(02-08-2021 09:46 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 09:33 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-06-2021 10:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-06-2021 09:57 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  What Democrats and the liberal media want to do is to leverage a fringe of extremist statements and violence from the right against mainstream conservatives in a way that they would never do on the left.”

Exactly why I have been saying this is all political. Painting a picture of right wing extremism permeating the entire caucus.

What I don't understand or accept is the obvious double standard that conservatives are painted as the most extreme nutcases on the right, no matter how much they disavow them, but leftists can embrace the most extreme nutcases on the left with impunity.

There's inherently a conflation of issues here, which I think started with this thread premise that is a bit off-the-mark in the inclusion of Greene in the comparison.

Republicans have done exactly what you're saying Dems have done, in regard to political philosophies. The Tea Party and Freedom Caucuses have 100% been embraced by the right and have influenced the politics of Reps in more concrete ways than The Squad has on the left.

This is starkly obvious by the fact that Mitt Romney is now considered a liberal conservative.

The thing is, the issues with Greene aren't related to her politic views, but her personal views. Do you think Reps have never tried to weaponize personal views of Dems to attack those politicians of the rest of the party?

Haven't hear much of the Tea party in 5-8 years. Are y'all still flogging this bogeyman?

Freedom Caucus I am not so familiar with - what exactly does it advocate besides Freedom?

And when I hear of Mitt, I just remember the angst the Democrats had over the possibility that a horrible person like that rich Mormon could ascend to the presidency. They seem a lot more comfortable with him now.

So what personal views of what Democrats were weaponized, as you say? Please be specific.

I echo OO's comments, plus a few of my own.

(02-08-2021 09:46 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Republicans have done exactly what you're saying Dems have done, in regard to political philosophies. The Tea Party and Freedom Caucuses have 100% been embraced by the right and have influenced the politics of Reps in more concrete ways than The Squad has on the left.

What TEA Party or Freedom Caucus issues have been embraced by the republicans? What Squad issues have not been embraced by the democrats?

Quote:This is starkly obvious by the fact that Mitt Romney is now considered a liberal conservative.

Mitt was always considered more center to center-right than right.

Quote:The thing is, the issues with Greene aren't related to her politic views, but her personal views. Do you think Reps have never tried to weaponize personal views of Dems to attack those politicians of the rest of the party?

My problem with democrats is that I find their political views totally unacceptable, regardless of their personal views.

(02-08-2021 10:09 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 09:46 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 09:33 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-06-2021 10:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-06-2021 09:57 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  What Democrats and the liberal media want to do is to leverage a fringe of extremist statements and violence from the right against mainstream conservatives in a way that they would never do on the left.”

Exactly why I have been saying this is all political. Painting a picture of right wing extremism permeating the entire caucus.

What I don't understand or accept is the obvious double standard that conservatives are painted as the most extreme nutcases on the right, no matter how much they disavow them, but leftists can embrace the most extreme nutcases on the left with impunity.

There's inherently a conflation of issues here, which I think started with this thread premise that is a bit off-the-mark in the inclusion of Greene in the comparison.

Republicans have done exactly what you're saying Dems have done, in regard to political philosophies. The Tea Party and Freedom Caucuses have 100% been embraced by the right and have influenced the politics of Reps in more concrete ways than The Squad has on the left.

This is starkly obvious by the fact that Mitt Romney is now considered a liberal conservative.

The thing is, the issues with Greene aren't related to her politic views, but her personal views. Do you think Reps have never tried to weaponize personal views of Dems to attack those politicians of the rest of the party?

Haven't hear much of the Tea party in 5-8 years. Are y'all still flogging this bogeyman?

Freedom Caucus I am not so familiar with - what exactly does it advocate besides Freedom?

C'mon, do you want to have an honest conversation?

