Politics The Donkey in the room...the Democrats today

Gee I bet the blog post written by someone who flat out proclaims themselves a marxist is TOTALLY legit and not at all biased by that or the fact its writer is a member of an organization so deeply antisemitic that they honored as a hero a woman who blew up a grocery store just to massacre jews.

Once again TFP proves that the only "jews" that are acceptable are those who actively take part in harming other jews to prove their loyalty. Nevermind that even the far left of the jewish community considers this organization fringe, and that its members openly praise the murder of jews every opportunity they get.

Remember TFPers: Orange Man Bad because he's a jew hating nazi... but all those left wing people who constantly violently terrorize jews, praise people who murder jews, and repeat the same conspiracy theories that drove people to shoot up synagogues because Trump is too pro-jew for them? Those people are doubleplusgood.

After all, anyone telling you otherwise is part of the jewish conspiracy that controls the media. Those dirty evil jews.

 

As far as I know the JSA is not connected to the JVP.
They have a tight connection with the DSA and they have been lumped in with the JVP because of their stance on Palestinian but so has the American Friends Service Committee.
The Quakers are about as far from evil and antisemitic as you can get (at least the ones I grew up with).

As a Jew I wish we controlled the media, this shit would be a whole lot easier and Game of Thrones would have a better ending.

 

Canary Mission, cited (linked) as a source for JVP being "deeply anti-Semitic", is a model of disingenuous , if not dishonest, distortions by US conservatives , mostly anonymous, to paint any criticism of Israel in general, and the Netanyahu government in particular, or any support of Palestinian rights, as anti-Semitic.

Canary Mission attempts to achieve this through censorship and intimidation , particularly on college campuses, to silence activists voices against current Israeli policies and practices.

The vast majority of Jews in the US do not accept that false premise which again explains why politically motivated campaigns like "Jexodus" by Trump and Republican/conservative groups to urge Jews to abandon the Democratic Party have failed miserably.

Opposing hardline, far right Israeli policies does not make one anti-Semitic.

More on Canary Mission

 

Even more interesting is where their funding comes from.

Documents Reveal Leaders Of Mysterious Charity Linked To Canary Mission

 

And if you read the about the author blurb you'll see that this author is part of both JSA and JVP.

Ah yes the old tactic of "accuse anyone saying that praising suicide bombers, violently attacking jewish students, and encouraging violence and antisemitism of being an evil islamophobe who can't tolerate 'criticism of israel'". Just like how in Germany burning down a synagogue isn't a hate crime, it's "criticism of Israel".

You do realise that when you say this you're admitting that "criticism of israel" is violence against jewish students, speakers with ties to terrorist organizations praising suicide bombings, and encouraging antisemitic violence right?

Rogue the democrats have adopted as their new star players people who literally repeat Nazi libels and conspiracies about jews and seek their genocide as part of their core platform. There's no escaping the jewish context to the democrats, jew hating has literally become part o their party platform now.

Dude that's a joke you guys are the most biased and corrupt mod team I've seen outside of SRS on reddit. I've had people abuse mod privileges to threaten me when I was talking with other staff about them, mods threaten to ban me just for disagreeing with TFP's SJWs even as those same people broke tons of other rules, and mods taking part in explicit rulebreaking then using their mod status the moment I responded. The fact I got threatened with a ban for posting dozens of links disproving feminist claims without any personal attacks while Redux is still here despite literally claiming the NYT is part of a global jew conspiracy controlled by jew gold is proof of that alone.

 

Please refrain from falsely attributing what you claim are comments allegedly made by me.

While it may fit with your false narrative, the above is simply not something I posted.

 

Fair enough I missed that one of the two authors is also a campus organizer for the JVP.
Now tell me that is wrong with the article.

