The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

[US Foreign Policy] A Generation of War

13567102

Posts

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    She could actually not move to censure her or whatever it is they end up deciding on. She's leadership, this is her party. If they slap down Omar its on her.

    Sure, she could oppose the majority of her party. But, like, why? That's not what the party as a whole actually wants to do so what purpose is there to it?

    Because it would be the right thing to do.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Enc wrote: »
    And while strategically correct, as fracturing the democratic base over this issue is a really bad thing to do right now (and nothing is quite as divisive on the left as Israel), morally this is reprehensible.

    Gotta say I don't think censuring the young muslim woman who just got elected is going to stop any fracturing!

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    She could actually not move to censure her or whatever it is they end up deciding on. She's leadership, this is her party. If they slap down Omar its on her.

    Sure, she could oppose the majority of her party. But, like, why? That's not what the party as a whole actually wants to do so what purpose is there to it?

    Because it would be the right thing to do.

    Not according to most of the party it isn't.

  • Metzger MeisterMetzger Meister It Gets Worse before it gets any better.Registered User regular
    What was the line from the Cohen testimony? Thank goodness the Democratic party can walk and chew gum at the same time?

  • PhasenPhasen Hell WorldRegistered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    The idea that this is the party line that Pelosi is enforcing is baffling. Omar criticized the fact that Israel is dumping money on politicians via lobbying. This is such an atrocity she is being censured. Why is it not Pelosi that is the problem here?

    Why do you believe Israel lobbying should be immune to criticism?

    psn: PhasenWeeple
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    She could actually not move to censure her or whatever it is they end up deciding on. She's leadership, this is her party. If they slap down Omar its on her.

    Sure, she could oppose the majority of her party. But, like, why? That's not what the party as a whole actually wants to do so what purpose is there to it?

    Because it would be the right thing to do.

    Not according to most of the party it isn't.

    What kind of moral framework is this supposed to be?

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • ShortyShorty touching the meat Intergalactic Cool CourtRegistered User regular
    elected democrats (with a couple exceptions) flatly do not believe that Israel is an apartheid state

    most of them probably wouldn't even agree with the notion that the camps are bad, or that West Bank colonization is bad

  • EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    Enc wrote: »
    And while strategically correct, as fracturing the democratic base over this issue is a really bad thing to do right now (and nothing is quite as divisive on the left as Israel), morally this is reprehensible.

    Gotta say I don't think censuring the young muslim woman who just got elected is going to stop any fracturing!

    It's a zugzwang at this point, I'd say. The DNC is thinking that censuring her is going to fracture less support than not appeasing the Israel lobby... which is probably correct in the numbers game. It's also, again, morally garbage.

    I don't blame Omar for giving voice to the problem at hand, but as soon as she did she started this path. I can't see a present where her actions led to any other result than where we are right now with the current political stance in the US. If she started this fight when the democrats controlled multiple houses or the presidency and had a solid league of fellow representatives willing to spend political capital correcting the issue, she would have been able to accomplish something. Right now is just not the right time to actually achieve any sort of limitation against the Israel lobby.

    At the same time, she is entirely correct that the only moral decision here is to point out the corruption at hand and expose it to sunlight. She may, in sacrificing herself in this manner, lead others to eventually have the momentum to take real action against the lobby.

  • VishNubVishNub Registered User regular
    edited March 2019
    I think this issue has one of the biggest gaps between the positions of the (D) electorate and the elected representatives.

    VishNub on
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Enc wrote: »
    Enc wrote: »
    And while strategically correct, as fracturing the democratic base over this issue is a really bad thing to do right now (and nothing is quite as divisive on the left as Israel), morally this is reprehensible.

    Gotta say I don't think censuring the young muslim woman who just got elected is going to stop any fracturing!

    It's a zugzwang at this point, I'd say. The DNC is thinking that censuring her is going to fracture less support than not appeasing the Israel lobby... which is probably correct in the numbers game. It's also, again, morally garbage.