You're intentionally downplaying the extent to which the far right has politically pushed the Republican party and then minimize the Freedom Caucus because of their name. Reps who currently are members include Boebert and Greene, as well as Nunes, Gaetz, and Jim Jordan. A far-right conservative whose who of "cut everything and government is always the problem" Republicans.

The Freedom Caucus is the Tea Party 2.0.

Quote:And when I hear of Mitt, I just remember the angst the Democrats had over the possibility that a horrible person like that rich Mormon could ascend to the presidency. They seem a lot more comfortable with him now.

And why is that relevant?

I absolutely agree that Romney was given a raw deal by Dems and Dems have paid for it (if anything, with 4 years of Trump). I've stated many times on this board that Dems really jumped the shark with many of their attacks on Romney.

I think that should be crystal clear to everyone in the Democratic party given the current state of politics.

Quote:So what personal views of what Democrats were weaponized, as you say? Please be specific.

First of all, I asked if you think similar things hadn't been done to Dems - way to duck and weave. I assume this means you don't think Dems personal views have ever been weaponized?

Off the top of my head, we can start with Omar, who has dealt with talking heads and now Congresswomen attacking her for being Muslim - saying things like she supports Sharia law. From a moralistic POV, Bill Clinton was taken to the shed for an extramarital affair that morphed into lying under oath.

(02-08-2021 10:35 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  C'mon, do you want to have an honest conversation?
You're intentionally downplaying the extent to which the far right has politically pushed the Republican party and then minimize the Freedom Caucus because of their name. Reps who currently are members include Boebert and Greene, as well as Nunes, Gaetz, and Jim Jordan. A far-right conservative whose who of "cut everything and government is always the problem" Republicans.

If you want to have a truly honest conversation, then you have to be willing to admit that the democrats have lurched to the left at least as far as republicans have moved to the right. Quick test--What were republican issue positions in 1960? What are they today? What were democrat issue positions in 1960? What are they today? Who has moved further? If you answer those questions honestly, I believe you will conclude that democrats have swung further left than republicans have to the right.

Quote:The Freedom Caucus is the Tea Party 2.0.

Are you talking about the TEA Party, which formed out of opposition to the bank bailouts of 2008 and advocated an alternative plan, or are you talking about the neocon RINOs who realized after the 2008 elections that they didn't have anything else going for them so they stole the Tea Party label? The TEA Party and neocons are about as far apart as possible.

What I know about the Freedom Caucus is that they opposed John Boehner (with which I agreed, as he was basically useless) and they opposed Trump's proposed changes to health care (with which I basically disagreed, although the Trump plan was not Bismarck which I support). I would say that I generally support many, but not all, of their issue positions.

Quote:I absolutely agree that Romney was given a raw deal by Dems and Dems have paid for it (if anything, with 4 years of Trump). I've stated many times on this board that Dems really jumped the shark with many of their attacks on Romney.

So, were you saying this in 2012, contemporaneously with Romney's presidential campaign, or have you taken that position upon reflection?

Quote:First of all, I asked if you think similar things hadn't been done to Dems - way to duck and weave. I assume this means you don't think Dems personal views have ever been weaponized?
Off the top of my head, we can start with Omar, who has dealt with talking heads and now Congresswomen attacking her for being Muslim - saying things like she supports Sharia law. From a moralistic POV, Bill Clinton was taken to the shed for an extramarital affair that morphed into lying under oath.

Bill Clinton was taken to the shed by some (not me, I always preferred him by such a wide margin over Al Gore that I would never have voted to impeach or convict, no matter what) for the extramarital affair, but much more for the lying under oath. I think Omar has been attacked not for being Muslim but rather for her at least implicit support of Sharia Law--at the very least, when given the opportunity she has failed to condemn atrocities against women and LGBT persons under Sharia Law.

(02-08-2021 10:35 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 10:09 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 09:46 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 09:33 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-06-2021 10:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Exactly why I have been saying this is all political. Painting a picture of right wing extremism permeating the entire caucus.

