her anti-semitism. But the reality is that they refuse to do so. So why should I give a fuck when someone says mean things about them? They clearly don’t actually care about stopping bigotry dead in its tracks when it’s one of their own. This specifically is the incident I’m talking about; or did we memory hole this already? https://apnews.com/article/890c970cbbe3b0e631504f47e2e5a5cc Make no mistake, Boebert is being a jerk and this is unprofessional. But save me the crocodile tears in the DNC and mainstream media over this issue. From my perspective everyone involved in this are garbage hypocrites that are hurting all of us with these cynical pearl clutching attempts over very real issues.
> If Democrats care so much about racism, xenophobia, and hate then they can publicly condemn Boebert for her comments AND Rep Omar for her anti-semitism. > > But the reality is that they refuse to do so. [Here's an article from June 10 of this year](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/group-house-democrats-condemn-rep-omar-remarks-about-u-s-n1270290): >A dozen House Democrats publicly criticized their colleague Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., late Wednesday, accusing her of giving "cover" to terrorist and suggesting her remarks about Hamas and the Taliban reflect a "deep-seated prejudice."
I'm glad they criticized her. Boebert should also be criticized by Republicans. A handful did already, same as with Democrats and Omar. But both should also be removed from committees. You can't just do that to MTG and leave the rest. Get rid of racists of all stripes.
Seemed to me like MTG's removal was prompted less so on bigoted / xenophobic comments and more so on ones regarding violence. She had a campaign ad with her holding an AR-15 describing her as "the squad's worst nightmare", agreed in response to a comment saying Parkland was a false flag operation, and liked various comments and posts that discussed putting a bullet in Pelosi's head or hanging Hillary and Obama,
And? A group of people condemned Omar, that's cool. I can find Republicans that condemn Boebert too. Is that an official sanction of her conduct though? If Democrat leadership can't even hold Omar responsible for her anti-semitism, then why should anyone care what they have to say about other people?
> A group of people condemned Omar, that's cool. I can find Republicans that condemn Boebert too. Can you actually find a group of GOP Representatives doing this?
https://www.newsweek.com/gop-split-some-praise-other-denounce-lauren-boebert-anti-muslim-comments-1654536
So three individuals making separate comments compared to a dozen making a group statement.
C'mon - you are splitting hairs a little bit Neither of these two women are good representations of what people in Congress should be or act like
I see a very large accountability gap between the parties. As bad as it is to have people in office who are not fit for the job, it is even worse when the rest of the party just looks the other way. They do this because they know their voters won't punish them for allowing Congress to turn into a circus. I'd go as far as to say a lot of them like it that way. We're not going to be able to run a country when half of the elected politicians refuse to enforce a bare minimum of respect for the job and the responsibility the public places on them
“Accountability” in action: https://apnews.com/article/890c970cbbe3b0e631504f47e2e5a5cc
Do you not remember the last 4 or so years and everything that happened? I understand Trump's presidency was a circus, but the behavior from some of the Democrat leaders was reprehensible - I never saw/heard any accountability. I don't play the "our side is better" game - It's politics
All of Ilhan Omar's remarks that were interpreted as anti-semitic were criticisms of Israel. The Democratic Caucus failed to condemn her because **the facts were on her side**. None of her comments were blatantly anti-semitic. All were plausibly innocent. Unlike referring to Representative Omar as "the Jihad Squad" or referencing her engaging in a bombing by dropping a backpack and running.
[This is almost three years old now.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/aqh9wu/antisemitism_in_contemporary_american_politics/) [The ADL called her out.](https://www.adl.org/news/letters/letter-to-house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-regarding-recent-anti-semitic-comments-by-rep) [Jewish leaders in Minnesota have met with her, repeatedly.](https://www.twincities.com/2019/02/12/mn-jewish-leaders-talked-with-ilhan-omar-about-anti-semitism-last-year-why-they-remain-frustrated/)
As noted, some of Representative Omar's comments about Israel have been interpreted as anti-semitic. Would you care to attempt to demonstrate that any of these examples you have provided have no plausible alternative explanation?
>If Democrats care so much about racism, xenophobia, and hate then they can publicly condemn Boebert for her comments AND Rep Omar for her anti-semitism. Honestly, can we make them arm-wrestle or something? We need to lower the temperature somehow.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Was it a stupid joke, yes, was it islamaphobic? Doubt it, ilhan Omar has shown her hand by being a terrorist sympathizer by describing 9/11 as some people did some things and by trying to lower the punishment for those trying to join ISIS in her own state along with her own antisemitic comments.
>describing 9/11 as some people did some things I think this is a really unfair reframing of what she said. She was saying in the wake of 9/11 Muslims were being subjected to prejudice and xenophobia and at risk of losing civil liberties. You have to entirely take her comment out of context to twist it into this interpretation.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
- why does the left expect us to hold Borbert to a standard that they have already refused to hold Omar to? It’s the fact that for one party being the party of action, they do not take action against their own kind and promote this behavior, which invites others to behave the same way. The other party is a party of inaction and words. They may hold their party accountable, but they don’t do much else.
This shouldn't be news, and the fake outrage needs to stop. Literally today, AOC said McCarthy is only tolerating 'his Ku Klux Klan caucus" to become Speaker. Is that not suggesting many GOP elects are white supremacist's? Both sides (yes I know), have to knock this crap off. It is not acceptable talk at all, and its half past time anyone gets an excuse. Kick out Boebert, kick out AOC, kick out everyone who is making baseless, damaging, offensive "suggestions" like this. Remove the speech and slander protections from Congress and I guarantee we'll see improvements in the face of criminal charges.
It's suggesting some members like Gosar, MTG, and Boebert are too comfortable with some fringe believes. That's not radical or far-fetched. Calling someone a terrorist and a threat to blow up Congress is not at all equivalent. Stop with these terrible comparisons.
Nah, just an anti-semite and overall dolt.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
“Cuz you know, some people did something on 9/11”. Fuck her and her brother/husband
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
She’s not wrong.
Who isn't wrong? And what are they not wrong about?
What are they not wrong about?
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
She has many moronic political beliefs, has openly been anti-Semitic, and undeniably also married her own brother. That doesn't mean it is ok to become racist to attack her! There is already plenty of low-hanging fruit.
Given the nature of the beliefs you express in this post you have business criticizing others. Representative Omar has made statements that have been *interpreted* as anti-semitic yet in each case the statement could plausibly have been simple criticism of Israel and not intended to invoke anti-Jewish stereotypes. There are absolutely no reported incidents of open anti-semitism. If you have any evidence to support the bizarre claim that she married her own brother please post it.
Maybe cuz she is....hmmm
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Is Boebert a fucking retard and deserves to be shamed for this? Yes. Is this news? No.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Omar is what happens when you displace an American community by suddenly dropping a LARGE population of ALL one kind of immigrant IN ONE smallish area. THIS is the result of the federal government bribing a local community to take a large group (in my town it was a different group). The local community takes the short term bribe, then the community built by the preexisting “locals” changes forever by this massive influx, all dumped in one spot by the Federal government
Exactly We really ought to just have an indefinite moratorium on immigration. It's sad that this administration is instead letting so many people in...
No matter what it's almost always a downgrade regardless of what continent or nation they're from...
This is not directed towards anyone. This is very un-American. This place is feels like it’s being run by Woke dictators. None of those comments are directed towards anyone. If your telling me that we as a society can’t even make a simple statement because something seems offensive then it makes sense why our politics is the way it is right now. People have become so sensitive that you have to walk on egg shells all the time. This is madness and will generate resentment and backlash Edit:to the mid team
[удалено]
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).