“I wish that he would be a statesman and do what is right for Israel. We all love Israel,” former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said recently on CNN about Netanyahu. “We need to help them and not have him stand in the way of that for such a long time.”
She added, “I think it’s going to invite more of what we have seen in terms of discontent among our own.”
-
We don’t “all love Israel”.
-
It’s incredibly concerning leadership understands this hurts the party but won’t even do the right thing for the wrong reasons.
Hell, it’s not even for the wrong reasons. As they keep saying, it’s vital that we stop republicans. But for some reason that’s not enough of a reason to stop supporting genocidal maniacs threatening WW3
Reasons don’t stop Republicans, a House majority does.
Dem majorities rarely do either, tbh.
The Dem leadership consider compromise for the sake of compromise the highest virtue and refuse to adjust that belief to the realities that
A) The GOP is now a literal fascist party,
B) The fascist GOP does not ever negotiate in good faith, and thus
C) any compromise with them will be unacceptable concessions in exchange for little to nothing.
Democratic majorities are rare. The last time Democrats had control of Congress we got the ACA and DACA.
Democratic majorities are rare
Because the Dem leadership is obsessed with appealing to an increasingly tiny portion of the electorate, alienating everyone to the left of Reagan who isn’t in the “Blue No Matter Who” cult of settling for second worst.
The last time Democrats had control of Congress we got the ACA and DACA
Which are both extremely watered down versions of what they initially promised. This due to the efforts of the very right wing Democrats the leadership keeps pushing over more progressive candidates whose policy positions are more in line with those of the population in general rather than the rich people, corporations and management side industry groups who donate a shitload of money to both Republicans and conservative Democrats.
So if you can’t get what you want, you’d rather have the opposite than settle?
Nope. That’s both a strawman and a false dichotomy.
I’m saying that the Dems aren’t good enough.
“Slightly better than literal fascists” is not a high enough bar and demanding more isn’t the same thing as endorsing the fascists.
If that’s still too hard to understand, let me put it this way: in spite of having done nothing to deserve it, you’re being given the choice between being kicked in the head or stabbed in the liver.
Objecting to the lesser assault is NOT a request to be stabbed.
That’s an imperfect analogy. It’s more like defending yourself. You may still get stabbed, but you have a better chance of stopping the attacker than doing nothing.
Because the Dem leadership is obsessed with appealing to an increasingly tiny portion of the electorate, alienating everyone to the left of Reagan who isn’t in the “Blue No Matter Who” cult of settling for second worst.
No, because land area determines the legislature and not population. The Republican Senate hasn’t represented more than half the population in the US since 1996, but had control for most of that time. Every Democratic majority is a short-lived thing after massive uphill battle, because America leans hard to the right we value land area more than people.
In short: This is the best our government can do, because it’s structurally deficient and Americans are pretty dumb.
No, because land area determines the legislature and not population
That’s a big part of the reason too, yes.
AmericaAmerican law leans hard to the rightweit values land area more than peopleFixed it for you. And guess who’s had ample opportunity to do something, ANYTHING, about that throughout the decades and have hardly even tried beyond empty campaign ad sound bites? Starts with a D…
This is the best our government can do
Ridiculous defeatism.
because it’s structurally deficient
Which SOME people have the power to do something about but actively avoid addressing outside of fundraising appeals.
Americans are pretty dumb.
Some are, but NOWHERE near the majority. For example, the largest share of the population that ever voted for Trump was 20%.
Some are, but NOWHERE near the majority.
I disagree with a lot in this post, but this is what I disagree with the most.
-
Abrahamism sure has a stranglehold on the U.S.
Shit, it’s the problem over there too…
They literally all worship the same God but too many people are still wanting to kill each other over the details
It was true when Emo Phillips said it, it’s still true today.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANNX_XiuA78
Even if one religion dominates large sections of the globe, over time it will fracture and create conflict again.
And the conflict isn’t just between people of different faiths. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre - the holiest place in all of Christianity, where Jesus rose from the dead - has been the site of many fights between the different branches of Christianity who care for the church. Monks beating each other up in the place where the Prince of Peace showed his divinity.
It’s so bad that there’s been a ladder leaning up against the church since the early 1700s because nobody can agree on who put it there and who should move it.
Netanyahu is actively throwing the Democrats and Biden under the bus on Twitter videos.
Biden still allowing Netanyahu to come and give a Trump endorsement speech in Congress has to be the weakest move I have ever seen. He’s Netanyahu’s removed.
He’s wanted by the ICJ. I hope someone has the courage to arrest his ass
This is the best summary I could come up with:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The last time Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the U.S. Congress, nearly 60 Democrats skipped his speech nine years ago, calling it a slap in the face to then-President Barack Obama as he negotiated a nuclear deal with Iran.
While some Democrats are saying they will come out of respect for Israel, a larger and growing faction wants no part of it, creating an extraordinarily charged atmosphere at a gathering that normally amounts to a ceremonial, bipartisan show of support for an American ally.
Netanyahu said in a release that he was “very moved” by the invitation to address Congress and the chance “to present the truth about our just war against those who seek to destroy us to the representatives of the American people and the entire world.”
Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, the highest-ranking Jewish official in the United States, gave a speech on the Senate floor that was harshly critical of the prime minister.
Schumer, D-N.Y., called the Israeli leader “an obstacle to peace” and urged new elections in Israel, even as he denounced Hamas and criticized Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.
Johnson spoke of asking Netanyahu to come to Washington, an invitation that Schumer and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York ultimately endorsed, albeit reluctantly.
The original article contains 1,284 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 83%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