What I don't understand or accept is the obvious double standard that conservatives are painted as the most extreme nutcases on the right, no matter how much they disavow them, but leftists can embrace the most extreme nutcases on the left with impunity.

There's inherently a conflation of issues here, which I think started with this thread premise that is a bit off-the-mark in the inclusion of Greene in the comparison.

Republicans have done exactly what you're saying Dems have done, in regard to political philosophies. The Tea Party and Freedom Caucuses have 100% been embraced by the right and have influenced the politics of Reps in more concrete ways than The Squad has on the left.

This is starkly obvious by the fact that Mitt Romney is now considered a liberal conservative.

The thing is, the issues with Greene aren't related to her politic views, but her personal views. Do you think Reps have never tried to weaponize personal views of Dems to attack those politicians of the rest of the party?

Haven't hear much of the Tea party in 5-8 years. Are y'all still flogging this bogeyman?

Freedom Caucus I am not so familiar with - what exactly does it advocate besides Freedom?

C'mon, do you want to have an honest conversation?

You're intentionally downplaying the extent to which the far right has politically pushed the Republican party and then minimize the Freedom Caucus because of their name. Reps who currently are members include Boebert and Greene, as well as Nunes, Gaetz, and Jim Jordan. A far-right conservative whose who of "cut everything and government is always the problem" Republicans.

The Freedom Caucus is the Tea Party 2.0.

Quote:And when I hear of Mitt, I just remember the angst the Democrats had over the possibility that a horrible person like that rich Mormon could ascend to the presidency. They seem a lot more comfortable with him now.

And why is that relevant?

I absolutely agree that Romney was given a raw deal by Dems and Dems have paid for it (if anything, with 4 years of Trump). I've stated many times on this board that Dems really jumped the shark with many of their attacks on Romney.

I think that should be crystal clear to everyone in the Democratic party given the current state of politics.

Quote:So what personal views of what Democrats were weaponized, as you say? Please be specific.

First of all, I asked if you think similar things hadn't been done to Dems - way to duck and weave. I assume this means you don't think Dems personal views have ever been weaponized?

Off the top of my head, we can start with Omar, who has dealt with talking heads and now Congresswomen attacking her for being Muslim - saying things like she supports Sharia law. From a moralistic POV, Bill Clinton was taken to the shed for an extramarital affair that morphed into lying under oath.

More precisely, Clinton was taken to the shed for lying under oath. Period. Nice try though.

(02-08-2021 10:35 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  ...Bill Clinton was taken to the shed for an extramarital affair that morphed into lying under oath.

It just "morphed", or was there a morpher?

(02-08-2021 09:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Why Schumer is cozying up to the AIC wing
"He had done a bunch of homework and knew everything that we were going to ask about and made a bunch of commitments with us to make it happen,” said Cea Weaver, a strategist for New York’s Housing Justice for All coalition. “He was like: I’m talking to Ilhan Omar, I’m talking to Bernie Sanders, I’m talking to A.O.C.”
There is no "Greene" wing of the GOP. Nobody in leadership is 'cozying up" to them. THAT is why the Squad (their name for themselves) is both different from Greene and infinitely more dangerous.

I've read Schumer's book (bought it used, wouldn't do anything that would put a nickel in his pocket). He pretty much comes across as a lying, scheming political hack who would sell his soul to the devil to win an election.

The one place I agree with him is that the military needs more special forces to deal with the worldwide terror situation. My proposal is to take a page from the Brits and turn the Marine Corps into a commando and amphibious infantry organization, like the Royal Marines, and get it out of the business of holding ground and occupying territory, which it has been doing since Westmoreland sent it north to I Corps instead of south to the Mekong Delta in Vietnam (one of Westmoreland's many mistakes, he really was a horrible general, at least in that conflict). Interestingly, I am on a bunch of military/naval chat boards, and I don't find much agreement with this idea there.

(02-08-2021 10:35 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Off the top of my head, we can start with Omar, who has dealt with talking heads and now Congresswomen attacking her for being Muslim - saying things like she supports Sharia law.

