The Rush to Judge Ilhan Omar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Why are you judging me for my bigoted opinions? I’m so offended.”

My opinion is that the way Omar characterized 9/11 was insensitive. That is not bigoted. It is okay to criticize politicians.

According to Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, that makes you a white supremacist.

Ironic that Omar was giving a speech about Islamaphobia--which I agree is real--and, just made it worse. She needs to think about why there was a rise in Islamaphobia. Phobias are based on fear. She gives credence to those who believe that Muslims are cavalier about 9/11.

Instead of using her position and identity as a platform for unity, she is using it for divisiveness.

It appears that she doesn't understand how 9/11 affected so many Americans. Perhaps, it is because she experienced violence and horror in her home country and does not realize how unfathomable it was to so many Americans. Perhaps, she did not watch it 24/7 like so many of us did. To those of us who were adults when it happened, it seems like yesterday. I would imagine it feels like yesterday to those in NYC. It certainly feels like yesterday to DH who witnessed the plane hitting the Pentagon and knew well a woman who was killed that day.

We all relate to our own background of experience. I understand that Omar's 9/11 experience was different from mine. However, she needs to realize that most of America had an experience different from hers.

Right now, she is not helping her cause. And, using W's words shows she has no sense of the context in which they were said. She needs to educate herself and watch her words. It also would not hurt for her to develop a little more understanding of why others see her the way they do--and, it is not just because she is Muslim. It is because of what she says and who she blames.

She is welcome to give a speech on Islamaphobia--it is real. She needs to understand why people are afraid and put water on the fire--not gasoline.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:MSNBC interviewed a Democratic Representative from NM about Ilhan Omar's characterization of 9/11. (I believe it's safe to say they are liberal leaning). He boldly (inappropriately perhaps?) spoke for all Americans.

https://www.msnbc.com/katy-tur/watch/asst-house-speaker-omar-s-9-11-comments-hurtful-to-me-and-everyone-that-was-personally-impacted-by-attacks-1488546371838?cid=referral_taboolafeed

Democratic Representative Ben Ray Lujan, the Assistant Speaker in the House of Representatives, tells MSNBC's Kasie Hunt that Rep. Ilhan Omar's description of the 9/11 terrorist attacks as "some people did something," was hurtful and that nobody should refer to it in that way. He says her words were extremely hurtful to him, and to everyone who was personally impacted by those terrorist attacks.

Interestingly, as this Democratic Congressman was saying this riled him, the chryon on the screen read, "Omar's Remark on 9/11, Muslim Civil Rights Riles Conservatives."

Never count on a Democrat -- especially one in leadership -- to have your back. This is the same group that couldn't run fast enough to introduce a resolution condemning Omar for saying something she didn't say.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Talk about mischaracterization of words. I said the validity or context of her point isn't relative to whether or not I, and many others, find her words about 9/11 insensitive and offensive. Yes, Islamophobia is on the rise. Yes, her words are offensive. Putting them in context of her speech does not change that.

"You simply don't care about the rise of Islamophobia." You're too much. If you care so much, why don't you start a topic on this issue instead of criticizing me for not caring?

I'm the one who started this thread.

Why do you keep pushing me to focus on Islamophobia instead of her 9/11 comments/tweet? If you wanted me to start a new topic, just say so. I brought the tweet up here since you deleted the more recent one and I decided you were trying to consolidate.

Islamophobia was the point of her remarks. You are ignoring her point to focus on semantics. You could read her whole statement and then characterize her words as "It was unfair that all Muslims were blamed for 9/11" or you could say "she described 9/11 as some 'people doing something'". Which way you choose says a lot about you and your priorities.

I've wondered, when having discussion with you, why you say things like the bolded above. I've never understood judging and attacking someone's character or morals to be a normal part of discussion and debate. You tend to get personal and self righteous, sounding like a judgmental scold. I enjoy debating topics, but not when it seems that you want to "own" the board figuratively as well as literally.

Are you denying that the subjects individuals choose to bring up -- or the way they frame those topics -- says something about them? If someone posted anti-Semitic remarks would you suggest that it doesn't reflect on the person? I absolutely think that when you choose to focus on semantics rather than an accurate point about increased bigotry it exposes your priorities. Why do you disagree with that?

What is the value in judging the character or priorities of someone with whom you're talking? What does it matter to you what it says about me? Are you trying to persuade anonymous strangers to think poorly of other anonymous strangers? The point is to discuss the issue. Questioning my character doesn't add anything to the discussion. It just makes it seem that your goal is to chastise and shut down discussion, rather than inform or persuade.