    I don't blame Omar for giving voice to the problem at hand, but as soon as she did she started this path. I can't see a present where her actions led to any other result than where we are right now with the current political stance in the US. If she started this fight when the democrats controlled multiple houses or the presidency and had a solid league of fellow representatives willing to spend political capital correcting the issue, she would have been able to accomplish something. Right now is just not the right time to actually achieve any sort of limitation against the Israel lobby.

    At the same time, she is entirely correct that the only moral decision here is to point out the corruption at hand and expose it to sunlight. She may, in sacrificing herself in this manner, lead others to eventually have the momentum to take real action against the lobby.

    Your point about her timing assumes this outrage isn't honestly held. Maybe they're condemning her because, like she said, they're fully in the tank for a foreign government and one more electoral cycle won't change that.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    The idea that this is the party line that Pelosi is enforcing is baffling. Omar criticized the fact that Israel is dumping money on politicians via lobbying. This is such an atrocity she is being censured. Why is it not Pelosi that is the problem here?

    Why is it baffling? It is demonstratively the party line. Look how the party is voting on it. Saying Pelosi is the problem is like blaming Trump for the GOP being racist. Pelosi is just representing the general views of the party itself on this matter.

    Why do you believe Israel lobbying should be immune to criticism?

    I never said this though. So whence comes this strawman?

  • ShortyShorty touching the meat Intergalactic Cool CourtRegistered User regular
    edited March 2019
    Enc wrote: »
    It is worth noting that the Israel question is a concern that, while critically and lethally important, perhaps isn't the most important to the party leadership at this point in time and spending political capital on it when there are so many other, more immediate concerns is likely why we are seeing this response as so bizarrely disproportionate right now. Pelosi et al are using it as a whip to keep the party focused upon their current immediate party goals.

    And while strategically correct, as fracturing the democratic base over this issue is a really bad thing to do right now (and nothing is quite as divisive on the left as Israel), morally this is reprehensible.

    I feel Omar picked a right fight at the wrong time, and will likely lose her political support from the DNC for it.

    1) political capital is a fake idea, especially when it's being used to justify unethical policy and behavior

    2) Omar categorically did not "pick a fight"--she said, in effect, that the Israel lobby spends money in DC and that this has a real influence, a flatly true statement.

    Shorty on
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    She could actually not move to censure her or whatever it is they end up deciding on. She's leadership, this is her party. If they slap down Omar its on her.

    Sure, she could oppose the majority of her party. But, like, why? That's not what the party as a whole actually wants to do so what purpose is there to it?

    Because it would be the right thing to do.

    Not according to most of the party it isn't.

    What kind of moral framework is this supposed to be?

    This isn't a moral question, it's a political one. And the Democratic party is acting according to it's stated positions. One can disagree with those positions but one can't be surprised they are following them.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    She could actually not move to censure her or whatever it is they end up deciding on. She's leadership, this is her party. If they slap down Omar its on her.

    Sure, she could oppose the majority of her party. But, like, why? That's not what the party as a whole actually wants to do so what purpose is there to it?

    Because it would be the right thing to do.

    Not according to most of the party it isn't.

    What kind of moral framework is this supposed to be?

    This isn't a moral question, it's a political one. And the Democratic party is acting according to it's stated positions. One can disagree with those positions but one can't be surprised they are following them.

    I assure you no one is surprised that the Democrats are going after a black leftist on behalf of the Israeli lobby.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • PhasenPhasen Hell WorldRegistered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    The idea that this is the party line that Pelosi is enforcing is baffling. Omar criticized the fact that Israel is dumping money on politicians via lobbying. This is such an atrocity she is being censured. Why is it not Pelosi that is the problem here?

    Why is it baffling? It is demonstratively the party line. Look how the party is voting on it. Saying Pelosi is the problem is like blaming Trump for the GOP being racist. Pelosi is just representing the general views of the party itself on this matter.

    Why do you believe Israel lobbying should be immune to criticism?

    I never said this though. So whence comes this strawman?

    Pelosi should not be criticized for her decision? She has agency as a leader. As to the second part you are choosing to defend this decision and carry water for it. Otherwise what do you believe?

    psn: PhasenWeeple
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    What was the line from the Cohen testimony? Thank goodness the Democratic party can walk and chew gum at the same time?