I know of nobody who has attacked Omar for being Muslim. I have heard attacks on her for being anti-Jewish.

And I doubt any woman who purportedly married her brother and/or has a murky marital history is worried about Sharia law. She could be stoned to death.

https://www.tampabay.com/nation-world/po...-20190719/

https://news.yahoo.com/fbi-investigating...1l9fcJTxyb

(02-08-2021 01:12 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 10:35 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Off the top of my head, we can start with Omar, who has dealt with talking heads and now Congresswomen attacking her for being Muslim - saying things like she supports Sharia law.

I know of nobody who has attacked Omar for being Muslim. I have heard attacks on her for being anti-Jewish.

And I doubt any woman who purportedly married her brother and/or has a murky marital history is worried about Sharia law. She could be stoned to death.

https://www.tampabay.com/nation-world/po...-20190719/

https://news.yahoo.com/fbi-investigating...1l9fcJTxyb

But wow, if you are a current hubby you can make some serious bling off of her campaign.

Campaign payments to her husband’s firm accounted for nearly 80 percent of its 2020 cash haul. Awesome gig when you can get it.

(02-08-2021 01:12 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 10:35 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Off the top of my head, we can start with Omar, who has dealt with talking heads and now Congresswomen attacking her for being Muslim - saying things like she supports Sharia law.

I know of nobody who has attacked Omar for being Muslim.

LOLOLOL

Take a guess who said this:

“We’re going to explain about how you can’t swear in on the Quran. We’re going to have the Bible and ask them if they would swear in on the Bible … I think that’s important.”

"I really want to go talk to these ladies and ask them what they are thinking, and why they are serving in our American government. They really should go back to the Middle East.”

(02-08-2021 02:44 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 01:12 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 10:35 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Off the top of my head, we can start with Omar, who has dealt with talking heads and now Congresswomen attacking her for being Muslim - saying things like she supports Sharia law.

I know of nobody who has attacked Omar for being Muslim.

LOLOLOL

Take a guess who said this:

“We’re going to explain about how you can’t swear in on the Quran. We’re going to have the Bible and ask them if they would swear in on the Bible … I think that’s important.”

"I really want to go talk to these ladies and ask them what they are thinking, and why they are serving in our American government. They really should go back to the Middle East.”

Glad to know that you are an expert on the Quran (as well as US Constitutional, Civil, and Business law).

Various parts of the Quran that have been explained to me I find quite troubling: subjugation of other religions; and taqiyya to name just two of many.

As for going back to the Middle East didn't Rashida Tlaib say something along the lines of, "I never felt more like a Palestinian" when she was sworn in to Congress wearing a thobe (traditional Palestinian dress).

So much for America as the melting pot.

(02-09-2021 05:36 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 02:44 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 01:12 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 10:35 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Off the top of my head, we can start with Omar, who has dealt with talking heads and now Congresswomen attacking her for being Muslim - saying things like she supports Sharia law.

I know of nobody who has attacked Omar for being Muslim.

LOLOLOL

Take a guess who said this:

“We’re going to explain about how you can’t swear in on the Quran. We’re going to have the Bible and ask them if they would swear in on the Bible … I think that’s important.”

"I really want to go talk to these ladies and ask them what they are thinking, and why they are serving in our American government. They really should go back to the Middle East.”

Glad to know that you are an expert on the Quran (as well as US Constitutional, Civil, and Business law).

Various parts of the Quran that have been explained to me I find quite troubling: subjugation of other religions; and taqiyya to name just two of many.

As for going back to the Middle East didn't Rashida Tlaib say something along the lines of, "I never felt more like a Palestinian" when she was sworn in to Congress wearing a thobe (traditional Palestinian dress).

So much for America as the melting pot.

Absolutely no idea what my being an “expert on the Quran” has to do with anything. It seems to be a cheap, throwaway line to diminish the clear point that Omar has been attacked for being Muslim.

