What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

Handyman said:
Yes but that isnt the issue here.
Click to expand...

Isn't it? My impression is that's exactly what happened here: x had the temerity to call AIPAC out (now, for what particular trigger, that I don't know), the sh-tstorm was deployed to bury the merits of the case in an avalanche of cynical charges of x's antisemitism. The merits of the case for limiting AIPAC's (and by extension, their clients') influence are forgotten.

That's how the game is played. Every lobby does it -- just wait until we try to fix some of the more heinous fiscal giveaways to the rich for them waving the bloody shirt of TEH COMMUNISM!!!1! That is a big part of what a lobby does.
 
Re: 116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

Kepler said:
On the one hand, that seems like BS because what she said is true: AIPAC is an incredibly powerful lobby, punching far above their weight in terms of American interests yet still somehow getting away with it and flourishing. They're exactly the type of pressure group (Big Pharma, the NRA) who should be exposed for warping American policy.

On the other hand, a first term Muslim woman has to be Jackie F-cking Robinson. It isn't fair, but she's going to have to live a triply perfect life to stand up to the garbage that can be thrown at her to leverage bigotry and hatred. She obviously knows this; she has to step very carefully. It sucks. Totally. But if she wants to call out AIPAC the way they deserve she should find a Jewish Member willing to do it. If she wants to call out DHS for profiling Muslims she should find a Christian Member willing to do it. "Life isn't fair, Princess. Just fairer than death; that's all."
Click to expand...

She would still be under fire if she was a Lilly White Lutheran. She isnt some city councilman she is a Congresswoman. When you hold public office everything you say or do is under a microscope. There is always someone looking to nail you for something so unless you have capital you shut up. That is why Pelosi did the right thing here even if it hurts the New Kids on the Block's feelings a bit. She not only taught her a lesson but also defused the bomb before it blew up in everyone's face.

The fact that she is a Muslim amplified it and definitely fed into it. I guarantee a lot of Jews are questioning whether she is Antisemitic or not now and she brought that on herself. Her apology was aces though so I have no ill will towards her on this (or any) matter.

But I think some of you upset she got ripped for this need to stop and take a major step back. If she was a Trumper and did the same thing, hell if she was a GOPer in any light you all would be destroying them especially you Kep. You wouldnt wait five seconds to post something from TPM about it and show it is further proof they are all racist and you would all disavow the apology. The (D) behind her name is making this way less of a big deal.

And Kep, when I say people are dogwhistling Antisemitism the stuff you are saying is my prime example. I know you arent doing it out of some hatred of Jews which is why I am not attacking you for it but I will point it out to you. No matter what it is about any implication of a "Big Jewish Boogeyman" is never good. It is the same game the Magaytes play with George Soros or the Farrakhan Disciples play with how the Jews own all the banks. Your point gets lost because basically you are saying the "Pelosi Fears the Jew Power So She Shut Omar Up" which is just ridiculous and really offensive. The Jews didnt tell Pelosi to shut Omar up...she did it on her own because Omar put herself in the crosshairs.

Israel is its own issue...but Omar deserved to get her wrist slapped by Mommy Pelosi over this one. And if I lived in Omar's district I would vote for her every election until she quit so I have zero ill will towards her even now because I think she made a frosh mistake.
 
Last edited:
Re: 116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

But I think some of you upset she got ripped for this need to stop and take a major step back. If she was a Trumper and did the same thing, hell if she was a GOPer in any light you all would be destroying them especially you Kep.
Click to expand...
Uh... no, because they would be correct.

Pelosi should be standing behind her on this except she knows members of her party get money from that PAC. If it was Saudi Arabia or Russia being tweeted about nobody would bat an eyelash other than Trump.
 
