36
Very few politicians are willing to stand up to AIPAC
(img.gvid.tv)
Among the Rs it's pretty much just her, Thomas Massie, and sometimes Rand Paul. The number on the D's can mostly be counted on one hand as well but it might be a bit bigger.
It's time to admit the uncomfortable truth. When it comes to foreign actors influencing our democracy, Russia and China are close to nothing in comparison to Israel.
If a politician can't denounce at least one of AIPAC or Israel then just call them what they are. A traitor who is owned by a foreign government. Sadly that's 90% of congress.
Odd question. Under the establishing principles of the US government, does congress have sovereign authority if is owned by a foreign government? I'm starting to view our federal government as being entirely illegitimate.
Stop trying to make me like her. It's not going to work.
You don't have to like her. You can acknwoledge she is right in this instance without thinking she is a good person
She's not right on this issue. You know how your math teacher made you show your work before marking you correct?
Which part is wrong? The statement that 5 millions being not a lot in a 347 millions population? About aipac breaking the law? About aipac need to register under the foreign agents registration? About the need to work for american only and not a terrorist state called israel?
the antisemitism is the part where she's wrong
if your first principles are wrong it doesn't matter what conclusions you come to
when you come to implementing your solutions it's those first principles that direct what you compromise and in what ways you adapt to real world circumstances.
I know she is antisemite and that the statements doesn't makes her a good person becuase of her motivations but none of those statements in this specific tweet is wrong or antisemitic
okay you're just gonna pretend I didn't just say that and say your last thing again
you are literally an unthinking individual
you are an idiot who want to hear only what you want to hear. I agree with you that she is an antisemite . I'm just saying that politicians in the USA should only serve there people and not being controlled by aipac and pledge alliance to Israel. How hard it is for you to understand that?
I made my point you chose not to respond to it.
Social media users, as a group, are immune to nuance.
A thing is either good or bad, if you say anything good about a bad thing then you are also bad.
"Nuance", in this case, would be to recognize that she is a raging anti-Semite. Her position here is anything but altruistic.
Nuance would be that yes she is antisemite but that it's true that aipac need to register and that American politicians should work for American only and not for the terrorist state of Israel
Nah, man. Nuance would be looking past the surface level of, "Well, she's not wrong", and realize that it has nothing to do with empathy towards Palestinians, or moral outrage over Israel's genocide in Gaza. With her, it's just, "Jews bad. Get out of my country".
Even though, on the surface, it might "look like" you have some common ground...is that really something you "agree with"? It doesn't matter how similar her position "appears" to be to my own...I understand completely that at the root, we are nowhere near the same. Not even when we agree on something.
Like i said she is an antisemite and i know her ulterior motive. Still aipac and the genocide need to be stopped it's will not happen with democrats alone. You can trash her while agreeing that aipac need to stop influencing and threatening anti Palestine occupation and anti genocide people and that all usa politicians need to only serve the usa. Similar to Tuck , he is definitely a trash person and a white supremacist but when he bring a person like a nun from occupied Palestine it may convince some Christians to not support Israel
Nuance, in this case means recognizing that even raging anti-Semites can say things that are true.
Sure. For disgusting and abhorrent reasons.
I agree