Patterico's Pontifications


By A Wide Margin, House Passes Broadly Inclusive “Anti-Hate” Resolution

Filed under: General — Dana @ 6:51 pm

[guest post by Dana]

Following up on this morning’s post about the Democrats’ struggle to rebuke one of their own for her outright anti-Semitic comments, Nancy Pelosi admitted after a new resolution passed by an overwhelming majority, that the resolution *was not* about Rep. Omar. This in spite of its original intent to be a rebuke of Rep. Omar. I’m surprised that it’s all rather unsurprising that the Democrats remain unable unwilling to publicly rebuke one of their own over anti-Semitism.

From the Washington Post:

Democrats engineered a broad House vote condemning hatred on Thursday in an attempt to move past alleged anti-Semitic comments by a freshman Muslim congresswoman — a battle that has torn the party apart and stymied their attempts to present a unified agenda.

The 407-to-23 vote capped days of frustration and anger over the comments by Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) that have overshadowed Democratic policies — both legislation and investigations of President Trump — and raised questions about whether Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) could keep her fractious caucus together.

Debates over climate change, health care and how the government spends money loom for the House Democratic majority — and are likely to cause fierce internal strife in the coming months.

Even crafting the generic resolution against bigotry proved difficult for Democrats on Thursday, as Latinos, Asian Americans and others objected to an initial version and demanded that their concerns be addressed. The resolution was revised shortly before the vote.

The resolution condemns anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim bias in equal measure, a shift from a draft circulated Monday that rebuked only anti-Semitism. Neither mentions Omar nor her comments specifically.

“It’s not about her,” Pelosi said of Omar at a news conference. “It’s about these forms of hatred.”

So, by this *not* being about Omar and by having received zero consequences for her bad behavior, Omar and the Democratic party have just learned, with their leader’s blessing, that anti-Semitism is now even more o.k. within the party. The slow normalization of it, if you will. Ridiculous resolution notwithstanding. And because Pelosi acted like a defensive mother protecting clueless little Omar by saying she didn’t believe the child understood the full weight of her words, it makes sense that Pelosi declined altogether to include any actual real consequences in the resolution. Additionally, because the adult caved at the very time discipline and correction were called for, the child learned that she was able to get away with bad behavior. This is called bad parenting. I no longer believe Nancy Pelosi is as strong of a leader as she would like us to believe. We’ve seen behind the screen.

I also wanted to point out this interesting contrast:

The resolution posted Thursday indirectly repudiates Omar’s comments, saying that “accusations of dual loyalty generally have an insidious and pernicious history” and noting that such an accusation “constitutes anti-Semitism because it suggests that Jewish citizens cannot be patriotic Americans and trusted neighbors.”

But it also includes language condemning anti-Muslim bigotry “as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contrary to the values and aspirations of the United States,” and condemns incidents of mosque bombings and planned domestic terrorist attacks targeting Muslim communities.

In response to the resolution’s passage, Omar gave herself a standing “O” for her stance against Islamaphobia and for having courageously started the ever important conversation about hate in America. Apparently the conversation has never been had, and all it took for it to begin was a bit of bigotry provided by a sitting Democratic representative:


Anyway, Allahpundit addreses the question of whether the resolution could have been worse, because while not explicitly naming Omar, it did focus on the the dual-loyalty accusation:

I agree, it could have been worse (e.g., “all hate matters, the end”). The fact that it identified the particular stereotype she used was welcome, and no doubt a concession to her critics in the caucus. But the resolution evolved within the wider context of Omar’s allies in the caucus running interference for her, even claiming that she was the real victim in this. Many of her allies, starting with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, refused to concede that accusing supporters of the Jewish state of foreign allegiance was necessarily problematic, to borrow a favorite word of the left. And of course, considering that initially punishments were discussed ranging from identifying Omar by name in the resolution to stripping her of her Foreign Affairs seat, in context the watered-down resolution feels more like a ploy to shield her from blame than to reprimand her.

You can read the resolution in its entirety here.


Me, I’m still scratching my head wondering how the vexing problem of anti-Semitism by an elected representative within the Democrat party managed to become about Islamaphobia and everything else in between…

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)


50 Responses to “By A Wide Margin, House Passes Broadly Inclusive “Anti-Hate” Resolution”

  1. Welp.

    Dana (023079)

  2. It’s very dark comedy, the truth is this type of language is perfectly acceptable in this sanderized party

    Narciso (766551)

  3. And Putin smelled smiled…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  4. This is like a United Nations resolution. It’s a compromise. To a considerable extent, everybody can read it their way. Nobody is too unhappy. It accomplishes virtually nothing.

    Sign of careful drafting: It avoided the term “Islamophobia.”

    I notice also it’s clearly treating “anti-Muslim” whatever as a more serious problem than anti-semitism. At least in the first paragraph. Further down, the resolution deals mostly with anti-semitism and appears to be left from an earlier draft and deals with things that went well beyond words.