 

One of their most popular rising stars who has so much political power she singlehandedly derailed an entire congressional condemnation of antisemitism literally flat out said that jews hypnotize the world, jews have dual loyalty, and jew money controls the government. Those are literal nazi conspiracies. One of her colleagues, also a phenomenally popular rising star who's untouchable right now, perverted history to the point of claiming that active uniformed members of the third reich "provided a safe haven" for jews. The US may not be to the point of democrats beating jews unconscious or trying to set them on fire in the streets like Corbyn's labour party but it is fast getting there.

 

Trump and the GOP are accused of anti-Semitism double standard after piling on Rep. Ilhan Omar

Both messages were elliptical, relying on innuendo and allusion. One was delivered in a seemingly stream-of-consciousness appeal, the other in its online equivalent: a tweet.

The insinuation, in both cases, was that Jews use money to pull strings and sway politics...

...

In a pair of tweets on Sunday, Omar had cited Puff Daddy’s 1997 paean to money — “It’s All About the Benjamins” — to paint Israel’s supporters in Congress as beholden to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a powerful lobbying group whose members contribute generously to lawmakers who share its right-wing perspective on the Middle East. Under a hail of criticism from both sides of the aisle, the congresswoman apologized and said she was learning about the “painful history of anti-Semitic tropes.”

...

But Trump, as a presidential candidate in December 2015, said much the same about what Jewish donors supposedly expect in return for their money.

Speaking at a presidential forum hosted by the Republican Jewish Coalition, he told members of the lobbying group, which describes itself as the “unique bridge between the Jewish community and Republican decision-makers,” that he wasn’t seeking their money because he didn’t want to be beholden to them.

“You’re not going to support me because I don’t want your money,” he said bluntly. Drawing a contrast to former Florida governor Jeb Bush, who raked in vast sums of money, Trump said, “That’s why you don’t want to give me money, okay? But that’s okay. You want to control your own politician.” He said he understood their perspective because he, too, was once a donor, a point suggesting that he didn’t view quid pro quo as an expectation unique to Jewish groups.

Still, the remarks drew criticism from some observers for perpetuating stereotypes about Jews, not just as political puppet masters but also as ruthless negotiators. “Is there anybody that doesn’t renegotiate deals in this room?” Trump asked earlier in the speech, adding, “Perhaps more than any room I’ve ever spoken to, maybe more. It’s okay. I’ve been called on that a couple of times, too.” The aside drew laughs and applause in the room.

Ari Fleischer, White House press secretary under George W. Bush and an RJC board member, was less enthused about Trump’s pitch.


View: https://twitter.com/AriFleischer/status/672465585016557568?s=19



View: https://twitter.com/TimesofIsrael/status/672498426576175104?s=19


The Anti-Defamation League, which censured Omar on Monday, defended the GOP front-runner after the 2015 appearance.

“We do not believe he intended his comments regarding negotiations and money to relate specifically to their Jewishness, but we understand that they could be interpreted that way,” Jonathan A. Greenblatt, the group’s chief executive, who has spoken out against Trump on other occasions, said in a statement later that day. “We encourage him to clarify that this was not his intention, and that he rejects the traditional stereotypes about Jews and money.”

Trump appears never to have publicly clarified his intent. Instead, he went on as president to make statements that seemed to find little fault with anti-Semitic bigotry and, at times, to use language that actually upheld it....(more)​

 

Personal observation: Tulsi not being in the third debate after destroying Kamala in the second one, and when it externally looks like she should've qualified, makes it reek like the DNC is pulling similar shenanigans as with Sanders in the previous primary.

 

I don't know that it "reeks" of anything other than the polling and donor contribution thresholds were raised for the third and fourth debates in order to narrow the field.

Gabbard , the "love" candidate Marianne Williamson and latecomer billionaire Tom Steyer met the donor threshold but not the polling threshold; others fell short of both.

Tulsi had the added issue of having to go on active duty with the Army National Guard for two weeks in August and Pentagon guidelines (in place long before her campaign) prohibited her from any active campaigning during that time. That certainly hurt in building name recognition and better polling numbers.

