Some Republicans vote against anti-bigotry resolution.

[BmorePat87]

(04-12-2019, 11:28 AM)GMDino Wrote: Agreed. (And did above.) But the rest of the quote you posted (I still haven't watched the video) clarified.

So we're back to arguing how the message was presented (croissants vs labor for example).  I agree that's a bad way to say what she apparently meant.  No problem calling that part out.




I posted DJT's statement because the post that I replied to about Omar actually made a Hitler reference in relation to her statement.  That's hyperbole.  And I used DJT becuase he was defending a group of White Supremisct Nazi's that just had just marched with torches chanting against Jews and then one ran over and killed someone.

Maybe my anti-nazi stance is too strong?

Can I not say one of her statements was wrong, the other was correct and that if someone has a problem with one part that they should at least acknowledge the second part?

If DJT had clarified that he meant "good people on both sides of the argument to keep or get rid of the statues" just not the nazis that got the headlines I'd have still condemned his dumb answer but understood at least he corrected it.

To use Trump as another example he gets a ton of mulligans when people "clarify" what he "meant".  Omar did it herself.  So she rightfully gets called out for an awful statement but then she explained it.  We all carry on then.

But to you point about "the other side" she is used to detract by the other side.  And her BEING Muslim just plays into what she said has happened.

This poster is in your Capitol on a booth sponsored by @WVGOP “When someone shows you who they are, believe them” pic.twitter.com/4k566ztHWo

— (((Mike Pushkin))) (@pushkinforhouse) March 1, 2019

It's not that I have "no problem" with what she said.  I just looked at everything she said. (As presented to me. I will have to watch that later since it caused such an uproar.)

To be fair "Note: I am not defend what she said because I didn't hear it yet." isn't really condemning her, and this isn't like AOC using a pastry comparison and us bickering about the meaning of it. This is about someone in an esteemed office dismissing the magnitude of the greatest attack ever committed on American soil. 

Without even reading her comments, you jumped into "is this only because she's a Democrat". We agree on a lot of issues, and we both dislike the depths the office of POTUS has sunk too, but we should still try to uphold these desired standards across the board.

[GMDino]

(04-12-2019, 12:18 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: To be fair "Note: I am not defend what she said because I didn't hear it yet." isn't really condemning her, and this isn't like AOC using a pastry comparison and us bickering about the meaning of it. This is about someone in an esteemed office dismissing the magnitude of the greatest attack ever committed on American soil. 

Followed by not doing that.

I said I wasn't defending her because I didn't listen to what she said.

(04-12-2019, 12:18 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Without even reading her comments, you jumped into "is this only because she's a Democrat". We agree on a lot of issues, and we both dislike the depths the office of POTUS has sunk too, but we should still try to uphold these desired standards across the board.

And I'm saying it because she's a democrat vs what Trump said because he's a republican. I'm making a distinction between someone saying "she just fluffed off 3000 people getting killed" in a full statement about how not all Muslims are bad versus Nazis have good people among them.

And after discussing I agreed that her initial quote is bad and she if someone wants to point that out that is fine and dandy.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(04-12-2019, 10:54 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: He didn't call her terrorist, anti-American, or any other slur. He condemned what she said.

“First Member of Congress to ever describe terrorists who killed thousands of Americans on 9/11 as ‘some people who did something'. Unbelievable.”

As someone who lost his full vision in the war that stemmed from that event, I do not think he needs to be silent when someone trivializes the event. 

If some lunatic on the right wants to use that as justification, they never needed the justification. 

(04-12-2019, 10:56 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: By deflecting to Trump without condemning her, you make it clear that you do not actually care about upholding the standards you want want the right to uphold. 

Be the change you want to see. "I have no problem condemning this kind of speech. It's ridiculous for someone to seemingly trivialize a tragedy like this. I hope that this feeling is bipartisan and we will see the same reactions from both sides of the aisle". 

(04-12-2019, 11:04 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Because describing the murder of 3,000 people as "some people did something" is a condemnable statement from a member of Congress, even if they were attempting to make a point about civil liberties. 