In fact, you’re doing just that in your post.

You literally helped make the point that OO refuted and gave credence to why Greene’s comments were so troubling to some. At least the post was very relevant.

(02-09-2021 05:36 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 02:44 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 01:12 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 10:35 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Off the top of my head, we can start with Omar, who has dealt with talking heads and now Congresswomen attacking her for being Muslim - saying things like she supports Sharia law.

I know of nobody who has attacked Omar for being Muslim.

LOLOLOL

Take a guess who said this:

“We’re going to explain about how you can’t swear in on the Quran. We’re going to have the Bible and ask them if they would swear in on the Bible … I think that’s important.”

"I really want to go talk to these ladies and ask them what they are thinking, and why they are serving in our American government. They really should go back to the Middle East.”

Glad to know that you are an expert on the Quran (as well as US Constitutional, Civil, and Business law).

Various parts of the Quran that have been explained to me I find quite troubling: subjugation of other religions; and taqiyya to name just two of many.

I am troubled by those too (I'm troubled by plenty of aspects of many religions). I'm not sure why your concerns are somehow relevant to the matter at hand though. Are your concerns a reason that she should not be allowed to be sworn in using the Quran? Should she have been forced to use the Bible for her swearing in?

Quote:As for going back to the Middle East didn't Rashida Tlaib say something along the lines of, "I never felt more like a Palestinian" when she was sworn in to Congress wearing a thobe (traditional Palestinian dress).

So much for America as the melting pot.

From the BBC (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46751362):

Quote:In an interview with the Detroit Free Press, Ms Tlaib, 42, said she would be using the Koran owned by America's third president, but she later told the paper that she had instead decided to use a family Koran.

"My swearing in on the Koran is about me showing that the American people are made up of diverse backgrounds and we all have love of justice and freedom".

Seems exactly like a melting pot IMO.

I can't find your "I've never felt more like a Palestinian" quote anywhere. Can you link it?

(02-09-2021 07:42 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 05:36 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 02:44 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 01:12 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 10:35 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Off the top of my head, we can start with Omar, who has dealt with talking heads and now Congresswomen attacking her for being Muslim - saying things like she supports Sharia law.

I know of nobody who has attacked Omar for being Muslim.

LOLOLOL

Take a guess who said this:

“We’re going to explain about how you can’t swear in on the Quran. We’re going to have the Bible and ask them if they would swear in on the Bible … I think that’s important.”

"I really want to go talk to these ladies and ask them what they are thinking, and why they are serving in our American government. They really should go back to the Middle East.”

Glad to know that you are an expert on the Quran (as well as US Constitutional, Civil, and Business law).

Various parts of the Quran that have been explained to me I find quite troubling: subjugation of other religions; and taqiyya to name just two of many.

I am troubled by those too (I'm troubled by plenty of aspects of many religions). I'm not sure why your concerns are somehow relevant to the matter at hand though. Are your concerns a reason that she should not be allowed to be sworn in using the Quran? Should she have been forced to use the Bible for her swearing in?

Quote:As for going back to the Middle East didn't Rashida Tlaib say something along the lines of, "I never felt more like a Palestinian" when she was sworn in to Congress wearing a thobe (traditional Palestinian dress).

So much for America as the melting pot.

From the BBC (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46751362):

Quote:In an interview with the Detroit Free Press, Ms Tlaib, 42, said she would be using the Koran owned by America's third president, but she later told the paper that she had instead decided to use a family Koran.

"My swearing in on the Koran is about me showing that the American people are made up of diverse backgrounds and we all have love of justice and freedom".

Seems exactly like a melting pot IMO.

I can't find your "I've never felt more like a Palestinian" quote anywhere. Can you link it?