    That means the Democratic party can investigate Trump on several fronts while also pushing some legislative agendas. It doesn't mean they can start an internal fight over a relatively unpopular position (especially with the media and the political class) while also maintaining support for more important issues like said investigations and legislation.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Looking across the pond at Labour's actual Anti-Semitism problem and all the recent terrorist attacks on synagogues, I'm not sure how opposed I am to being overzealous about this. However, I also don't really see what it has to do with our actual foreign policy versus intraparty dynamics. Meanwhile Trump literally abolished the Palestinian Consulate/Mission today.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    The idea that this is the party line that Pelosi is enforcing is baffling. Omar criticized the fact that Israel is dumping money on politicians via lobbying. This is such an atrocity she is being censured. Why is it not Pelosi that is the problem here?

    Why is it baffling? It is demonstratively the party line. Look how the party is voting on it. Saying Pelosi is the problem is like blaming Trump for the GOP being racist. Pelosi is just representing the general views of the party itself on this matter.

    Why do you believe Israel lobbying should be immune to criticism?

    I never said this though. So whence comes this strawman?

    Pelosi should not be criticized for her decision? She has agency as a leader. As to the second part you are choosing to defend this decision and carry water for it. Otherwise what do you believe?

    Pelosi is not responsible for the stances of the Democratic Party and the people it represents. It's not like this is all just her idea. Pelosi is not the person who's mind you need to change here. Or rather, she's only one of many many many many minds you need to change. Focusing the blame on her misses the larger picture.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    Looking across the pond at Labour's actual Anti-Semitism problem and all the recent terrorist attacks on synagogues, I'm not sure how opposed I am to being overzealous about this. However, I also don't really see what it has to do with our actual foreign policy versus intraparty dynamics. Meanwhile Trump literally abolished the Palestinian Consulate/Mission today.

    You dont see what the opposition crushing all criticism of Israel has to do with foreign policy unlike our unwavering support for hard right israeli politics?

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • PhasenPhasen Hell WorldRegistered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    The idea that this is the party line that Pelosi is enforcing is baffling. Omar criticized the fact that Israel is dumping money on politicians via lobbying. This is such an atrocity she is being censured. Why is it not Pelosi that is the problem here?

    Why is it baffling? It is demonstratively the party line. Look how the party is voting on it. Saying Pelosi is the problem is like blaming Trump for the GOP being racist. Pelosi is just representing the general views of the party itself on this matter.

    Why do you believe Israel lobbying should be immune to criticism?

    I never said this though. So whence comes this strawman?

    Pelosi should not be criticized for her decision? She has agency as a leader. As to the second part you are choosing to defend this decision and carry water for it. Otherwise what do you believe?

    Pelosi is not responsible for the stances of the Democratic Party and the people it represents. It's not like this is all just her idea. Pelosi is not the person who's mind you need to change here. Or rather, she's only one of many many many many minds you need to change. Focusing the blame on her misses the larger picture.

    Pelosi is a human being and not a monolith she could shut this down. It is a very apparent she wants to prove her loyalty by using her powers to the fullest to attack Omar.

    psn: PhasenWeeple
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    The idea that this is the party line that Pelosi is enforcing is baffling. Omar criticized the fact that Israel is dumping money on politicians via lobbying. This is such an atrocity she is being censured. Why is it not Pelosi that is the problem here?

    Why is it baffling? It is demonstratively the party line. Look how the party is voting on it. Saying Pelosi is the problem is like blaming Trump for the GOP being racist. Pelosi is just representing the general views of the party itself on this matter.

    Why do you believe Israel lobbying should be immune to criticism?

    I never said this though. So whence comes this strawman?

    Pelosi should not be criticized for her decision? She has agency as a leader. As to the second part you are choosing to defend this decision and carry water for it. Otherwise what do you believe?

    Pelosi is not responsible for the stances of the Democratic Party and the people it represents. It's not like this is all just her idea. Pelosi is not the person who's mind you need to change here. Or rather, she's only one of many many many many minds you need to change. Focusing the blame on her misses the larger picture.