You really have missed the entire point. Break the wheel, don't just keep rolling it back and forth with the other side.  

This may be the first time I've seen you run up against this phenomena on this board.  We certainly have our differences, but you're always consistent in your opinions.  The more extreme of us on this board are not.  Even worse, some of our more extreme members don't appear to realize just how extreme they are.

You are 100% correct, Omar's statement was reprehensible.  I would condemn the remark if it was made by a gas station attendant, much less a member of Congress.  Additionally, Omar's history doesn't work in her favor on this.  The GOP has Steve King, the only GOP member of Congress I believe you can legitimately slap the white nationalist tag on, and the Dems have Omar, an antisemite who trivializes muslim extremism.  They both deserve condemnation, only one of them was condemned by their own party.  

[fredtoast]

first of all people need to realize that the members of CAIR are victims of 9-11 also.  They all know what happened on 9-11.  Omar could have used a better phrase, but I don't see it being a big deal.  

Just curious, but when you guys talk about 9-11 do you say "9-11" or do you say "the day Muslims murdered over three thousand Americans" or "the deadliest act of terrorism ever in US history"?

At least she was not claiming that on 9-11 there were some "good people" among the terrorists.

[jj22]

I guess the answer is no we won't hold Republicans accountable too. Just the Dem.

One day we'll hold both parties to equal standards.

[fredtoast]

Here is her quote

"CAIR was founded after 9/11, because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties,"

How many of you would be squealing "racism" if she had said this instead?

"CAIR was founded after 9/11, because they recognized that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties,"


I think this is just much ado about nothing.

[jj22]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7LRXPnGkPY

[jj22]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsVmV1xIjGo

[BmorePat87]

(04-12-2019, 12:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: first of all people need to realize that the members of CAIR are victims of 9-11 also.  They all know what happened on 9-11.  Omar could have used a better phrase, but I don't see it being a big deal.  

Just curious, but when you guys talk about 9-11 do you say "9-11" or do you say "the day Muslims murdered over three thousand Americans" or "the deadliest act of terrorism ever in US history"?

At least she was not claiming that on 9-11 there were some "good people" among the terrorists.

I don't think anyone would have had an issue with her saying "because of 9/11". That's very different from saying "because some people did something". To even loosely imply that the two are comparable is just intellectually lazy. 

Just please do not feign moral outrage or expect anyone on the right to condemn anything Trump says if you're incapable of doing so for a freshman congresswoman. 

[SunsetBengal]

Everyone should have voted against this resolution. It's obviously an encroachment to Freedom of Speech, as guaranteed in the 1st Amendment.

Hate speech is bad, and should be condemned by all. However, the way to achieve peace and acceptance among differing peoples isn't by attempting to control speech and thought. People who express negative sentiments toward people they don't agree with is and should remain completely acceptable within the law, with the exception of speech that incites violence toward others.

[BmorePat87]

(04-12-2019, 12:43 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Here is her quote

"CAIR was founded after 9/11, because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties,"

How many of you would be squealing "racism" if she had said this instead?

"CAIR was founded after 9/11, because they recognized that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties,"


I think this is just much ado about nothing.

Who said anything was racist about what she said?

[BmorePat87]

(04-12-2019, 12:49 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Everyone should have voted against this resolution.  It's obviously an encroachment to Freedom of Speech, as guaranteed in the 1st Amendment.  

Hate speech is bad, and should be condemned by all.  However, the way to achieve peace and acceptance among differing peoples isn't by attempting to control speech and thought.  People who express negative sentiments toward people they don't agree with is and should remain completely acceptable within the law, with the exception of speech that incites violence toward others.

Nothing about the resolution limits free speech. 

[fredtoast]

(04-12-2019, 12:49 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Who said anything was racist about what she said?

riticisms of Israel and pro-Israel American lobbying organizations. 

"Ilhan Omar isn’t just anti-Semitic – she’s anti-American," Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said in a tweet referencing her 9/11 remark.