The quote appears to be in reference to how she is asked to comment/condemn any action (implied that they are related to Palestine). That being requested to do that all the time makes her feel more Palestinian than she does when she is in Palestine.

https://grabien.com/story.php?id=231555

(02-09-2021 07:52 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 07:42 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 05:36 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 02:44 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 01:12 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I know of nobody who has attacked Omar for being Muslim.

LOLOLOL

Take a guess who said this:

“We’re going to explain about how you can’t swear in on the Quran. We’re going to have the Bible and ask them if they would swear in on the Bible … I think that’s important.”

"I really want to go talk to these ladies and ask them what they are thinking, and why they are serving in our American government. They really should go back to the Middle East.”

Glad to know that you are an expert on the Quran (as well as US Constitutional, Civil, and Business law).

Various parts of the Quran that have been explained to me I find quite troubling: subjugation of other religions; and taqiyya to name just two of many.

I am troubled by those too (I'm troubled by plenty of aspects of many religions). I'm not sure why your concerns are somehow relevant to the matter at hand though. Are your concerns a reason that she should not be allowed to be sworn in using the Quran? Should she have been forced to use the Bible for her swearing in?

Quote:As for going back to the Middle East didn't Rashida Tlaib say something along the lines of, "I never felt more like a Palestinian" when she was sworn in to Congress wearing a thobe (traditional Palestinian dress).

So much for America as the melting pot.

From the BBC (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46751362):

Quote:In an interview with the Detroit Free Press, Ms Tlaib, 42, said she would be using the Koran owned by America's third president, but she later told the paper that she had instead decided to use a family Koran.

"My swearing in on the Koran is about me showing that the American people are made up of diverse backgrounds and we all have love of justice and freedom".

Seems exactly like a melting pot IMO.

I can't find your "I've never felt more like a Palestinian" quote anywhere. Can you link it?

The quote appears to be in reference to how she is asked to comment/condemn any action (implied that they are related to Palestine). That being requested to do that all the time makes her feel more Palestinian than she does when she is in Palestine.

https://grabien.com/story.php?id=231555

Thanks. Makes sense. Doesn't seem to have anything to do with her dress.

(02-09-2021 08:59 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 07:52 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 07:42 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 05:36 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 02:44 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  LOLOLOL

Take a guess who said this:

“We’re going to explain about how you can’t swear in on the Quran. We’re going to have the Bible and ask them if they would swear in on the Bible … I think that’s important.”

"I really want to go talk to these ladies and ask them what they are thinking, and why they are serving in our American government. They really should go back to the Middle East.”

Glad to know that you are an expert on the Quran (as well as US Constitutional, Civil, and Business law).

Various parts of the Quran that have been explained to me I find quite troubling: subjugation of other religions; and taqiyya to name just two of many.

I am troubled by those too (I'm troubled by plenty of aspects of many religions). I'm not sure why your concerns are somehow relevant to the matter at hand though. Are your concerns a reason that she should not be allowed to be sworn in using the Quran? Should she have been forced to use the Bible for her swearing in?

Quote:As for going back to the Middle East didn't Rashida Tlaib say something along the lines of, "I never felt more like a Palestinian" when she was sworn in to Congress wearing a thobe (traditional Palestinian dress).

So much for America as the melting pot.

From the BBC (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46751362):

Quote:In an interview with the Detroit Free Press, Ms Tlaib, 42, said she would be using the Koran owned by America's third president, but she later told the paper that she had instead decided to use a family Koran.

"My swearing in on the Koran is about me showing that the American people are made up of diverse backgrounds and we all have love of justice and freedom".

Seems exactly like a melting pot IMO.

I can't find your "I've never felt more like a Palestinian" quote anywhere. Can you link it?

The quote appears to be in reference to how she is asked to comment/condemn any action (implied that they are related to Palestine). That being requested to do that all the time makes her feel more Palestinian than she does when she is in Palestine.

https://grabien.com/story.php?id=231555

Thanks. Makes sense. Doesn't seem to have anything to do with her dress.

