Jump to content
SaysWho?

~*Official Utterly Useless Old Woman, AOC, and UBI Thread*~

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Then we come back to the point I made originally when the first time she "misspoke" came up - what should she do? I mean, what are you suggesting? "She's absolutely terrible at wording in most things" is not true - the few things the Republicans can take they do take and will stretch into something ridiculous out of context. Republicans in government have and continue to say terrible things, much worse than anything Ilhan Omar has said, yet the Republicans were able to get the Democrats to work together to pass a House resolution because of what Ilhan Omar said?? Are you fucking kidding me? It's an outrage.

 

Again, what is she supposed to do? Apologize every time something she says that's poorly worded (which is not often) that the Republicans twist into something else? How about the Democrats not cowtow to Republicans and unite behind their freshman Congresswoman, like Republicans do for their own all the time? Ilhan Omar already speaks well enough, and certainly better than many politicians if you've seen her in committee videos, yet she's scrutinized to a ridiculous degree and then we perpetuate the problem by saying: "Ilhan needs to speak better" rather than the problem which is Republican hypocrisy and anti-Muslim propoganda. 

 

You made the assumption that my statement was based on her country of origin or religion, it’s not. Like... at all. You also made the assumption that I want her to word things “perfectly”, I don’t, just better in line with the underlying context. That’s not asking for much. This is the third time she had a poorly worded statements being weaponized in like 6 weeks. That’s not really great and gives the GOP more ammo than they should have. I am not saying she shouldn’t speak, I’m not disagreeing with her statements and I’m certainly not agreeing with the GOP responses, I am disagreeing with her wording.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

 

You made the assumption that my statement was based on her country of origin or religion, it’s not. Like... at all. You also made the assumption that I want her to word things “perfectly”, I don’t, just better in line with the underlying context. That’s not asking for much. This is the third time she had a poorly worded statements being weaponized in like 6 weeks. That’s not really great and gives the GOP more ammo than they should have. I am not saying she shouldn’t speak, I’m not disagreeing with her statements and I’m certainly not agreeing with the GOP responses, I am disagreeing with her wording.

 

I didn't say you were making those arguments. They are implicit in your criticism of her "poorly wording" things comment. I am suggesting she didn't poorly word anything here, nor did she when she said dual allegiances. You are only listening to the Republican spin on this - otherwise, go back to the actual quotes, and bold for me what, exactly, in context, in all three incidents you say she's had where things were clearly poorly worded and thus ammo for Republicans to use, were poorly worded? 

 

Because the first is arguable, but the second and third are not, unless I'm missing something. Everything else is just bullshit if, in context, her quotes are completely fine. So saying she's "poorly worded a lot of things" is incorrect from what I'm seeing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Greatoneshere said:

 

I didn't say you were making those arguments. They are implicit in your criticism of her "poorly wording" things comment. I am suggesting she didn't poorly word anything here, nor did she when she said dual allegiances. You are only listening to the Republican spin on this - otherwise, go back to the actual quotes, and bold for me what, exactly, in context, in all three incidents you say she's had where things were clearly poorly worded and thus ammo for Republicans to use, were poorly worded? 

 

Because the first is arguable, but the second and third are not, unless I'm missing something. 

 

Since I’d be saying the same things if some white guy/lady rep said this... no. Also, I doubt I’d be getting jumped on in that case.

 

The poorly worded part was literally that front page headline posted earlier. I can’t quote it in context, because, as I stated multiple times, it’s being used out of context and I do not disagree with the actual context of any of her statements and how she meant it. Also, the “all about the benjamins” tweet... hmm... Jews and money, that’s not a stereotype that could be taken out of context at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jason said:

 

Yea, I’m totally comparable to his usual arguments. :rolleyes:

I’m not even the only one who said she worded this poorly, yet I’m the only one getting jumped on. Good job :twothumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Spork3245 said:

 

Yea, I’m totally comparable to his usual arguments. :rolleyes:

I’m not even the only one who said she worded this poorly, yet I’m the only one getting jumped on. Good job :twothumbsup:

 

there is no need to be upset GIF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

Since I’d be saying the same things if some white guy/lady rep said this... no. Also, I doubt I’d be getting jumped on in that case.

 

The poorly worded part was literally that front page headline posted earlier. I can’t quote it in context, because, as I stated multiple times, it’s being used out of context and I do not disagree with the actual context of any of her statements and how she meant it. Also, the “all about the benjamins” tweet... hmm... Jews and money, that’s not a stereotype that could be taken out of context at all.

 

Just because you'd give any other kind of politician the same kind of criticism is irrelevant because the context changes things entirely. As you said yourself, she didn't say anything wrong in context, therefore: she didn't say anything wrong, therefore, what was poorly worded here? This context is one where Republicans are taking a completely benign thing Ilhan Omar said (in context) and, because she's a progressive black Muslim woman, they are going after her no matter how benign the thing she says is. If it can be taken out of context, it will be every time they find something.