Again, we both know that your reaction would be much different if a poster were spouting anti-Semitism. In that case, you would have no problem discussing character and priorities. Do you think that choosing to frame this issue as "Omar downplayed 9/11" rather than "Omar discussed the rise of Islamophobia after 9/11" has nothing to do with your character or priorities? There is absolutely a connection. Whether that is worthy of discussion in this forum is an open question that only individual readers can answer, but I think it is at least worth pointing out. Maybe you have a different explanation for choosing to frame this issue the way that you did that has nothing to do with your character or priorities. If so, please share.

You have questioned my character in quite a few discussions I have had with you in this forum, on a variety of topics, and I have seen you do it many times to other posters. It's a strategy that I don't understand, but I'll let it go. It's your choice and your style. I thought it was worth mentioning. I'm a moderate Republican, not some white nationalist RWNJ. I enjoy the discussions, but could do without the sanctimony.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MSNBC interviewed a Democratic Representative from NM about Ilhan Omar's characterization of 9/11. (I believe it's safe to say they are liberal leaning). He boldly (inappropriately perhaps?) spoke for all Americans.

https://www.msnbc.com/katy-tur/watch/asst-house-speaker-omar-s-9-11-comments-hurtful-to-me-and-everyone-that-was-personally-impacted-by-attacks-1488546371838?cid=referral_taboolafeed

Democratic Representative Ben Ray Lujan, the Assistant Speaker in the House of Representatives, tells MSNBC's Kasie Hunt that Rep. Ilhan Omar's description of the 9/11 terrorist attacks as "some people did something," was hurtful and that nobody should refer to it in that way. He says her words were extremely hurtful to him, and to everyone who was personally impacted by those terrorist attacks.

Interestingly, as this Democratic Congressman was saying this riled him, the chryon on the screen read, "Omar's Remark on 9/11, Muslim Civil Rights Riles Conservatives."

Never count on a Democrat -- especially one in leadership -- to have your back. This is the same group that couldn't run fast enough to introduce a resolution condemning Omar for saying something she didn't say.

SMH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Why are you judging me for my bigoted opinions? I’m so offended.”

My opinion is that the way Omar characterized 9/11 was insensitive. That is not bigoted. It is okay to criticize politicians.

According to Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, that makes you a white supremacist.

Ironic that Omar was giving a speech about Islamaphobia--which I agree is real--and, just made it worse. She needs to think about why there was a rise in Islamaphobia. Phobias are based on fear. She gives credence to those who believe that Muslims are cavalier about 9/11.

Instead of using her position and identity as a platform for unity, she is using it for divisiveness.

It appears that she doesn't understand how 9/11 affected so many Americans. Perhaps, it is because she experienced violence and horror in her home country and does not realize how unfathomable it was to so many Americans. Perhaps, she did not watch it 24/7 like so many of us did. To those of us who were adults when it happened, it seems like yesterday. I would imagine it feels like yesterday to those in NYC. It certainly feels like yesterday to DH who witnessed the plane hitting the Pentagon and knew well a woman who was killed that day.

We all relate to our own background of experience. I understand that Omar's 9/11 experience was different from mine. However, she needs to realize that most of America had an experience different from hers.

Right now, she is not helping her cause. And, using W's words shows she has no sense of the context in which they were said. She needs to educate herself and watch her words. It also would not hurt for her to develop a little more understanding of why others see her the way they do--and, it is not just because she is Muslim. It is because of what she says and who she blames.

She is welcome to give a speech on Islamaphobia--it is real. She needs to understand why people are afraid and put water on the fire--not gasoline.

I think that those who are defending her are making it worse. Their reactions have been more inflammatory than her own remarks. AOC's complaint that Crenshaw hasn't done enough for 9/11 victims, and hasn't done his part to stop violent extremism is wrong. Crenshaw volunteered for duty, went to Afghanistan and lost his eye to the enemy. AOC saying that his criticism of her is inciting violence against her is wrong. It's okay to criticize politicians. No one is exempt. She calls people out on Twitter all the time. Her "friends" are doing her no favors.

[Anonymous]

She is a bad combination of angry and not that bright. It’s a recipe for disaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Why are you judging me for my bigoted opinions? I’m so offended.”

My opinion is that the way Omar characterized 9/11 was insensitive. That is not bigoted. It is okay to criticize politicians.

According to Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, that makes you a white supremacist.

Ironic that Omar was giving a speech about Islamaphobia--which I agree is real--and, just made it worse. She needs to think about why there was a rise in Islamaphobia. Phobias are based on fear. She gives credence to those who believe that Muslims are cavalier about 9/11.