[BmorePat87]

(04-12-2019, 01:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: riticisms of Israel and pro-Israel American lobbying organizations. 

"Ilhan Omar isn’t just anti-Semitic – she’s anti-American," Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said in a tweet referencing her 9/11 remark.

So none of us? Gotcha. 

Her anti-semitic label comes from her stance on lobbying from Israeli groups, not her 9/11 comment. I disagree that it's anti-semitic on the surface, but no one was calling her anti-semitic for the 9/11 comment. 

[BmorePat87]

(04-12-2019, 12:30 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This may be the first time I've seen you run up against this phenomena on this board.  We certainly have our differences, but you're always consistent in your opinions.  The more extreme of us on this board are not.  Even worse, some of our more extreme members don't appear to realize just how extreme they are.

You are 100% correct, Omar's statement was reprehensible.  I would condemn the remark if it was made by a gas station attendant, much less a member of Congress.  Additionally, Omar's history doesn't work in her favor on this.  The GOP has Steve King, the only GOP member of Congress I believe you can legitimately slap the white nationalist tag on, and the Dems have Omar, an antisemite who trivializes muslim extremism.  They both deserve condemnation, only one of them was condemned by their own party.  

My criticism of conservatives who do this is meaningless if it's not uniform. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(04-12-2019, 12:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: first of all people need to realize that the members of CAIR are victims of 9-11 also.  They all know what happened on 9-11.  Omar could have used a better phrase, but I don't see it being a big deal.  

Just curious, but when you guys talk about 9-11 do you say "9-11" or do you say "the day Muslims murdered over three thousand Americans" or "the deadliest act of terrorism ever in US history"?

At least she was not claiming that on 9-11 there were some "good people" among the terrorists.

#whataboutism

(04-12-2019, 12:43 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Here is her quote

"CAIR was founded after 9/11, because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties,"

How many of you would be squealing "racism" if she had said this instead?

"CAIR was founded after 9/11, because they recognized that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties,"


I think this is just much ado about nothing.

Yeah.  I remember at the Holocaust museum when the tour guide was telling us about Auschwitz where, "some people did something". 

(04-12-2019, 12:45 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I don't think anyone would have had an issue with her saying "because of 9/11". That's very different from saying "because some people did something". To even loosely imply that the two are comparable is just intellectually lazy. 

Just please do not feign moral outrage or expect anyone on the right to condemn anything Trump says if you're incapable of doing so for a freshman congresswoman. 

You're not leaving him with much here.

(04-12-2019, 01:54 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: So none of us? Gotcha. 

Her anti-semitic label comes from her stance on lobbying from Israeli groups, not her 9/11 comment. I disagree that it's anti-semitic on the surface, but no one was calling her anti-semitic for the 9/11 comment. 

Precisely.

(04-12-2019, 01:55 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: My criticism of conservatives who do this is meaningless if it's not uniform. 

My hope is that some take notes. 

[fredtoast]

(04-12-2019, 01:54 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: So none of us? Gotcha. 

Her anti-semitic label comes from her stance on lobbying from Israeli groups, not her 9/11 comment.

I just posted a comment "referencing her 9-11 comments"  that called her anti-Semitic.  Since you were not the one that made that comment you have no idea if the label was based on something else. 

If Mike brown makes a stupid move and I say "Not only is he cheap, but he is stupid" you can't start splitting up my comment and claim the "cheap" part of it was based on one move and "stupid" part of it was based on a different one.

[fredtoast]

(04-12-2019, 02:30 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yeah.  I remember at the Holocaust museum when the tour guide was telling us about Auschwitz where, "some people did something". 

Not sure what your point is but I have heard the term "Holocaust" used many times without having to add any details about how many people died.  And I have had multiple conversations with people about 9-11 without having to add details about how many people were murdered.

 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(04-12-2019, 02:42 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Not sure what your point is.

 

 I think we're done here.

[fredtoast]

(04-12-2019, 03:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:  I think we're done here.

Good.  I don't have time to waste playing the "obtuse answer" game.