 

So no, you can't make the same criticisms of her as you would of someone else because you wouldn't even know someone else ever said something like this. You only know in this case because Republicans want you to know because they want you to think poorly of Ilhan Omar - including her ability to be a politician and word things correctly. Is she perfect? No. Is she any worse than any other politician, especially Republicans? No. So then, why are we hearing about the things she says but not what other politicians say (including much worse things Republicans have said)? Probably because there's a smear campaign against this freshman immigrant black Muslim progressive left Democratic Congresswoman. 

 

Even "all about the benjamins" is taken out of context. She said that in response to Glenn Greenwald via tweet explaining how he's been bought off by organizations like AIPAC. How is she supposed to talk about Israel dark lobbying money without, you know, referencing money? She has to press the attack on Israel's far right-wing conservative government as well as Israel dark money in politics that flow through organizations like AIPAC so we fight for humanitarian rights first and not a foreign state's agenda first so she's going to be critical. It's insane that anyone who knows exactly what's going and knows what the quotes are in context would still suggest she worded anything poorly. Did she word a few things in such a way that, when taken out of context, have been used against her? Sure, absolutely. But I would never blame the victim (Ilhan Omar, in this case) for any of that. 

 

Edit: Also, my posts can be responded to by anyone who agrees that what Ilhan Omar said anything poorly in context. No one has yet shown anything to that effect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Just because you'd give any other kind of politician the same kind of criticism is irrelevant because the context changes things entirely. As you said yourself, she didn't say anything wrong in context, therefore: she didn't say anything wrong, therefore, what was poorly worded here? This context is one where Republicans are taking a completely benign thing Ilhan Omar said (in context) and, because she's a progressive black Muslim woman, they are going after her no matter how benign the thing she says is. If it can be taken out of context, it will be every time they find something.

 

So no, you can't make the same criticisms of her as you would of someone else because you wouldn't even know someone else ever said something like this. You only know in this case because Republicans want you to know because they want you to think poorly of Ilhan Omar - including her ability to be a politician and word things correctly. Is she perfect? No. Is she any worse than any other politician, especially Republicans? No. So then, why are we hearing about the things she says but not what other politicians say (including much worse things Republicans have said)? Probably because there's a smear campaign against this freshman immigrant black Muslim progressive left Democratic Congresswoman. 

 

Even "all about the benjamins" is taken out of context. She said that in response to Glenn Greenwald via tweet explaining how he's been bought off by organizations like AIPAC. How is she supposed to talk about Israel dark lobbying money without, you know, referencing money? She has to press the attack on Israel's far right-wing conservative government as well as Israel dark money in politics that flow through organizations like AIPAC so we fight for humanitarian rights first and not a foreign state's agenda first. It's insane that anyone who knows exactly what's going and and knows what the quotes are in context would still suggest she worded anything poorly. Did she word a few things in such a way that, when taken out of context, have been used against her? Sure, absolutely. But I would never blame the victim (Ilhan Omar, in this case) for any of that. 

 

Edit: Also, my posts can be responded to by anyone who agrees that what Ilhan Omar said anything poorly in context. No one has yet shown anything to that effect. 

 

Are you saying wording doesn’t matter for a politician as long as the context is okay and agreeable? I’m really asking, because if that’s what you’re getting at here then I strongly disagree.

 

If a GOP rep made that all about the benjamins tweet after a(n arguable) gaffe in regards to Israel or Jews we’d all be going “holy god damned shit!” regardless of context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

 

Are you saying wording doesn’t matter for a politician as long as the context is okay and agreeable? I’m really asking, because if that’s what you’re getting at here then I strongly disagree.

 

No, I'm saying the context here is relevant given how delicate Israel and anti-Semitism are as issues in this country and when taken in context, Ilhan Omar's comments are completely benign. Maybe accidentally anti-Semitic at best and that's arguable. This is much more about a smear campaign than it is Ilhan Omar wording anything poorly so we shouldn't lose the forest for the trees here. 

 

There are plenty of times where context provides no help, and there are plenty of times someone says something that they should be held accountable for regardless of context. I have not seen that with Ilhan Omar, and the fact that we're talking about this instead of what Republicans whose names you don't know who have said much worse things is everything right there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

No, I'm saying the context here is relevant given how delicate Israel and anti-Semitism are as issues in this country and when taken in context, Ilhan Omar's comments are completely benign. Maybe accidentally anti-Semitic at best and that's arguable. This is much more about a smear campaign than it is Ilhan Omar wording anything poorly so we shouldn't lose the forest for the trees here. 

 

There are plenty of times where context provides no help, and there are plenty of times someone says something that they should be held accountable for regardless of context. I have not seen that with Ilhan Omar, and the fact that we're talking about this instead of what Republicans whose names you don't know who have said much worse things is everything right there.

 

I’m not arguing that context isn’t relevant, I’m arguing that wording is also relevant. I also don’t believe in someone getting a free pass on wording simply due to context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SaysWho? said:

“CAIR was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.”

