Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Sat Dec 14 05:01:01 PST 2019

Utopia Talk / Politics / Dems attack on Trump backfire
superdude
Member
Wed Jul 17 01:41:33
Freaking priceless. Pelosi should resign just out of shame.

http://www...-rules-trump-rebuke-backfires/
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Jul 17 02:08:26
yeah... um, the resolution passed and w/ 4 R's joining, 0 D's rejecting

and Nancy Pelosi was only 'out of order' for disparaging the President on the floor of Congress... kinda hard not to disparage him when the purpose was to condemn his words
kargen
Member
Wed Jul 17 02:48:57
She also broke the rules when she left the floor while the matter was being discussed. Then there is the lie she told saying she had a parliamentarian check to make sure her words were okay.

That aside the real failure is the Democrats wanted this to be a big moment they could use against the President and now they are going to do their best to get it out of the news cycle.

President Trump should point out the Democrats in the House had a chance today to pass a resolution that could potentially save lives on the border and decided instead to pass a resolution stating the president said something mean.

The Democrats wanted something they could run on and created something they will want to run from.
Dukhat
Member
Wed Jul 17 03:41:30
Kargen arguing over stupid procedural bullshit literally nobody cares about.
Dukhat
Member
Wed Jul 17 03:42:11
Trump is a fucking racist. Every single minority person has had an event in their life like this where some usually white and male asshole threatens them in the same manner just because of their skin color.

Go fuck yourself.
patom
Member
Wed Jul 17 05:00:23
Kargan > "President Trump should point out the Democrats in the House had a chance today to pass a resolution that could potentially save lives on the border and decided instead to pass a resolution stating the president said something mean."

Democrats should point out that the Republicans had 8 years to form a health care system to replace the ACA with something that would cover all Americans. The closest they came were repeated plans to do away with the ACA. Some of them have hinted that they have a plan. So far there is not substance to those hints. Trump himself has blatantly stated that he has a plan that will be cheaper and better than the ACA. Yet still nothing in writing.
Paramount
Member
Wed Jul 17 05:32:33
”Dems attack on Trump backfire
Freaking priceless. Pelosi should resign just out of shame. ”


Breitbart lol.

Well anyhow. She may not be perfect but at the least she is speaking her mind and is not being politically correct, and she is only doing what is best for America.
Rugian
Member
Wed Jul 17 10:59:55
Pretty embarrassing fuckup on Pelosi's part. When you cant even get your manufactured outrage and playing of the race card right, haha.
RugianLovesTheCock
Member
Wed Jul 17 11:28:20
Mmmm black cock
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Jul 17 11:37:25
"Then there is the lie she told saying she had a parliamentarian check to make sure her words were okay. "

where is your proof that was a lie?

obviously the rules of Congress need updated, apparently they didn't expect a clearly obvious piece of trash to get elected... its also stupid you can't say it in Congress, but Lindsey Graham can go on Fox News and say way worse
Forwyn
Member
Wed Jul 17 12:01:12
Dude in the 80's couldn't even say that certain behavior was the lowest of low on the floor, it's fairly predictable you can't label the executive racist
TJ
Member
Wed Jul 17 12:04:05
"where is your proof that was a lie?"

"obviously the rules of Congress need updated"

Too funny.
obaminated
Member
Wed Jul 17 13:49:45
who wants to bet that whoever runs the rugianlovesthecock account is absolutely obsessed with black on white porn? the dude keeps posting about black dicks.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed Jul 17 15:27:10
Rumors has it that having the dems rally around the people they were trying to distance themselves from, wasn't even the end game. The end game is to crack down on asylum and immigration while the everyone else is busy going "OMG he has finally gone over the line" for the 6549th time and pass useless resolutions that will never pass.

Say what you will about Trump, but he is a master trash talker and disrupter and his opposition are fucking idiots.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Wed Jul 17 15:47:55
House thrown into chaos after Pelosi decries Trump's 'racist' tweets on floor

The House voted along party lines to allow Speaker Nancy Pelosi to call President Donald Trump's tweets about minority Democratic lawmakers "racist" in the Congressional Record on Tuesday, overriding a parliamentary ruling and GOP objections.