    She's literally the leader of a body that looks to be advancing censure. I dont get how someone can be grossed out by the Democratic reponse to Omar and also carry water for its leadership.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    She could actually not move to censure her or whatever it is they end up deciding on. She's leadership, this is her party. If they slap down Omar its on her.

    Sure, she could oppose the majority of her party. But, like, why? That's not what the party as a whole actually wants to do so what purpose is there to it?

    Because it would be the right thing to do.

    Not according to most of the party it isn't.

    What kind of moral framework is this supposed to be?

    This isn't a moral question, it's a political one. And the Democratic party is acting according to it's stated positions. One can disagree with those positions but one can't be surprised they are following them.

    I assure you no one is surprised that the Democrats are going after a black leftist on behalf of the Israeli lobby.

    Dude, she could be the whitest malest rightest motherfucker in congress and they'd still be giving her the same treatment. This is just not a stance you can have and not expect to get slapped down for given the current US political culture. It's got nothing to do with who's saying it, it's just the position itself.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited March 2019
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    The idea that this is the party line that Pelosi is enforcing is baffling. Omar criticized the fact that Israel is dumping money on politicians via lobbying. This is such an atrocity she is being censured. Why is it not Pelosi that is the problem here?

    Why is it baffling? It is demonstratively the party line. Look how the party is voting on it. Saying Pelosi is the problem is like blaming Trump for the GOP being racist. Pelosi is just representing the general views of the party itself on this matter.

    Why do you believe Israel lobbying should be immune to criticism?

    I never said this though. So whence comes this strawman?

    Pelosi should not be criticized for her decision? She has agency as a leader. As to the second part you are choosing to defend this decision and carry water for it. Otherwise what do you believe?

    Pelosi is not responsible for the stances of the Democratic Party and the people it represents. It's not like this is all just her idea. Pelosi is not the person who's mind you need to change here. Or rather, she's only one of many many many many minds you need to change. Focusing the blame on her misses the larger picture.

    She's literally the leader of a body that looks to be advancing censure. I dont get how someone can be grossed out by the Democratic reponse to Omar and also carry water for its leadership.

    Yes, she's the leader of the body and she is representing that body. That's the point. The problem is not leadership and a change in leadership will not solve it. The problem is the views of the party as a whole.

    This chain began with the comment "This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go." I'm simply pointing out the ways in which this stance is foolish. Pelosi is not the problem here, the party and the political culture as a whole is.

    shryke on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    Looking across the pond at Labour's actual Anti-Semitism problem and all the recent terrorist attacks on synagogues, I'm not sure how opposed I am to being overzealous about this. However, I also don't really see what it has to do with our actual foreign policy versus intraparty dynamics. Meanwhile Trump literally abolished the Palestinian Consulate/Mission today.

    You dont see what the opposition crushing all criticism of Israel has to do with foreign policy unlike our unwavering support for hard right israeli politics?

    Given the content of the words she said? Yes.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited March 2019
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    She could actually not move to censure her or whatever it is they end up deciding on. She's leadership, this is her party. If they slap down Omar its on her.

    Sure, she could oppose the majority of her party. But, like, why? That's not what the party as a whole actually wants to do so what purpose is there to it?

    Because it would be the right thing to do.

    Not according to most of the party it isn't.

    What kind of moral framework is this supposed to be?

    This isn't a moral question, it's a political one. And the Democratic party is acting according to it's stated positions. One can disagree with those positions but one can't be surprised they are following them.

    I assure you no one is surprised that the Democrats are going after a black leftist on behalf of the Israeli lobby.

    Dude, she could be the whitest malest rightest motherfucker in congress and they'd still be giving her the same treatment. This is just not a stance you can have and not expect to get slapped down for given the current US political culture. It's got nothing to do with who's saying it, it's just the position itself.

    As you agreed with a page ago:
    I Zimbra wrote: »
    The house still hasn't censured Steve King for being a white nationalist, just in case you were curious about their priorities.

