Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:23 Republicans voted in favor of hate. Stupid Louie Gohmert even gave a floor speech saying the according to the Bible, hate is okay.

Update: a few votes were changed after the gavel, so I updated the number.

Oh, just stop it. They did NOT vote in favor of hate.
They voted against a worthless resolution. It may well have said... Just be kind. THAT, they would have voted for.

I'm sure both Farrakhan and David Duke approve of these Republicans' votes, as well as Louie Gohmert's anti-Semitic comment on TV that even Fox news apolpgized for.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-business-apologizes-for-louie-gohmert-spreading-anti-semitic-george-soros-conspiracy

The same guy who praised Ilhan Omar to the hilt.

Hardly "To the hilt." Certainly not effusively as he praised Trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Engel's statement was full of pain.
It's worth watching.

ugh - i worked for him. no matter what the issues of the day were, it's always a focus on israel this, israel that.

I've always found it interesting that Bernie has a direct connection to a lot of pain and tragedy in his jewish family but he NEVER brings it up.

Maybe Bernie realizes that all humans suffer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:23 Republicans voted in favor of hate. Stupid Louie Gohmert even gave a floor speech saying the according to the Bible, hate is okay.

Update: a few votes were changed after the gavel, so I updated the number.

Oh, just stop it. They did NOT vote in favor of hate.
They voted against a worthless resolution. It may well have said... Just be kind. THAT, they would have voted for.

I'm sure both Farrakhan and David Duke approve of these Republicans' votes, as well as Louie Gohmert's anti-Semitic comment on TV that even Fox news apolpgized for.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-business-apologizes-for-louie-gohmert-spreading-anti-semitic-george-soros-conspiracy

The same guy who praised Ilhan Omar to the hilt.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:23 Republicans voted in favor of hate. Stupid Louie Gohmert even gave a floor speech saying the according to the Bible, hate is okay.

Update: a few votes were changed after the gavel, so I updated the number.

Oh, just stop it. They did NOT vote in favor of hate.
They voted against a worthless resolution. It may well have said... Just be kind. THAT, they would have voted for.

I'm sure both Farrakhan and David Duke approve of these Republicans' votes, as well as Louie Gohmert's anti-Semitic comment on TV that even Fox news apolpgized for.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-business-apologizes-for-louie-gohmert-spreading-anti-semitic-george-soros-conspiracy

FYI, all 23, including King, voted yes on H.R. 41 in January which "rejects White nationalism and White supremacy as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values that define the people of the United States."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:23 Republicans voted in favor of hate. Stupid Louie Gohmert even gave a floor speech saying the according to the Bible, hate is okay.

Update: a few votes were changed after the gavel, so I updated the number.

Oh, just stop it. They did NOT vote in favor of hate.
They voted against a worthless resolution. It may well have said... Just be kind. THAT, they would have voted for.

I'm sure both Farrakhan and David Duke approve of these Republicans' votes, as well as Louie Gohmert's anti-Semitic comment on TV that even Fox news apolpgized for.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-business-apologizes-for-louie-gohmert-spreading-anti-semitic-george-soros-conspiracy

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[All I'm saying is that a WHOLE LOT of Jewish people, for whom having a major disruption in their party is undesirable, are choosing (I suppose) to find her words offensive and anti-Semitic. Is it just more outrage culture? If Democrats are so whipped up by the outrage culture they have created that they can't even step back and interpret benign words the way they were intended, even when it's in their best interest to do so, then that's going to be the death of them. OTOH, if that's not what it is, perhaps you could just say that people feel the way they feel, and that her words aroused some sort of feelings in them that were negative and familiar. And if so, then there's a very good chance that the phrasing or something about her words makes them less innocent than you feel they are. If there are two distinct viewpoints on this within the Democratic party, it is clearly up for interpretation and far from factual.

When a group of Jewish leaders in MN met with her last year to tell her they were upset by things she had said, and the "Jews have hypnotized the world" comment was one among other things she had said, can we accept that their feelings and reasons were legitimate? We do not know what their other examples were.

Interesting that you misquote her 2012 tweet. In that tweet, she said that Israel had hypnotized the world, not the Jews. She later said that she didn't understand how that would be understood and apologized. But what we are discussing now, and what she was just criticized for on the floor of the US House of Representatives was her talk at Busboys and Poets. I can offer a couple of different possible explanations for the criticism. I don't know which, if any, are correct:

1) The first reports of her talk wildly mischaracterized her words. That established a narrative that has been difficult to push back. I also think that once many had reacted to the initial reports, they for whatever reason were reluctant to admit they were wrong.

2) It may be that the attacks on her have less to do with anti-Semitism and more to do with squashing any criticism of Israel and its supporters.

3) Omar's use of the word "allegiance" was unfortunate and contributed to the mischaracterization of her remarks. Had she said "support" instead, things might be different. It's possible that that single word is enough for some of her critics to basically declare "end of story" and not really concern themselves with her fuller statement.

4) Some may feel that while her words are not explicitly anti-Semitic, her intent (which assume to divine) was anti-Semitic.

5) I think that the attention paid to her 2012 tweet (for which she apologized) and her comment about the Benjamins, plus her religion, created a preconceived notion that she is anti-Semitic. This made it easy for people to assume the worst about her Busboys and Poets remarks and allowed easy acceptance of the initial mischaracterizations.

6) Lastly, the media played a significant role in broadcasting the mischaracterization of her remarks. Even now the Washington Post has an article that falsely describes what she said. I have written to the journalist and hopefully he will correct it.