Pelosi's comments were initially ruled "out of order" on the floor itself, a small victory for the Republicans during a tense day in which both sides exchanged accusations of racism, hypocrisy and indecorous behavior unworthy of Congress or the country.

The drama over Pelosi's comments, sure to rankle Trump, played out before the House voted 240-187 to condemn Trump's weekend tweets about four Democratic members of color — . Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts. All 235 Democrats were joined by four Republicans and Rep. Justin Amash (I-Mich.) in backing the measure.

House members aren't allowed to refer to Trump or his tweets as racist when speaking on the floor, even though the resolution they voted on Tuesday said as much. These rules on floor decorum are part of a package the body approved on the first day of current Congress.

That led to a bizarre scene on Tuesday: Only clerks reading the resolution aloud were allowed to say the resolution condemned Trump's "racist tweets," demonstrating once again how different lawmaking is from real life.

The chaotic dispute began when Pelosi went to the floor to bash Trump over his tweets about "the squad," as the four freshman lawmakers refer to themselves.

Trump said the four Democrats should "go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came," after incorrectly stating they were originally from other countries. Three of the lawmakers — Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib and Pressley — were born in the United States, while Omar was born in Somalia and became a U.S. citizen two decades ago when she was 17.

Rep. John Lewis reacts to Trump's tweets: 'Segregationists told us to go back'
SharePlay Video
Trump's tweet caused an immediate uproar throughout Washington, and lawmakers in both parties objected. House Democrats quickly drafted a resolution decrying Trump's "racist tweets."

Yet House rules prevent a member from referring to the president or any of his statements as racist on the floor. Democrats warned each other to be careful and follow the rule during a closed-door meeting Tuesday morning.

Pelosi, however, decided to push the limits.

"Every single member of this institution, Democratic and Republican, should join us in condemning the president's racist tweets," Pelosi said during her floor speech. "To do anything less would be a shocking rejection of our values and a shameful abdication of our oath of office to protect the American people."

Republicans immediately objected. Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) asked Pelosi to "rephrase" her statement, and when she refused, he sought to have the words stricken from the official record.

No speaker has had their words "taken down," as the process is referred to, in 35 years, and even challenging a speaker's comments is considered a serious breach of etiquette. Collins' request led to a nearly two-hour delay in the floor proceedings.

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), a member of the Congressional Black Caucus who was sitting in the speaker's chair for the dispute, didn't want to be part of it when it became clear Pelosi was going to lose via a ruling by the House parliamentarian over whether her comments would be allowed.

While Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio) urged Cleaver to ignore the parliamentarian's ruling — a huge risk for a chamber that religiously follows precedent — the Missouri Democrat decided to "abandon the chair," a shocking move that left it empty for a moment.

House Minority Leader McCarthy doesn't think Trump's tweets were racist
SharePlay
Mute
Current Time
0:31
/
Duration
0:33

CaptionsFullscreen
As Cleaver stormed off the floor, several Democratic members could be heard gasping. Others turned to each other with confused looks.

“This whole day, we haven’t gotten anything for the American public," Cleaver later told reporters. "And at the center of this is just one man, all this is based on one man’s words.”

Democrats then scrambled to find someone to take Cleaver's place. Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, several of whom were on the floor for the debate, refused, not wanting be the one to strike the speaker’s comments. Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.), a former CBC chairman, briefly stepped in, followed by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who read a parliamentary ruling when announcing that Pelosi's comments were "out of order."

When asked whether Cleaver's abandonment of the chair was unprecedented, Hoyer said, “I’ve not seen it before."

There was a lengthy delay after Collins' request, during which leadership on both sides of the aisle, the parliamentarian, and various members involved in the debate consulted. That led to Hoyer's announcement and a party line vote. That vote allowed Pelosi's remarks to remain in the Congressional Record as part of the official debate, even though members still can't call Trump a racist on the floor.

Afterward, Collins said the House prizes decorum and he hopes “we recover that confidence soon and more forward with respect for the American people who sent elected officials, including the president, to represent them in Washington.”

Pelosi, however, remained defiant.