    So.....press (x) for doubt

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Metzger MeisterMetzger Meister It Gets Worse before it gets any better.Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Looking across the pond at Labour's actual Anti-Semitism problem and all the recent terrorist attacks on synagogues, I'm not sure how opposed I am to being overzealous about this. However, I also don't really see what it has to do with our actual foreign policy versus intraparty dynamics. Meanwhile Trump literally abolished the Palestinian Consulate/Mission today.

    You dont see what the opposition crushing all criticism of Israel has to do with foreign policy unlike our unwavering support for hard right israeli politics?

    Given the content of the words she said? Yes.
    What did you find objectionable about her statement?

  • EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    Enc wrote: »
    Enc wrote: »
    And while strategically correct, as fracturing the democratic base over this issue is a really bad thing to do right now (and nothing is quite as divisive on the left as Israel), morally this is reprehensible.

    Gotta say I don't think censuring the young muslim woman who just got elected is going to stop any fracturing!

    It's a zugzwang at this point, I'd say. The DNC is thinking that censuring her is going to fracture less support than not appeasing the Israel lobby... which is probably correct in the numbers game. It's also, again, morally garbage.

    I don't blame Omar for giving voice to the problem at hand, but as soon as she did she started this path. I can't see a present where her actions led to any other result than where we are right now with the current political stance in the US. If she started this fight when the democrats controlled multiple houses or the presidency and had a solid league of fellow representatives willing to spend political capital correcting the issue, she would have been able to accomplish something. Right now is just not the right time to actually achieve any sort of limitation against the Israel lobby.

    At the same time, she is entirely correct that the only moral decision here is to point out the corruption at hand and expose it to sunlight. She may, in sacrificing herself in this manner, lead others to eventually have the momentum to take real action against the lobby.

    Your point about her timing assumes this outrage isn't honestly held. Maybe they're condemning her because, like she said, they're fully in the tank for a foreign government and one more electoral cycle won't change that.

    I don't think the outrage from the democrats against her is honestly held in most cases. It's a sham to support the lobby, their influence in the New England electorate, and the considerable money they use towards the party.

    I believe Omar's position against the lobby, and the vast majority of democrats (I think the last polling I saw was something like less than 33% of democrats support israel over palestine), is totally honestly held.

    In short, to summarize my position and my previous posts, I think Omar did what is right, and what is right is presently politically inconvenient to the party and exposed vulnerabilities that will be exposed and used against the already weak Democratic position without some sort of political theater taken against her. What's more, the political theater is all bullshit and mostly to satisfy the lobby rather than the base, and they are correct in assuming only high-information voters even know its happening and those are probably going to stay with the DNC because the alternative is worse (more Trump control).

    Which I absolutely hate them for but at the same time is not incorrect.

    Its sorta the same situation with everything with Pelosi. She's highly effective at what she does, but her political positions are still 30 years too old and ill equipped to deal with our current needs in the DNC. And I say that as a self-described moderate democrat.

  • PhasenPhasen Hell WorldRegistered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    The idea that this is the party line that Pelosi is enforcing is baffling. Omar criticized the fact that Israel is dumping money on politicians via lobbying. This is such an atrocity she is being censured. Why is it not Pelosi that is the problem here?

    Why is it baffling? It is demonstratively the party line. Look how the party is voting on it. Saying Pelosi is the problem is like blaming Trump for the GOP being racist. Pelosi is just representing the general views of the party itself on this matter.

    Why do you believe Israel lobbying should be immune to criticism?

    I never said this though. So whence comes this strawman?

    Pelosi should not be criticized for her decision? She has agency as a leader. As to the second part you are choosing to defend this decision and carry water for it. Otherwise what do you believe?

    Pelosi is not responsible for the stances of the Democratic Party and the people it represents. It's not like this is all just her idea. Pelosi is not the person who's mind you need to change here. Or rather, she's only one of many many many many minds you need to change. Focusing the blame on her misses the larger picture.

    She's literally the leader of a body that looks to be advancing censure. I dont get how someone can be grossed out by the Democratic reponse to Omar and also carry water for its leadership.

    Yes, she's the leader of the body and she is representing that body. That's the point. The problem is not leadership and a change in leadership will not solve it. The problem is the views of the party as a whole.

