this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
415 points (96.4% liked)

politics

19089 readers
4157 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
415
Dems who censured Rep. Tlaib over Palestine comments largely silent on GOP Rep's call for nukes (www.thehandbasket.co)
submitted 7 months ago by Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I reached out to spokespeople for all 22 Democrats Monday morning with a simple inquiry: I wanted to know if they planned to make a statement or take any sort of action—like a censure—against Rep. Walberg for his call for the destruction of Gaza.

Only three offices responded. 

“Deranged and depraved,” Rep. Ritchie Torres of New York said through his press secretary, which was surprising given Torres’ aggressive and unapologeticsupport for Israel. (He’s literally in Israel right now.) I followed up, pointing out Torres’ vote to censure Tlaib and asking if he thought Rep. Walberg's comments were on the same level. His press secretary said yes. When I pressed further, asking if Torres planned to call for a vote to censure, I received no reply.

top 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 57 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It feels strange doesn't it? That you can call to defend the very concept of humanity, and get called out. But calling for the instant genocide of an entire peoples leaves crickets?

The erosion of our institutions must be nearly complete. We have Christians calling for the destruction of Galilee. We have so called progressives falling to silence in the face of just words, in the past they'd be on the picket lines with us (see Civil Rights Movement). This doesn't even mention the bravery of the workers during the Battle of Blair Mountain. We have been successfully desensitized as a whole, even if as individuals it is madness inducing to see every day.

All symbols, words, and institutions have lost their original meaning. We don't even know what YHWH means really. A species of perceived orphans pounding their chest proudly proclaiming we know what is going on. Nobody does. It's all just one urge to the next, and if there is a plan, it is because an urge required complexity to satisfy. We have become The Jungle once more.

[–] minnow@lemmy.world 33 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Democrats are not "so called progressives".

Some progressives are Democrats, but not all Democrats are progressives. Most Democrats are not progressives, in fact. Things make a little more sense once you accept that.

But only a little.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

None of this shit makes any sense unless you worship Mamon. It only makes sense if you blind yourself to everything but wealth, power, and influence to see with the eyes of modern Pharisees. That's all it is. Its the same exact story scaled up.

[–] grrgyle 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

We have become The Jungle once more.

What do you mean by this?

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 7 months ago

My guess is a reference to the novel by Upton Sinclair called The Jungle.

[–] VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago

He means 'waaaaaa! waaaaaa! Not everyone believes exactly the same things I do!' It's petulant whinging from someone totally detached from reality.

They think the few things they've heard of are the worst things ever because they have no real concept of anything else.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 37 points 7 months ago (3 children)

They oppose progressives but not republicans. This is nothing even remotely new.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It's the only "both sides" I subscribe to.

All Republicans and most Democrats are "conservative" so in that respect they're the same. We have like a handful of actual "left leaning" individuals in the democratic party and the rest of them hate that fact because what we really have is a plutocracy.

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 7 points 7 months ago

Right. Progressives would enact meaningful campaign finance reform, and maybe even put an end to their insider training. It would completely upend their little apple cart, so the establishment politicians will always have “bipartisan cooperation” when it comes to silencing progressive voices.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Censuring a Dem passes. Censuring a Republican doesn't. It's pretty simple. He doesn't want to call for a failed vote.

His office should have just said that.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Censuring a Dem passes. Censuring a Republican doesn’t. It’s pretty simple.

And I said why this is the case. There is no other reason.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Because Republicans exist.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

I didn't ask for the centrist excuse for opposing progressives and not republicans.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world -4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

She said, "from the river to the sea". That's a phrase calling for genocide and explicitly calling for genocide deserves censure.

Republicans will vote against censure for a Republican. Both Dems and Republicans will vote for censuring a Democrat.

Generally holding our own accountable and not being in lockstep like the Republicans is something to be proud of, not ashamed of.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That’s a phrase calling for genocide and explicitly calling for genocide deserves censure.

When a progressive does it. And under no other circumstances.

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

She should have called to purchase a sqadron or two of F-16s

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 31 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I mean did you expect anything less? Palestinians don't donate, have PACS and lobbyists influencing American politicians like Israel has.

Money is always above humanitarian rights.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Wu-Tangs song C.R.E.A.M. sums this up.