“I stand by my statement,” Pelosi told reporters as she walked back onto the House floor. “I’m proud of the attention that is being called to it, because what the president said is completely inappropriate against our colleagues."

http://www...rump-racism-resolution-1417365
kargen
Member
Wed Jul 17 20:44:02
"Democrats should point out that the Republicans had 8 years to form a health care system to replace the ACA with something that would cover all Americans."

That is going off on a tangent but Democrats did do that over and over and over. It was one of the few things they talked about when they were not accusing President Trump of being a Nazi.

"where is your proof that was a lie?"

The parliamentarians admitting they didn't see nor approve the words would be a start. They would know the rules, literally why they are there, and would not have given the okay.

She fucked up and others fucked up afterwards. The goal was to get a certain message out and they failed miserably.

The best part is Biden released a plan for rural America and hit the early talk shows to try and generate face time and is getting no coverage at all.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Jul 17 21:27:38
"The parliamentarians admitting they didn't see nor approve the words would be a start"

again,.. is there evidence of this or are you makin it up?

Pelosi saying she showed it when she didn't seems unlikely to me... the parliamentarian letting it slide until nitpicky Rs complained seems more likely (given the whole purpose of the resolution was to condemn his racist comments)


also it wasn't a failure, it passed with low R support as would've been the case under any circumstance... Rs being dicky about the rules didn't change anything
kargen
Member
Thu Jul 18 02:53:04
The resolution passed but nobody is talking about that. All the talk was/is on the Democrat meltdown on the floor. That is a failure. Pass or not pass wasn't the point the point was the news cycle.

And Republicans were not "being dicky" about the rules. Pelosi broke more than one rule in a short period of time and she has been there long enough to know the rules. She can't even claim ambiguity in the rule. The rule is pretty damn clear.

Now she is acting like her breaking the rules is a good thing.

The Republicans pointing out the rule gave her a chance to retract her words so the days agenda could continue. She refused that opportunity so the debacle that followed is all on her.

Personal opinion, she knew calling the president a racist was against the rules and also knew her party wouldn't punish her for breaking that rule. She gave her little statement knowing ahead of time it was against the rules but her and those around her wanted the words on record.

What she didn't count on is the whole thing becoming a circus she created so the only thing to come out of it is her and few other Democrats look bad.
Even the Democrats cheerleaders over at MSNBC spent most their time on the story talking about the chaos instead of the message. They did of course put a Republicans are evil spin to it still it wasn't the reporting the leaders in the house were hoping for.
patom
Member
Thu Jul 18 05:02:03
Kargan, she did not create the circus. Trump did. He threw shit at the wall and it has stuck.
hood
Member
Thu Jul 18 09:28:18
What a free world we live in where it's against rules to call a president names. And the freedom tards support this. What a world.
kargen
Member
Thu Jul 18 11:01:52
patom President Trump wasn't even there. He isn't the ring master of every circus in town.

hood she could and can call the president any name she wishes just not from the floor of the house. Rules of decorum in the house have been in place for a couple of centuries now. The rules are in place to keep shit shows like Pelosi started to a minimum so congress might actually get something done.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Jul 18 11:32:08
the whole point of the resolution was to condemn the words of the piece of shit, so bringing up a rule from the dark ages saying you can't say anything bad about him is indeed being a dick

and if there was no drama, it just would've been a smaller story... how much can you say about them passing it?

and your news sources still would've been calling it a win, see Trump celebrating how 'only' 4 congressmen of his own party agreed he was being racist
kargen
Member
Thu Jul 18 12:26:52
The whole point was to generate a talking point.

They failed to create the talking point they were hoping for.

But sure I suppose in your world you created a useless resolution declaring the president said something mean is a win. Embrace it I guess..you get so few.
Trolly
Member
Thu Jul 18 12:37:01
"The rules are in place to keep shit shows like Pelosi started to a minimum so congress might actually get something done."

Kinda like how the repubs had control of Congress and their circle jerk of calling the previous president various adjectives. But cool of you to scope in on Pelosi because its Pelosi.
hood
Member
Thu Jul 18 12:43:48
Good to see my point validated in its first response.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Jul 18 12:44:29
yeah, i'm sure Fox News would've spent a lot of time talking about how the House passed a resolution condemning Trump had Pelosi merely mimed its contents

nothing would've changed anything, no great 'talking point' could have been gained
kargen
Member
Thu Jul 18 15:08:54
Trolly can you provide an example of Republicans on the house floor describing President Obama in a way that violates house rules? I'm sure it probably happened but do you have something specific in mind? The examples I found of the Republicans disrespecting President Obama happened outside the chambers of the house.