Last edited:
Re: 116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

Handyman said:
And Kep, when I say people are dogwhistling Antisemitism the stuff you are saying is my prime example. I know you arent doing it out of some hatred of Jews which is why I am not attacking you for it but I will point it out to you. No matter what it is about any implication of a "Big Jewish Boogeyman" is never good. It is the same game the Magaytes play with George Soros or the Farrakhan Disciples play with how the Jews own all the banks. Your point gets lost because basically you are saying the "Jews Used Their Power to Shut Her Up" which is just ridiculous and really offensive. The Jews didnt tell Pelosi to shut Omar up...she did it on her own because Omar put herself in the crosshairs.
Click to expand...

I think I understand what you are saying. But there's a problem with the logic someplace, as if I shouldn't be a vegan now because Hitler was one.

It has to be OK to discuss the possibility that x is actually acting in some way P even in an environment in which bad actors indiscriminately accuse x of P as part of their campaign of bigotry. There actually are some Irish alcoholics, and there actually are some entities deployed by forces within Israel to buy off or threaten US pols in order to obtain their policy goals.

The irony is the AIPAC stooges themselves are probably WASPs working for some blue-blood K Street firm which either was or even still is antisemitic.
 
Re: 116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">To every Democrat who said nothing about the anti-Muslim bigotry, harassment, and bullying Rep. Ilhan Omar has been enduring over the past months, and longer, but only spoke up to criticize her: You are part of the problem.</p>— Matt Duss (@mattduss) <a href="https://twitter.com/mattduss/status/1095303084278992896?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 12, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Handyman said:
She would still be under fire if she was a Lilly White Lutheran. She isnt some city councilman she is a Congresswoman. When you hold public office everything you say or do is under a microscope. There is always someone looking to nail you for something so unless you have capital you shut up. That is why Pelosi did the right thing here even if it hurts the New Kids on the Block's feelings a bit. She not only taught her a lesson but also defused the bomb before it blew up in everyone's face.

The fact that she is a Muslim amplified it and definitely fed into it. I guarantee a lot of Jews are questioning whether she is Antisemitic or not now and she brought that on herself. Her apology was aces though so I have no ill will towards her on this (or any) matter.

But I think some of you upset she got ripped for this need to stop and take a major step back. If she was a Trumper and did the same thing, hell if she was a GOPer in any light you all would be destroying them especially you Kep. You wouldnt wait five seconds to post something from TPM about it and show it is further proof they are all racist and you would all disavow the apology. The (D) behind her name is making this way less of a big deal.

And Kep, when I say people are dogwhistling Antisemitism the stuff you are saying is my prime example. I know you arent doing it out of some hatred of Jews which is why I am not attacking you for it but I will point it out to you. No matter what it is about any implication of a "Big Jewish Boogeyman" is never good. It is the same game the Magaytes play with George Soros or the Farrakhan Disciples play with how the Jews own all the banks. Your point gets lost because basically you are saying the "Pelosi Fears the Jew Power So She Shut Omar Up" which is just ridiculous and really offensive. The Jews didnt tell Pelosi to shut Omar up...she did it on her own because Omar put herself in the crosshairs.

Israel is its own issue...but Omar deserved to get her wrist slapped by Mommy Pelosi over this one. And if I lived in Omar's district I would vote for her every election until she quit so I have zero ill will towards her even now because I think she made a frosh mistake.
Click to expand...

So what is the proper way to call out AIPAC for having outsized influence due to their lobbying efforts, including the expenditure of large sums of money, in a manner similar to the NRA, Americans for Prosperity, etc., if we can't point out the expenditure of such sums without being accused of stereotyping and being anti-semetic?
 
Re: 116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

unofan said:
So what is the proper way to call out AIPAC for having outsized influence due to their lobbying efforts, including the expenditure of large sums of money, in a manner similar to the NRA, Americans for Prosperity, etc., if we can't point out the expenditure of such sums without being accused of stereotyping and being anti-semetic?
Click to expand...