You are really not in a position to yell fake news at real journalists. The WAPO accurately characterized her comments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Engel's statement was full of pain.
It's worth watching.

ugh - i worked for him. no matter what the issues of the day were, it's always a focus on israel this, israel that.

I've always found it interesting that Bernie has a direct connection to a lot of pain and tragedy in his jewish family but he NEVER brings it up.

Anonymous wrote:Democracy in this country has become only an illusion.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The anti-Semitic accusations are the usual ridiculous hysteria that accompanies any accusation of Israel. Didn’t the house just pass a bill that allows for states to boycott businesses that are boycotting Israel for its treatment of Palestinians? Our elected officials thought it was so important to protect a foreign government that this was the first bill they passed this year? And people have the audacity to think Omar is wrong to say that Congress is bought and paid for by AIPAC and its affiliates?

^^^ criticism of Israel.......sorry, too early.

It is an anti-semitic trope to say that Jews have bought our Congress. Read a history book if you don't believe that a person in power making such claims is dangerous.

Here is an AIPAC official saying that it is all about the Benjamins:

"Congressmen and senators don’t do anything unless you pressure them. They kick the can down the road, unless you pressure them, and the only way to do that is with money."

https://theintercept.com/2019/02/11/ilhan-omar-israel-lobby-documentary/

Right on its own website, AIPAC recruits people to donate $5,000 per election cycle:

https://www.aipac.org/act/congressional-club

While saying that pro-Israel groups have "bought" Congress oversimplifies the reasons why Israel is popular in Congress, the role of pro-israel money cannot be denied.

Gross! You should be ashamed of yourself. Pick up a history book.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Engel's statement was full of pain.
It's worth watching.

ugh - i worked for him. no matter what the issues of the day were, it's always a focus on israel this, israel that.

I've always found it interesting that Bernie has a direct connection to a lot of pain and tragedy in his jewish family but he NEVER brings it up.

Anonymous wrote:Engel's statement was full of pain.
It's worth watching.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[All I'm saying is that a WHOLE LOT of Jewish people, for whom having a major disruption in their party is undesirable, are choosing (I suppose) to find her words offensive and anti-Semitic. Is it just more outrage culture? If Democrats are so whipped up by the outrage culture they have created that they can't even step back and interpret benign words the way they were intended, even when it's in their best interest to do so, then that's going to be the death of them. OTOH, if that's not what it is, perhaps you could just say that people feel the way they feel, and that her words aroused some sort of feelings in them that were negative and familiar. And if so, then there's a very good chance that the phrasing or something about her words makes them less innocent than you feel they are. If there are two distinct viewpoints on this within the Democratic party, it is clearly up for interpretation and far from factual.

When a group of Jewish leaders in MN met with her last year to tell her they were upset by things she had said, and the "Jews have hypnotized the world" comment was one among other things she had said, can we accept that their feelings and reasons were legitimate? We do not know what their other examples were.

Interesting that you misquote her 2012 tweet. In that tweet, she said that Israel had hypnotized the world, not the Jews. She later said that she didn't understand how that would be understood and apologized. But what we are discussing now, and what she was just criticized for on the floor of the US House of Representatives was her talk at Busboys and Poets. I can offer a couple of different possible explanations for the criticism. I don't know which, if any, are correct:

1) The first reports of her talk wildly mischaracterized her words. That established a narrative that has been difficult to push back. I also think that once many had reacted to the initial reports, they for whatever reason were reluctant to admit they were wrong.

2) It may be that the attacks on her have less to do with anti-Semitism and more to do with squashing any criticism of Israel and its supporters.

3) Omar's use of the word "allegiance" was unfortunate and contributed to the mischaracterization of her remarks. Had she said "support" instead, things might be different. It's possible that that single word is enough for some of her critics to basically declare "end of story" and not really concern themselves with her fuller statement.

4) Some may feel that while her words are not explicitly anti-Semitic, her intent (which assume to divine) was anti-Semitic.

5) I think that the attention paid to her 2012 tweet (for which she apologized) and her comment about the Benjamins, plus her religion, created a preconceived notion that she is anti-Semitic. This made it easy for people to assume the worst about her Busboys and Poets remarks and allowed easy acceptance of the initial mischaracterizations.

6) Lastly, the media played a significant role in broadcasting the mischaracterization of her remarks. Even now the Washington Post has an article that falsely describes what she said. I have written to the journalist and hopefully he will correct it.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The anti-Semitic accusations are the usual ridiculous hysteria that accompanies any accusation of Israel. Didn’t the house just pass a bill that allows for states to boycott businesses that are boycotting Israel for its treatment of Palestinians? Our elected officials thought it was so important to protect a foreign government that this was the first bill they passed this year? And people have the audacity to think Omar is wrong to say that Congress is bought and paid for by AIPAC and its affiliates?

^^^ criticism of Israel.......sorry, too early.

It is an anti-semitic trope to say that Jews have bought our Congress. Read a history book if you don't believe that a person in power making such claims is dangerous.

Here is an AIPAC official saying that it is all about the Benjamins:

"Congressmen and senators don’t do anything unless you pressure them. They kick the can down the road, unless you pressure them, and the only way to do that is with money."

https://theintercept.com/2019/02/11/ilhan-omar-israel-lobby-documentary/

Right on its own website, AIPAC recruits people to donate $5,000 per election cycle:

https://www.aipac.org/act/congressional-club

While saying that pro-Israel groups have "bought" Congress oversimplifies the reasons why Israel is popular in Congress, the role of pro-israel money cannot be denied.