    I guess Ilahn Omar’s defenders didn’t care much about what came after the first paragraph.

    Anti-semitism, although mentioned first, is merely summed up as hateful expressions, but anti-Muslim is discrimination.

    Sammy Finkelman (b0ece0)

  5. “Me, I’m still scratching my head wondering how the vexing problem of anti-Semitism by an elected representative within the Democrat party managed to become about Islamaphobia and everything else in between…”

    It’s a new ballgame, new rules. The only surprise is that some people were surprised.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  6. Tomorrow, they name post offices.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  7. Omar/Talib/Cortez = Mnt. Rushmore

    mg (8cbc69)

  8. They can spin it how they want, but I’ll keep saying “not good enough” until she’s kicked out of the Foreign Affairs Committee. There’s no room for an anti-Semite like her in that body.

    Paul Montagu (d49d0a)

  9. “Condemning” seems like such a hateful word.

    Munroe (75c371)

  10. “I think we have crossed a Rubicon of sorts. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and the Congressional Black Caucus–which supported Omar unanimously, as best one can tell from news reports–are in the driver’s seat. Anti-Semitism is now accepted by the Democratic Party.”

    — John Hinderaker

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  11. Its certainly unhelpful, Republicans are just prone to crime think,

    Narciso (766551)

  12. So what pecans favorite band kajagogoo

    Narciso (766551)

  13. The Republicans in the House could, all 197 of them, have co-sponsored their own resolution condemning only Illhead’s anti-Semitism.
    Nancy would not have let it come to a vote, but so what? The people would know about it.
    They did not.
    Why not?
    I’ll tell you why not. Because all they want is to keep their phony-baloney jobs. They cannot afford to piss off Pelosi too much because, then, no pork for their districts would ever make it to the floor, either.
    Yes, yes, I am saying that they’re all in cahoots and we’re suckers to take their dog and pony shows seriously.

    nk (dbc370)

  14. Well that’s a way to demoralize their base, but heck your fine with it because trump, that’s been the pattern for two years now.

    Narciso (766551)

  15. They might have done something more worthwhile by passing a resolution denouncing fly specks in pepper shakers. That would have more significance then this toothless pile of pablum.

    Skeptical Voter (9d65cd)

  16. democratic base just won house and got more votes in senate races ;but 22% of voters in small states control as many senate seats as the other 78% in 2020 6 million democrats who didn’t vote in 2016 will be voting in 2020 also 2.5 million democrats who vote third part because clinton wasn’t progressive enough. clinton will not be on ballot. also 3 million young democrats will have turned 18 by nov 2020. also nearly 2 million republicans will have died. aoc is the future you have no future. you stupidly think democratic party is to progressive. democratic base thinks its not progressive enough! 71% of voters in 2016 were whites as 3 million blacks didn’t vote because hillary was to racist and refused to put black for veep. in 2020 only 68% of voters will be white. bye bye republican party! demographics not the b.s. you pontificate here will decide the election in 2020!

    lany (c14a47)

  17. Like I’ve been saying, nk, the uni-party hates us.

    mg (8cbc69)

  18. So A.G. Barr asks Huber what have you been doing? He replies, nothing. And Barr says great job.
    These Just us lawyers need to be hung.

    mg (8cbc69)

  19. 18… your personal pep talk is like Stuart Smalley Gone way off the rails. Thanks for the chuckle!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  20. Stein points out that zoolander (trudeau) actually did what trump is accused off,

    narciso (d1f714)

  21. But he’s been warning of this for some time:

    narciso (d1f714)

  22. 14, probably Poi Dog Pondering or Violent Femmes, might have been on the ground floor of the BoDeans/Replacements 120 minutes era.

    urbanleftbehind (f7c8ad)

  23. When I hear y’all going off on teh libs I think you’re irrational and impossible to talk to but when I hear you talk about music I know we could be friends. Same way it is with my Trump supporting friends and family in real life. We’re basically fine if we don’t talk about immigration. You just named some great bands. Speaking of early-to-mid 90s bands how about the Judybats out of Knoxville, TN or the Samples from CO. Both of their debut albums knock my socks off. Also, f*** antisemitism and hate.

    JRH (fe281f)

  24. No those are all terrible bands, but nickelback is uniquely so.

    Narciso (8816df)

  25. who do you like? jw. my all time fave is Neil Young. He had a Republican phase in the early 80s. He hasn’t had a good album in a very long time though. Hawks and Doves is a great one from when he was flirting with Repubicanism.


    JRH (fe281f)

  26. Maybe his earlier stuff, Morrison when I’m morose, the police (well I grew up in the 80s)

    Narciso (8816df)

  27. If you play a Neil Young song backwards, you’ll hear messages from the devil. Even worse, if you play it forwards, you’ll hear Neil Young.