When googling that, I found an article from The Blaze (IIRC) that clearly ignored the words right before the quote to make the statement look much more controversial.

(02-09-2021 07:42 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 05:36 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 02:44 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 01:12 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 10:35 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Off the top of my head, we can start with Omar, who has dealt with talking heads and now Congresswomen attacking her for being Muslim - saying things like she supports Sharia law.

I know of nobody who has attacked Omar for being Muslim.

LOLOLOL

Take a guess who said this:

“We’re going to explain about how you can’t swear in on the Quran. We’re going to have the Bible and ask them if they would swear in on the Bible … I think that’s important.”

"I really want to go talk to these ladies and ask them what they are thinking, and why they are serving in our American government. They really should go back to the Middle East.”

Glad to know that you are an expert on the Quran (as well as US Constitutional, Civil, and Business law).

Various parts of the Quran that have been explained to me I find quite troubling: subjugation of other religions; and taqiyya to name just two of many.

I am troubled by those too (I'm troubled by plenty of aspects of many religions). I'm not sure why your concerns are somehow relevant to the matter at hand though. Are your concerns a reason that she should not be allowed to be sworn in using the Quran? Should she have been forced to use the Bible for her swearing in?


What's your understanding of taqiyya? Mine is that you can say anything you want if you feel you are under duress.

Quote:As for going back to the Middle East didn't Rashida Tlaib say something along the lines of, "I never felt more like a Palestinian" when she was sworn in to Congress wearing a thobe (traditional Palestinian dress).

So much for America as the melting pot.

From the BBC (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46751362):

(Sorry the link doesn't work for me. I just paid my BBC licence fee last month under duress.)

Quote:In an interview with the Detroit Free Press, Ms Tlaib, 42, said she would be using the Koran owned by America's third president, but she later told the paper that she had instead decided to use a family Koran.

"My swearing in on the Koran is about me showing that the American people are made up of diverse backgrounds and we all have love of justice and freedom".

Seems exactly like a melting pot IMO.

I can't find your "I've never felt more like a Palestinian" quote anywhere. Can you link it?

No, I did try to find the quote (via Google) but could not. I don't believe I'm 'misquoting' her even if it isn't exactly word for word.

In my humble opinion, multi-culturalism isn't a melting pot. If whenever I'm elected to Congress I won't be wearing lederhosen (yes I own a pair). I'm a second generation American and remember my Mother saying how they were disciplined in school whenever they spoke anything but English. So the Bible I'll use will be an English translation and not the Latin Vulgate.

The mention of Jefferson's Quran is a red herring. He was a bibliophile. My understanding was he bought the Quran to gain a better understanding of the Ottoman Empire. Lots of people bought Mein Kompf to understand Hitler, not to embrace his ideals.

Do you think the Quran is a treatise of "justice and freedom"?

(02-09-2021 09:30 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 07:42 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 05:36 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 02:44 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 01:12 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I know of nobody who has attacked Omar for being Muslim.

LOLOLOL

Take a guess who said this:

“We’re going to explain about how you can’t swear in on the Quran. We’re going to have the Bible and ask them if they would swear in on the Bible … I think that’s important.”

"I really want to go talk to these ladies and ask them what they are thinking, and why they are serving in our American government. They really should go back to the Middle East.”

Glad to know that you are an expert on the Quran (as well as US Constitutional, Civil, and Business law).

Various parts of the Quran that have been explained to me I find quite troubling: subjugation of other religions; and taqiyya to name just two of many.

I am troubled by those too (I'm troubled by plenty of aspects of many religions). I'm not sure why your concerns are somehow relevant to the matter at hand though. Are your concerns a reason that she should not be allowed to be sworn in using the Quran? Should she have been forced to use the Bible for her swearing in?


What's your understanding of taqiyya? Mine is that you can say anything you want if you feel you are under duress.

Quote:As for going back to the Middle East didn't Rashida Tlaib say something along the lines of, "I never felt more like a Palestinian" when she was sworn in to Congress wearing a thobe (traditional Palestinian dress).