I learned by the time I was four years old well he/they did it first isn't an excuse for bad behavior. Pelosi broke the rules and her party voted to allow it. Because both parties like to play the well they did it first game you can bet this will bite Democrats in the ass sometime in the future.

Rugian
Member
Thu Jul 18 15:41:02
So Ilhan made remarks to the press tying this resolution to Israel, and she introduced it at the same time the (saner) members of Congress were introducing their own anti-BDS resolution...but tw thinks it has nothing to do with Israel. Fascinating

Also, BDS is considered anti-Semitic because it's a direct product of the massively disproportionate hate of Israel that's prevalent on the far-left. If those people were just concerned about fighting against the biggest evil-doers in the world, they'd be going after countries like China instead. Only problem is, China isn't a Jewish country...unlike Israel.

Remember when tw sanctimoniously claimed that his absolute hatred of Trump was over the man, not his politics? Well that's now proven to be a fucking lie.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Jul 18 16:04:52
you're in the wrong thread

you think Palestinians should be fighting for boycotts against China before they can want ones against Israel?

others considering BDS anti-semitic isn't terribly relevant, what has Omar advocated that is anti-semitic?

"tw...claimed that his absolute hatred of Trump was over the man, not his politics"
yeah, that remains true... Trump isn't even in this particular Omar discussion (yet)... i'm sure he'll join the lies

i oppose misrepresentations in general... completely separate from Trump... although he is one hell of a spewer of them
Forwyn
Member
Thu Jul 18 17:03:17
"Palestinians"

Omar isn't Palestinian
US Leftists aren't Palestinian
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Jul 18 18:26:43
it's Palestinian-led... i don't know who we are criticizing

can you prove no one who supports BDS supports boycotts of others? who exactly is advocating across the board for every single problem equally? people can pick their foci (first time ever typing that word, woohoo)

Omar hasn't called for any boycott (that i'm aware of), if she does for Israel then let's hear her reasoning and judge it
kargen
Member
Thu Jul 18 18:52:10
The B in BDS stands for boycott. She has said she supports BDS.

If it walks like a duck and squawks like a duck good chance it is a duck.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Jul 18 20:22:19
i support the WWF, doesn't mean i'm doing anything about it

yesterday was the first i heard of BDS, but doesn't appear to be clearly anti-semitic... and if 'US leftists' support it, that also suggests it isn't about hating the jew
Forwyn
Member
Thu Jul 18 20:44:36
It does explicably single out Israel, as if it's worst actor in the Middle East/world.
Hrothgar
Member
Thu Jul 18 20:46:26
Once again, any surprised by Trump doing this stuff had their eyes willingly closed in the last election and extreme levels of selective memory of him the last 30 years.
American Democrat
Member
Fri Jul 19 04:19:17
"It does explicably single out Israel, as if it's worst actor in the Middle East/world. "

While the movement was established addressing actions taken by the state of Israel; it is more of an awareness foundation. But due to the sensitive history of Israel and it's formation. Some have gone with the extreme views that the movement either it is "anti-sematic" or another attempt to oppress the jewish people. Which I would argue not particularly true.

This movement comprises of all sorts of people from various backgrounds and those also who happened to be jewish. Though the politicization of the concept, particularly, in the US turned into a platform for the conservatives as a weapons to attack liberals/democrats in an attempt to show that they are anti-semantic or anti-Israel. Which is ridiculous.

American Democrat
Member
Fri Jul 19 04:28:10
Another issue to bring up, is the incapability that Israel is always doing the right thing. Where I can say over the course of this boards existence, the scrutiny that some have given UK, Germany, France and other allies, longer than Israel, has been more tumultuous than in comparison.