    This chain began with the comment "This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go." I'm simply pointing out the ways in which this stance is foolish. Pelosi is not the problem here, the party and the political culture as a whole is.

    Pelosi should act like a leader and do what she thinks is right. I just happen to believe she thinks this is right and that is the reason she has to go.

    psn: PhasenWeeple
  • EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    Shorty wrote: »
    Enc wrote: »
    It is worth noting that the Israel question is a concern that, while critically and lethally important, perhaps isn't the most important to the party leadership at this point in time and spending political capital on it when there are so many other, more immediate concerns is likely why we are seeing this response as so bizarrely disproportionate right now. Pelosi et al are using it as a whip to keep the party focused upon their current immediate party goals.

    And while strategically correct, as fracturing the democratic base over this issue is a really bad thing to do right now (and nothing is quite as divisive on the left as Israel), morally this is reprehensible.

    I feel Omar picked a right fight at the wrong time, and will likely lose her political support from the DNC for it.

    1) political capital is a fake idea, especially when it's being used to justify unethical policy and behavior

    2) Omar categorically did not "pick a fight"--she said, in effect, that the Israel lobby spends money in DC and that this has a real influence, a flatly true statement.

    I don't really agree with 1, but that's a philosophy thing.

    On 2, pointing out that truth to the general public as a means to draw attention to and limit the lobby absolutely is picking that fight.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    She could actually not move to censure her or whatever it is they end up deciding on. She's leadership, this is her party. If they slap down Omar its on her.

    Sure, she could oppose the majority of her party. But, like, why? That's not what the party as a whole actually wants to do so what purpose is there to it?

    Because it would be the right thing to do.

    Not according to most of the party it isn't.

    What kind of moral framework is this supposed to be?

    This isn't a moral question, it's a political one. And the Democratic party is acting according to it's stated positions. One can disagree with those positions but one can't be surprised they are following them.

    I assure you no one is surprised that the Democrats are going after a black leftist on behalf of the Israeli lobby.

    Dude, she could be the whitest malest rightest motherfucker in congress and they'd still be giving her the same treatment. This is just not a stance you can have and not expect to get slapped down for given the current US political culture. It's got nothing to do with who's saying it, it's just the position itself.

    As you agreed with a page ago:
    I Zimbra wrote: »
    The house still hasn't censured Steve King for being a white nationalist, just in case you were curious about their priorities.

    So.....press (x) for doubt

    Steve King would absolutely get censured for speaking out against Israel. He won't get censured for being a white nationalist though because half the government is white nationalists. I don't see how the difference here isn't super obvious. It's the ideology in question.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Looking across the pond at Labour's actual Anti-Semitism problem and all the recent terrorist attacks on synagogues, I'm not sure how opposed I am to being overzealous about this. However, I also don't really see what it has to do with our actual foreign policy versus intraparty dynamics. Meanwhile Trump literally abolished the Palestinian Consulate/Mission today.

    You dont see what the opposition crushing all criticism of Israel has to do with foreign policy unlike our unwavering support for hard right israeli politics?

    Given the content of the words she said? Yes.
    What did you find objectionable about her statement?

    That Members of Congress have literally sworn allegiance to Israel in abandonment of their oath of office in order to get paid.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    She could actually not move to censure her or whatever it is they end up deciding on. She's leadership, this is her party. If they slap down Omar its on her.

    Sure, she could oppose the majority of her party. But, like, why? That's not what the party as a whole actually wants to do so what purpose is there to it?

    Because it would be the right thing to do.

    Not according to most of the party it isn't.

    What kind of moral framework is this supposed to be?

    This isn't a moral question, it's a political one. And the Democratic party is acting according to it's stated positions. One can disagree with those positions but one can't be surprised they are following them.

    I assure you no one is surprised that the Democrats are going after a black leftist on behalf of the Israeli lobby.

    Dude, she could be the whitest malest rightest motherfucker in congress and they'd still be giving her the same treatment. This is just not a stance you can have and not expect to get slapped down for given the current US political culture. It's got nothing to do with who's saying it, it's just the position itself.

    As you agreed with a page ago:
    I Zimbra wrote: »
    The house still hasn't censured Steve King for being a white nationalist, just in case you were curious about their priorities.