So much for America as the melting pot.

From the BBC (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46751362):

(Sorry the link doesn't work for me. I just paid my BBC licence fee last month under duress.)

Quote:In an interview with the Detroit Free Press, Ms Tlaib, 42, said she would be using the Koran owned by America's third president, but she later told the paper that she had instead decided to use a family Koran.

"My swearing in on the Koran is about me showing that the American people are made up of diverse backgrounds and we all have love of justice and freedom".

Seems exactly like a melting pot IMO.

I can't find your "I've never felt more like a Palestinian" quote anywhere. Can you link it?

No, I did try to find the quote (via Google) but could not. I don't believe I'm 'misquoting' her even if it isn't exactly word for word.

In my humble opinion, multi-culturalism isn't a melting pot. If whenever I'm elected to Congress I won't be wearing lederhosen (yes I own a pair). I'm a second generation American and remember my Mother saying how they were disciplined in school whenever they spoke anything but English. So the Bible I'll use will be an English translation and not the Latin Vulgate.

That is one perfectly valid ways to approach being an American. There are other valid ways that differ from that approach.

Quote:The mention of Jefferson's Quran is a red herring. He was a bibliophile. My understanding was he bought the Quran to gain a better understanding of the Ottoman Empire. Lots of people bought Mein Kompf to understand Hitler, not to embrace his ideals.

Do you think the Quran is a treatise of "justice and freedom"?

Again... I have lots of concerns when it comes to my limited knowledge of the Quran. I also have concerns about Mormanism and Christianity (I consider myself a Christian BTW).

What are you getting at? Should Muslims not be allowed to serve in Congress? Should they be forced to use a Bible for their swearing in?

I don't think it matters one jot what they use for swearing in. Same goes for a number of non Muslim politicians. It's just an artefact for some.

A number of individuals are just plain amoral.

Concerns about religion and its impact on governing aren't entirely misplaced. That's why I believe in separation of church and state. So how should we view political Islam?

(02-09-2021 09:25 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 08:59 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 07:52 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 07:42 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(02-09-2021 05:36 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  Glad to know that you are an expert on the Quran (as well as US Constitutional, Civil, and Business law).

Various parts of the Quran that have been explained to me I find quite troubling: subjugation of other religions; and taqiyya to name just two of many.

I am troubled by those too (I'm troubled by plenty of aspects of many religions). I'm not sure why your concerns are somehow relevant to the matter at hand though. Are your concerns a reason that she should not be allowed to be sworn in using the Quran? Should she have been forced to use the Bible for her swearing in?

Quote:As for going back to the Middle East didn't Rashida Tlaib say something along the lines of, "I never felt more like a Palestinian" when she was sworn in to Congress wearing a thobe (traditional Palestinian dress).

So much for America as the melting pot.

From the BBC (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46751362):

Quote:In an interview with the Detroit Free Press, Ms Tlaib, 42, said she would be using the Koran owned by America's third president, but she later told the paper that she had instead decided to use a family Koran.

"My swearing in on the Koran is about me showing that the American people are made up of diverse backgrounds and we all have love of justice and freedom".

Seems exactly like a melting pot IMO.

I can't find your "I've never felt more like a Palestinian" quote anywhere. Can you link it?

The quote appears to be in reference to how she is asked to comment/condemn any action (implied that they are related to Palestine). That being requested to do that all the time makes her feel more Palestinian than she does when she is in Palestine.

https://grabien.com/story.php?id=231555

Thanks. Makes sense. Doesn't seem to have anything to do with her dress.

When googling that, I found an article from The Blaze (IIRC) that clearly ignored the words right before the quote to make the statement look much more controversial.

Kind of like how the progressive side ignored one guy clearly stating he condemned the neo-nazis and white supremacists, in fact 'condemned totally'.

Amazing how that happens. Fun, fun, fun.