I dunno...I am just telling you how it looks. Maybe if every argument made against Jews wasnt how they are part of some vast conspiracy you wouldnt have this problem. Blame the Antisemites and their lack of creativity not me.

I do find it ironic though how the Left doesnt have the same zeal for defending certain groups over others though. If this was a situation where Muslim stereotypes were used the Left would be up in arms for days screaming how insensitive it was. (and rightfully so) Christ anyone even mentions anything tangentially close to being a racial slur against a Black the Left is ready to go to War and tar and feather the person. (again rightfully so, myself included) All I am pointing out is this is a similar scenario and they would be wise to watch the way they say things because as we have all said a million times, optics matter.

I am all for not supporting Likud and much of the antics of Israel (though they arent even the worst ally we have in the MidEast despite how bad the Left paints them sometimes) because they bring that crap on themselves. I mean it would be nice if the Left held other actors in the region to the same standard but everyone has their ox to gore that is how politics works so that is the price for playing the game. The GOP only supports Israel because the Evangelicals need to it for the return of their White Messiah. But just know, and I say this as a Jewish Liberal, you need to pay better attention to the rhetoric used or it will bite you in the *** later on.
 
Re: 116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-cards="hidden" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Sean Hannity blasts "garbage" funding compromise <a href="https://t.co/i5RUJ3RLGY">https://t.co/i5RUJ3RLGY</a> <a href="https://t.co/6jE7yZ7iyz">pic.twitter.com/6jE7yZ7iyz</a></p>— The Hill (@thehill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1095386816847536128?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 12, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Fox News host Sean Hannity took aim at reports of an immigration and border security compromise between Democrats and Republicans in Congress shortly after the deal was announced Monday night and before any details were publicly available.

In a segment on his show, Hannity warned that any Republican supporting a compromise with Democrats that did not involve funding for President Trump's planned wall along the Mexican border would "have to explain" their positions.

"By the way on this new so-called compromise, I am getting details ... $1.3 billion?" Hannity asked, referring to a figure reportedly agreed upon by lawmakers that is far lower than Trump has demanded for border security funding.

"That's not a— not even a wall, a barrier?" Hannity continued. "I'm going to tell [you] this tonight we will get back into this tomorrow. Any Republican that supports this garbage compromise, you will have to explain [it.]"
Click to expand...
 
Re: 116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

Ruh ro:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-cards="hidden" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">BREAKING: Trump "not happy" with deal, weighing options for building wall <a href="https://t.co/ySnepRK9Ar">https://t.co/ySnepRK9Ar</a> <a href="https://t.co/IO1GHefTg4">pic.twitter.com/IO1GHefTg4</a></p>— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1095376894365786112?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 12, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Re: 116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

Let's not forget that Congressional Republicans agreed to this deal. Apparently Trump can only operate with full control. Which is not surprising.
 
Re: 116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

I’m sure Hannity called and told him it didn’t give him an erection and therefore isn’t an option
 
Re: 116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

Last month, McConnell wouldn't bring anything for a vote unless Trump said so.

Now-

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">McConnell on shutdown deal:<br><br>"I look forward to reviewing the full text as soon as possible and hope the Senate can act on this legislation in short order.”</p>— Aaron Blake (@AaronBlake) <a href="https://twitter.com/AaronBlake/status/1095346719015997440?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 12, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

He's done with dealing with a wall that he never cared about.
 
Re: 116th Congress: Episode 1 - Trial by Fire

bronconick said:
Last month, McConnell wouldn't bring anything for a vote unless Trump said so.

Now-

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">McConnell on shutdown deal:<br><br>"I look forward to reviewing the full text as soon as possible and hope the Senate can act on this legislation in short order.”</p>— Aaron Blake (@AaronBlake) <a href="https://twitter.com/AaronBlake/status/1095346719015997440?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 12, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

He's done with dealing with a wall that he never cared about.
Click to expand...

Turtle Boy bailing? Has he pulled the rip chord on the chute yet?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top