Instead of using her position and identity as a platform for unity, she is using it for divisiveness.

It appears that she doesn't understand how 9/11 affected so many Americans. Perhaps, it is because she experienced violence and horror in her home country and does not realize how unfathomable it was to so many Americans. Perhaps, she did not watch it 24/7 like so many of us did. To those of us who were adults when it happened, it seems like yesterday. I would imagine it feels like yesterday to those in NYC. It certainly feels like yesterday to DH who witnessed the plane hitting the Pentagon and knew well a woman who was killed that day.

We all relate to our own background of experience. I understand that Omar's 9/11 experience was different from mine. However, she needs to realize that most of America had an experience different from hers.

Right now, she is not helping her cause. And, using W's words shows she has no sense of the context in which they were said. She needs to educate herself and watch her words. It also would not hurt for her to develop a little more understanding of why others see her the way they do--and, it is not just because she is Muslim. It is because of what she says and who she blames.

She is welcome to give a speech on Islamaphobia--it is real. She needs to understand why people are afraid and put water on the fire--not gasoline.

I think that those who are defending her are making it worse. Their reactions have been more inflammatory than her own remarks. AOC's complaint that Crenshaw hasn't done enough for 9/11 victims, and hasn't done his part to stop violent extremism is wrong. Crenshaw volunteered for duty, went to Afghanistan and lost his eye to the enemy. AOC saying that his criticism of her is inciting violence against her is wrong. It's okay to criticize politicians. No one is exempt. She calls people out on Twitter all the time. Her "friends" are doing her no favors.

sort of like the technology in schools

Using a platform doesn't translate into teaching.

But this is exactly what AOC and Omar think - that by tweeting, they're leading/governing.

lol

[Anonymous]

The people who voted for her must be really clueless.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
sort of like the technology in schools

Using a platform doesn't translate into teaching.

But this is exactly what AOC and Omar think - that by tweeting, they're leading/governing.

lol

Right, you would never support a politician who led by tweeting. That would be unthinkable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We all know why everyone is judging her.

She's a woman, she's young and she is a Muslim.

It's disgraceful.

And a person of color. Doomed to judgement by legions of jerks the second she came out of the womb.

Oh please. Her status as a POC and a Muslim was the only reason this unqualified nut was elected in the first place.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
sort of like the technology in schools

Using a platform doesn't translate into teaching.

But this is exactly what AOC and Omar think - that by tweeting, they're leading/governing.

lol

Right, you would never support a politician who led by tweeting. That would be unthinkable.

DP Just because two people act like imbeciles it doesn't normalize their behavior. This tit for tat mentality is a bit childish.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
sort of like the technology in schools

Using a platform doesn't translate into teaching.

But this is exactly what AOC and Omar think - that by tweeting, they're leading/governing.

lol

Right, you would never support a politician who led by tweeting. That would be unthinkable.

Is there anything you would criticize about AOC or Omar?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
sort of like the technology in schools

Using a platform doesn't translate into teaching.

But this is exactly what AOC and Omar think - that by tweeting, they're leading/governing.

lol

Right, you would never support a politician who led by tweeting. That would be unthinkable.

exactly - I did NOT vote for Trump if that's what you're implying.

I don't believe in the overuse of social media. It's a weak excuse for "work."

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
sort of like the technology in schools

Using a platform doesn't translate into teaching.

But this is exactly what AOC and Omar think - that by tweeting, they're leading/governing.

lol

Right, you would never support a politician who led by tweeting. That would be unthinkable.

Is there anything you would criticize about AOC or Omar?

I think that AOC was intimidated by the response to her initial position regarding Israel and Palestine and has since backed down and stays away from the issue. Otherwise, I have no criticisms of her. I disagree with Omar's suggestion that Senators are only pro-Israel because of the Benjamins, though it is correct that that is a major part of it (just not the only reason).

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
sort of like the technology in schools

Using a platform doesn't translate into teaching.

But this is exactly what AOC and Omar think - that by tweeting, they're leading/governing.

lol

Right, you would never support a politician who led by tweeting. That would be unthinkable.

Is there anything you would criticize about AOC or Omar?

I think that AOC was intimidated by the response to her initial position regarding Israel and Palestine and has since backed down and stays away from the issue. Otherwise, I have no criticisms of her. I disagree with Omar's suggestion that Senators are only pro-Israel because of the Benjamins, though it is correct that that is a major part of it (just not the only reason).

LOL. Okay. This reminds me of a job candidate answering the question, "What is one of your weaknesses?" and answering, "Sometimes I work too hard."