But on this particular issue, it is demonstrating how far some posters have gone to jump on the bandwagaon. Let us not forget that some of those same posters in the past were and have been critical of Israel now. But, the Trump train keeps rolling around and now they are all on board and objectivity is at the window. Even those some pretend they still have it.

Main point: Though this resolution addresses a component in regards to the 1st amendment, where it counters many US states resolutions that passed starting in 2015 by the state of TN and then others followed suit, did highlight the
American Democrat
Member
Fri Jul 19 04:31:54
**Don't know what is wrong with the board, but to a point my cursor will disappear and I can't continue to type anyways...**

...did highlight the right to expression that if any company or entity or state wanted to not deal with Israel, or other countries alike, boycotting them should not be viewed upon as they are Anti-semantic/Israel. But also, do not ignore that Israel is more of the hot topic, which takes the lead regarding BDS.
Rugian
Member
Sat Jul 20 12:05:45
TW,

"you're in the wrong thread"

Are you suggesting that there are certain venues where it is inappropriate to suggest a particular thought?

Also, do you live under a rock or something? Leftwing anti-Semitism is one of the most common forms of bigotry out there. Hell, Paramount has been on this forum for YEARS - you've seriously never read even one of his posts regarding Jews/Israel?

Ilhan is not a Palestinian, so I don't know where that argument is coming from. Also, you're assuming that Palestinian gripes are valid, which I'd disagree with. Play terrorist games, win stupid prizes. Fuck them.
Paramount
Member
Sat Jul 20 12:16:43
Criticism of Israel and its actions and of the Israeli regime is not anti-semitism.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sat Jul 20 12:18:06
you said "this resolution" referencing Omar/Israel in this thread about a resolution that called Trump's comments racist

it appeared you meant to be in the "Thanks Ilhan!" thread which is about her resolution that is supposedly for sanctions against Israel for being worse than Nazis (if you are a viewer of Fox News)
Forwyn
Member
Sat Jul 20 12:19:53
Anti-Zionism is not antisemitism, but when a Muslim unduly targets Israel for criticism, antisemitism is a likely component.
Rugian
Member
Sat Jul 20 12:22:06
tw

The joke
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Your head

"Anti-Zionism is not antisemitism, but when a Muslim unduly targets Israel for criticism, antisemitism is a likely component. "

^This. I have my own gripes with Israel and personally don't think the alliance is all that great a benefit to us, but it's blatantly obvious that a lot of anti-Israel criticism is rooted in anti-Semitism.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sat Jul 20 13:21:33
it was Trump people chanting 'Jews will not replace us', so maybe America can finally unite in it's opposition to the Jew


in any case, i see no proof that supporting BDS proves one is anti-semitic... therefore it's up to Omar to provide an anti-semitic basis for her support


“We must support an end of the occupation and seek to achieve a two-state solution. I believe firmly that the path to peace does not lie with violent means. We should condemn in the strongest terms violence that perpetuates the occupation, whether it’s Israel, Hamas or individuals. We cannot also condemn nonviolent means. We cannot simultaneously say we want peace and oppose peaceful means to hold our allies accountable.”
~ Omar... when countering an attack on BDS

i don't see any clear anti-semitism here
Paramount
Member
Sat Jul 20 13:27:15
”We must support an end of the occupation and seek to achieve a two-state solution”

”I believe firmly that the path to peace does not lie with violent means.”


^ Examples of anti-semitism.


Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sat Jul 20 14:22:17
It is antisemitic if your only focus is on Israel's wrong doings and mistakes. Which for ideological social justice reasons (never punch down) it is. It is a type of antisemitism that really has nothing or very little to do with the old traditional antisemitism, but in practice they become indistinguishable.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sat Jul 20 14:59:12
does that make it islamophobic to only focus on Palestinian wrong-doings & mistakes? ...as that's standard procedure for most in the US (of course most of the US probably -is- islamophobic :p)

i'm able to hate both sides like a decent person
Paramount
Member
Sat Jul 20 15:39:34
”It is antisemitic if your only focus is on Israel's wrong doings and mistakes.”

As the overwhelmingly stronger part and as the aggressor (the occupying power), you should have your focus on them.


”Which for ideological social justice reasons (never punch down) it is”

What do you mean? Are we punching down if we focus on Israel?

show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share