Tulsi Gabbard is back from active duty after being cut off from her campaign

She could conceivably be back in the October debate if she meets the thresholds:

The Democratic National Committee will hold its fourth primary debate on October 15 in Ohio. If more than 10 candidates qualify for the debate, there will be a second night on October 16.

Campaigns will have until 11:59 p.m. ET on October 1 to meet donor and polling thresholds to qualify. The thresholds to qualify are the same as the thresholds for the September 12 debate, meaning that a candidate who did not qualify for the September debate could reach the polling and donor thresholds to qualify for the October debate.

Candidates must receive 2% or more support in at least four polls, which may be national polls or polls in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada. Candidates also must receive donations from at least 130,000 unique donors, with 400 donors per state in at least 20 states. ​

I think she brings an interesting dynamic to the campaign and hope she makes it back in for the October debate but that does not suggest I think she is a strong candidate with any shot of winning the nomination.

 

I understand the qualification criteria, and her rebuttal is as follows: Where is Tulsi Gabbard? Hawaii congresswoman didn't qualify for third DNC presidential primary debate

In any case, noted on your comment re: October debate. Let's see if she ends up in that round.

Speaking of the 3rd debate, nobody really stood out to me as they were all following the usual polital point-scoring despised by many - the only ones that seemed semi-authentic were Sanders and Yang. Everyone else seems generic and establishment-esque.

Sanders suffers from the "mad old man" image and I hope he can lessen his exaggerated gesticulating enough to be taken more serious, and Yang needs to reach another level of polish to be a serious contender IMO.

 

Gabbard's blacklisted by the DNC because she's an actual liberal who's against profiteering wars, critical of the congressional military industrial complex, and soundly condemns the antisemitism and antiliberalism that's utterly strangling the left. The DNC learned from their mistakes with sanders and when she destroyed Harris in the debates and became the single most searched candidate google was quick to memory hole her campaign ads. The left doesn't want a repeat of 2016 where people got their own information from primary sources and directly communicated to form the backbone of Sanders' insurgent campaign. They've already got facebook, twitter, and google going full fascism to make sure this "election" turns out the way the DNC wants.

Harris has been coronated by the donor class because she's the perfect candidate. She's a corporatist authoritarian who abhores due process and has the skin deep "diversity" that the rich whites of the social justice movement obsess over.

 

Bingo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Please provide examples of Gabbard suggesting that the "left" or the Democratic Party is anti-Semitic and "soundly condemned" them.

She certainly took a few shots at Trump yesterday...


View: https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1173723701373591552?s=19



View: https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1173434704302751744?s=19

***

Added....

While Gabbard personally opposes the BDS movement, as do the overwhelming majority of Democrats, she was also one of 18 House members who co-sponsored a resolution by Rep. Ilhan Omar that affirms a First Amendment right "to participate in boycotts in pursuit of civil and human rights at home and abroad"

 

Couldn't agree more with Gabbard's tweets, especially when following the geopolitical games and movements over the past year, and the incessant attempts to construct a narrative in the vein of a 'attack Iran's proxies and ultimately declare war on them directly' agenda. Afghanistan has been a fun rollercoaster ride in the meantime as well.

If there's a single candidate that I'm behind on foreign policy, it's Gabbard. Honestly, if Gabbard, Yang, and Sanders could fuse their positions and combine the best aspects of each, it'd be a revolutionary combination for the country.

Likelihood of such an unholy alliance is astronomically low, however. IMO it's too early for Gabbard & Yang - I think they'd be much stronger contenders 4 years from now (and certainly need that time to polish their strategy & presentation).

 

The latest from Tulsi....


View: https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1174675784973410305


I think we will see her in the October debate and she will continue to rise in the polls....perhaps paving the way for serious consideration for VP.

Add:

Gabbard: 'Debate or no debate we are driving forward'