    So.....press (x) for doubt

    Steve King would absolutely get censured for speaking out against Israel. He won't get censured for being a white nationalist though because half the government is white nationalists. I don't see how the difference here isn't super obvious. It's the ideology in question.

    Come on man, King has spent a career being an actual anti-semite and even the Democrats do nothing about it, but here comes the young black muslim woman saying things about the nature of our relationship with Israel that are objectively true and her own party is preparing to throw her under the bus.

    It doesn't take a brain genius to notice the difference between how Omar and King will be treated in America.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    Re-the Steve King thing. Steve King hasn't been censured by the GOP because support of racism is part and parcel of the party's main line. The equivalent here would be if Omar had said something supporting Israel and we were complaining she hadn't been censured. Or, on the Steve King thing, if a republican had pointed out the racist lobby as part of the major funding of the GOP and were censured.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Looking across the pond at Labour's actual Anti-Semitism problem and all the recent terrorist attacks on synagogues, I'm not sure how opposed I am to being overzealous about this. However, I also don't really see what it has to do with our actual foreign policy versus intraparty dynamics. Meanwhile Trump literally abolished the Palestinian Consulate/Mission today.

    You dont see what the opposition crushing all criticism of Israel has to do with foreign policy unlike our unwavering support for hard right israeli politics?

    Given the content of the words she said? Yes.
    What did you find objectionable about her statement?

    That Members of Congress have literally sworn allegiance to Israel in abandonment of their oath of office in order to get paid.

    Did she ever say "literally sworn allegiance"

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    I feel bad for Ilhan. Must be exhausting to be surrounded by a bunch of vile racists coming from all sides. They can all eat shit.

    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Registered User, Moderator Mod Emeritus
    Guys, while America's relationship to Israel is foreign policy related this argument over which congressman or woman gets called out and how hard for what words is much more about other stuff. Link what you're saying to foreign policy or drop it.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    I feel bad for Ilhan. Must be exhausting to be surrounded by a bunch of vile racists coming from all sides. They can all eat shit.

    Tlaib has been going to bat hard for her and its been nice to see.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    The idea that this is the party line that Pelosi is enforcing is baffling. Omar criticized the fact that Israel is dumping money on politicians via lobbying. This is such an atrocity she is being censured. Why is it not Pelosi that is the problem here?

    Why is it baffling? It is demonstratively the party line. Look how the party is voting on it. Saying Pelosi is the problem is like blaming Trump for the GOP being racist. Pelosi is just representing the general views of the party itself on this matter.

    Why do you believe Israel lobbying should be immune to criticism?

    I never said this though. So whence comes this strawman?

    Pelosi should not be criticized for her decision? She has agency as a leader. As to the second part you are choosing to defend this decision and carry water for it. Otherwise what do you believe?

    Pelosi is not responsible for the stances of the Democratic Party and the people it represents. It's not like this is all just her idea. Pelosi is not the person who's mind you need to change here. Or rather, she's only one of many many many many minds you need to change. Focusing the blame on her misses the larger picture.

    She's literally the leader of a body that looks to be advancing censure. I dont get how someone can be grossed out by the Democratic reponse to Omar and also carry water for its leadership.

    Yes, she's the leader of the body and she is representing that body. That's the point. The problem is not leadership and a change in leadership will not solve it. The problem is the views of the party as a whole.

    This chain began with the comment "This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go." I'm simply pointing out the ways in which this stance is foolish. Pelosi is not the problem here, the party and the political culture as a whole is.

    Pelosi should act like a leader and do what she thinks is right. I just happen to believe she thinks this is right and that is the reason she has to go.

    Pelosi is acting like a leader by representing the interests and views of her party. Pelosi doesn't "have to go" here because literally nothing will change on this issue if she does and you would be just not paying attention to think otherwise.

    What needs to happen is that the views on this issue within the electorate and withing the political class especially have to change. And what Omar is saying is definitely a good start to that but that's all it is: a start. And it's one anyone would be foolish to expect her not to get slapped down for. I'm glad someone is saying it but, as with everyone who's said this before her, the reaction is wholely and completely expected.