Method Man is not glorifying money and excess; rather, he’s saying that money holds power, and is a factor of major decisions made in the world he lives in. Those who have it, have power and those who don’t, won’t get up anywhere; sort of a way of saying the “love of money is the root of all evil” phrase from 1 Timothy 6:10 in the Bible, if you will.

[–] in4aPenny@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I'm sorry but as a fan of Wu-Tang this is not at all what C.R.E.A.M. is about, just read/listen to the lyrics. It's about the paper-chase in the hood and how it's not worth the struggle, no more no less. Also Method Man only sings the hook, the rest of the song is written and performed by Raekwon and Inspectah Deck. Stop being a poser.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

From U-God in their book "Raw: My Journey into the Wu-Tang"

The realism on “C.R.E.A.M.” is what resonates with so many people all over the world. People everywhere know that sentiment of being slaves to the dollar. Cash is king, and we are its lowly subjects. That’s pretty much the case in every nation around the world, the desperation to put your life and your freedom on the line to make a couple dollars. Whether you’re working, stripping, hustling, or slinging, whether you’re a business owner or homeless, cash rules everything around us.

From Raekon in the article Raekwon Breaks Down His 25 Most Essential Songs

C.R.E.A.M.’ did a lot for my career personally. It gave me an opportunity to revisit the times where that cream meant that much to us. So, yeah, when I think of this record it just automatically puts me back into ‘87/’88 where we were standing in front of the building. It’s cold outside. We didn’t care. We’re out there, all black on trying to make dollars. Just trying to make some money and trying to eat. Survive.

All of Wu-Tang has been credited for writing C.R.E.A.M.

  • Clifford Smith (Method Man)
  • Corey Woods (Raekwon)
  • David Porter
  • Dennis Coles (Ghostface Killah)
  • Gary Grice (GZA)
  • Isaac Hayes
  • Jason Hunter (Inspectah Deck)
  • Lamont Jody Hawkins (U-God)
  • Robert Diggs (RZA)
  • Russell Jones (Ol' Dirty Bastard)

As for Method Man's hook, the hook is the key part of the song. The hook is theme of the song, which is money = power. Without the hook, it's a personal story about Raekwon and Inspectah Deck's youth, living in the rough part of the city, and their dreams. Method Man's hook frames those stories as people trying to escape poverty through acquiring money as money = power. Hence why Method Man raps "cash rules everything around me". This completely frames Raekwon and Inspectah Deck verses as story about chasing money through any money. As Inspectah Deck raps:

Neglected for now, but yo, it gots to be accepted. That what? That life is hectic

It's an acknowledgment that money is the only that that matters. When it comes to humanitarian rights, unless you have money. Those in power don't care. Israel has a powerful lobby that uses money to influence American politics. Israel isn't shaping American policy through gifts, connections, or logical arguments. The influence is coming straight from money. As Method Man eloquently puts it "cash rules everything around me". If American politicians actually cared about the plight they would be tell the Israel lobby to go fuck themselves and not take their money. It is the pursuit of the American politician getting money that is causing problems in Palestine.

Palestinians don't have money to influence anything in American politics. It's taking direct action for Palestinians to get support.

When Inspectah Deck raps in the hook:

Because you can't just get by no more, Word up, you gotta get over, straight up and down

[–] in4aPenny@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

If that amount of interpretation can be squeezed out of that banger, then you could write a 10-volume encyclopedia out of Leaving The Past by Immortal Technique.

[–] Arcity@feddit.nl 21 points 7 months ago

A nation of genocide, slavery and nuking cities, prefers a nuke over cease-fire? surprised pikachu face

[–] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago

They are racist and paid off.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

They're all taking the same AIPAC money Torres is. Democrats are filthy hypocrites.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world -4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

*Some democrats

[–] Sami_Uso@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

*Some including the president of the United States.

[–] fiend_unpleasant@lemmy.world -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

ADAB

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah Bernie is all about the AIPAC money I guess

[–] Sami_Uso@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

No but it's been pretty clear he's falling in line with the rest of the party.

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Oh grandma what big teeth you have.

It's coming from inside the house...

[–] Sami_Uso@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Always has been

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Can we define "largely"?

Perhaps a percentage or something less vague and leading?

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

Of course not, articles that shit on the Dems have to be as vague as possible to reinforce the BoTh SiDeS mentality that stupid people have and want to spread.

[–] istanbullu@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Democrats are a bunch of racists cheering the genocide of brown people.

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

That's not true, they are concealing their joy, not cheering publicly.