    If you see a link offering a free clip of a Neil Young song, DO NOT CLICK IT! It links to a free clip of a Neil Young song.

    If a tree falls in a forest and there’s no one around to hear it, you have just found the perfect location for a Neil Young concert.

    nk (dbc370)

  28. love the Police. so much superior to solo Sting. @30. RFLMAO!

    JRH (fe281f)

  29. I have a superstition about a certain band that Young belonged to. I consider it a big, big jinx. If a song by that band, or any of its members, ever comes on the radio, I immediately turn it off. Then I take that station off my preset buttons, and don’t listen to it again until the year has rolled around (after January 1 of the following year).

    nk (dbc370)

  30. That Neil young hate is unhealthy, even skynyrd skynyrd didnt harbor it.

    Narciso (8816df)

  31. See my Comment 27 above.

    nk (dbc370)

  32. Solo Sting is laden with cliche – SJ to the nth degree, the mandatory black lady backup singers etc. 1980s Steve Winwood was the guilt-free alternative to solo Sting.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  33. Also winwood didn’t sound like a brit

    narciso (d1f714)

  34. If you see a link offering a free clip of a Neil Young song, DO NOT CLICK IT! It links to a free clip of a Neil Young song.

    I once accidentally clicked on a link for Justin Bieber tickets. Fortunately, it was just a Trojan Horse.

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  35. Jimi
    Voodoo Child

    mg (8cbc69)

  36. democratic base just won house and got more votes in senate races

    Do you not understand how Senate elections work? Every two years, about 1/3 of the Senate seats are up for grabs. This particular year, roughly 2/3 of the seats in the election were held by Democrats. Incumbents tend to get reelected (over 90% of the time). So, naturally there were more votes for Democrats last election.

    but 22% of voters in small states control as many senate seats as the other 78%

    Do you not get how Congress works? Proportional representation is in the House of Representatives. The Senate has always been two votes for each state.

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  37. lany doesnt get it – I think we are far closer to a 3rd party resulting from the Problem Solvers/Opioids and their fans walking out on the new school Dems – it will amount to ish in the near term because their simply is not enough NT on the other side to dent the Rs in a meaningful way.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  38. Chuck Bartowski (great nickname, of course), I think that the Left (and some of the Right) are counting on people being ignorant of how government is constructed and how it works. It’s the triumph of “what I want to be” over reality.

    Heck, I think that there should be a poll test before people can vote. I’m talking “Schoolhouse Rocks” level. I’d even settle for (1) name the three branches of government, (2) the names of your Senators, (3) the name of your Representative, (4) the name of the Secretary of State, and (5) describe one Amendment to the Constitution and why it is important to you.

    But that would apparently make me a racist. Jeez.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  39. nk, I think that Jimmy Fallon does Neil Young better than Neil Young does Neil Young:

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  40. 36… we had the good fortune to see Winwood 3 or 4 years ago… great show, he had an excellent drummer as I recall.

    Colonel Haiku (e2ff85)

  41. 33… don’t be dissin’ Buffalo Springfield! CSNY, I’m with ya on that.

    Colonel Haiku (e2ff85)

  42. Mark steyn points out this panjandrum mentioned the dreyfus affair?

    Narciso (8816df)

  43. Ohio is the best with alabama second.

    lany (82b8df)

  44. 46. Narciso (8816df) — 3/8/2019 @ 9:16 am

    Mark steyn points out this panjandrum mentioned the dreyfus affair?

    Yes he did, and yes it did. he said they mentioned something that took place in anotehr country (France) and anotehr century (actually it started in o the century before last)

    Here is where the resolution mentions it: (it’s second in a list of 4 examples of the (wrongful) use of the concept of dual loyalty:

    Whereas accusations of dual loyalty generally have an insidious and pernicious history, including—

    (1) the discriminatory incarceration of Americans of Japanese descent during World War II on their basis of race and alleged dual loyalty;

    (2) the Dreyfus affair, when Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish French artillery captain, was falsely convicted of passing secrets to Germany based on his Jewish background;

    (3) when the loyalty of President John F. Kennedy was questioned because of his Catholic faith; and

    (4) the post-9/11 conditions faced by Muslim-Americans in the United States, including Islamophobia and false and vicious attacks on and threats to Muslim-Americans for alleged association with terrorism.;

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  45. Now the thing is,ofcourse teh Dreyfuss Affair was not like Ilahn Omar said. The Dreyfuss affsir involved a TOTALLY FALSE claim of spying (based on teh fact that Dreyfuss camew from Alsace, which had bene annexed by Germany after the Franco Purssian War of 1870-1- and it was actually supposed non-loyalty to France) Someone else was the spy, by the way,and this started as a cover-up.

    What Ilahn Omar said was an “explanation ” of generally undisputed facts (although she distorts them) so they’re not really similar at all. Nobody is denying that they support Israel in many things.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5818 secs.