  • ShortyShorty touching the meat Intergalactic Cool CourtRegistered User regular
    edited March 2019
    Enc wrote: »
    Shorty wrote: »
    Enc wrote: »
    It is worth noting that the Israel question is a concern that, while critically and lethally important, perhaps isn't the most important to the party leadership at this point in time and spending political capital on it when there are so many other, more immediate concerns is likely why we are seeing this response as so bizarrely disproportionate right now. Pelosi et al are using it as a whip to keep the party focused upon their current immediate party goals.

    And while strategically correct, as fracturing the democratic base over this issue is a really bad thing to do right now (and nothing is quite as divisive on the left as Israel), morally this is reprehensible.

    I feel Omar picked a right fight at the wrong time, and will likely lose her political support from the DNC for it.

    1) political capital is a fake idea, especially when it's being used to justify unethical policy and behavior

    2) Omar categorically did not "pick a fight"--she said, in effect, that the Israel lobby spends money in DC and that this has a real influence, a flatly true statement.

    I don't really agree with 1, but that's a philosophy thing.

    On 2, pointing out that truth to the general public as a means to draw attention to and limit the lobby absolutely is picking that fight.

    it is perverse to say that taking the morally correct position, accurately describing reality, and finally pushing back against the dominant narrative is "picking a fight"

    the power dynamics of this situation are so clearly not in Omar's favor, as evidenced by the thing that happened which started this discussion, not to mention the people she's standing up for

    e: I did not see moderation before I finished writing this. I will not be responding further.

    Shorty on
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go. I don't know how or why these people are so beholden to Israel and why any criticism of Israel means you're an Antisemite.

    Why is that the centrist politician position? Completely baffling.

    The idea that this is just Pelosi is baffling. Again, this is the position of the vast majority of the party itself. This isn't even just a centrist position. You'll find basically all your more left-wing democrats running the same line.

    The idea that this is the party line that Pelosi is enforcing is baffling. Omar criticized the fact that Israel is dumping money on politicians via lobbying. This is such an atrocity she is being censured. Why is it not Pelosi that is the problem here?

    Why is it baffling? It is demonstratively the party line. Look how the party is voting on it. Saying Pelosi is the problem is like blaming Trump for the GOP being racist. Pelosi is just representing the general views of the party itself on this matter.

    Why do you believe Israel lobbying should be immune to criticism?

    I never said this though. So whence comes this strawman?

    Pelosi should not be criticized for her decision? She has agency as a leader. As to the second part you are choosing to defend this decision and carry water for it. Otherwise what do you believe?

    Pelosi is not responsible for the stances of the Democratic Party and the people it represents. It's not like this is all just her idea. Pelosi is not the person who's mind you need to change here. Or rather, she's only one of many many many many minds you need to change. Focusing the blame on her misses the larger picture.

    She's literally the leader of a body that looks to be advancing censure. I dont get how someone can be grossed out by the Democratic reponse to Omar and also carry water for its leadership.

    Yes, she's the leader of the body and she is representing that body. That's the point. The problem is not leadership and a change in leadership will not solve it. The problem is the views of the party as a whole.

    This chain began with the comment "This Omar situation is why Pelosi has to go." I'm simply pointing out the ways in which this stance is foolish. Pelosi is not the problem here, the party and the political culture as a whole is.

    Pelosi should act like a leader and do what she thinks is right. I just happen to believe she thinks this is right and that is the reason she has to go.

    Pelosi is acting like a leader by representing the interests and views of her party. Pelosi doesn't "have to go" here because literally nothing will change on this issue if she does and you would be just not paying attention to think otherwise.

    What needs to happen is that the views on this issue within the electorate and withing the political class especially have to change. And what Omar is saying is definitely a good start to that but that's all it is: a start. And it's one anyone would be foolish to expect her not to get slapped down for. I'm glad someone is saying it but, as with everyone who's said this before her, the reaction is wholely and completely expected.

    "has to go" can reasonably be construed to include "and replaced by someone with better foreign policy views on Israel".

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
This discussion has been closed.