 

^^^ that’s the weaponized quote, the “some people did something”. That’s badly worded even though it’s a true statement and fine in context. Better wording, which potentially averts that shit bag NYP front page and doesn’t “under sell” the severity many hold to 9/11 would potentially be “some people committed an atrocity on 9/11” or “a horrible act was committed by some people on 9/11”. 

Her statement is not wrong, in context, but the wording allows it to be taken out of context and “rile up” idiots much too easily who don’t seek out the whole quote. Part of being an effective politician, IMO, is one’s ability to word things well. She could have worded that better, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

 

I’m not arguing that context isn’t relevant, I’m arguing that wording is also relevant. I also don’t believe in someone getting a free pass on wording simply due to context.

 

But without context it'd be easy to twist a lot of people's words a lot of ways. That's patently unfair, especially in this context. I've already granted that some things are heinous enough to say that even without context they need to be held accountable for what they said. But what's said so poorly here that couldn't be taken out of context if anyone said it? I'm sure I've referred to 9/11 similarly even. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

But without context it'd be easy to twist a lot of people's words a lot of ways. That's patently unfair, especially in this context. I've already granted that some things are heinous enough to say that even without context they need to be held accountable for what they said. But what's said so poorly here that couldn't be taken out of context if anyone said it? I'm sure I've referred to 9/11 similarly even. 

 

13 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

 

^^^ that’s the weaponized quote, the “some people did something”. That’s badly worded even though it’s a true statement and fine in context. Better wording, which potentially averts that shit bag NYP front page and doesn’t “under sell” the severity many hold to 9/11 would potentially be “some people committed an atrocity on 9/11” or “a horrible act was committed by some people on 9/11”. 

Her statement is not wrong, in context, but the wording allows it to be taken out of context and “rile up” idiots much too easily who don’t seek out the whole quote. Part of being an effective politician, IMO, is one’s ability to word things well. She could have worded that better, IMO.

 

Also, you’re not a politician (in regards to you saying it the same way)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

No, I'm saying the context here is relevant given how delicate Israel and anti-Semitism are as issues in this country and when taken in context, Ilhan Omar's comments are completely benign. Maybe accidentally anti-Semitic at best and that's arguable. This is much more about a smear campaign than it is Ilhan Omar wording anything poorly so we shouldn't lose the forest for the trees here. 

 

There are plenty of times where context provides no help, and there are plenty of times someone says something that they should be held accountable for regardless of context. I have not seen that with Ilhan Omar, and the fact that we're talking about this instead of what Republicans whose names you don't know who have said much worse things is everything right there.

Why did an extremely left leaning writer at the Forward call the wording anti-Semitic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

Also, you’re not a politician (in regards to you saying it the same way)

 

True, but I could say it that way as a politician too (to me, anyway). Also you're not addressing the substance of my previous posts, but I am happy to clarify. 

 

2 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

Why did an extremely left leaning writer at the Forward calling the wording anti-Semitic?

 

Can you elaborate on what you mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

True, but I could say it that way as a politician too (to me, anyway). Also you're not addressing the substance of my previous posts, but I am happy to clarify. 

 

 

Can you elaborate on what you mean?

 

I fully addressed it and even gave examples of better wording. Perhaps you’re not understanding my argument (not being snarky here, at all, btw!)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Greatoneshere said:

Can you elaborate on what you mean?

 

Part of the tweet thread where she got into hot water was in response to a writer at The Forward. The writer and the publication are very left. Your argument is that Spork is buying GOP spin which is based in omar being a black Muslim woman, so why did Batya Unger take issue with Omar’s tweet before any Republicans

tried to use it as an attack on Omar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

 

Part of the tweet thread where she got into hot water was in response to a writer at The Forward. The writer and the publication are very left. Your argument is that Spork is buying GOP spin which is based in omar being a black Muslim woman, so why did Batya Unger take issue with Omar’s tweet before any Republicans

tried to use it as an attack on Omar?

 

And the thing is, I’m not even buying the spin. My issue is her wording allowing the easy spin. Admittedly, I just began ignoring those insinuations as there’s only so many times I’m going to type that I agree with her context, but it was poorly worded :p 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Spork3245 said:

 

Yea, I’m totally comparable to his usual arguments. :rolleyes:

I’m not even the only one who said she worded this poorly, yet I’m the only one getting jumped on. Good job :twothumbsup:

Yes you are, you big fat liar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spork3245 said:

 

And the thing is, I’m not even buying the spin. My issue is her wording allowing the easy spin. Admittedly, I just began ignoring those insinuations as there’s only so many times I’m going to type that I agree with her context, but it was poorly worded :p 

Welcome to the CEB where everyone has gone batshit insane.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, the GOP has weaponized bad faith, calcified a white identity, destroyed truth as a concept for their constituents.  If they don't care about the bad faith they won't care about lies. What they care about is reinforcing the idea that their identity is good and any other identity is bad on top of a notion that their bad faith is justified by what they believe is the bad faith that anyone else demonstrates by professing an otherwise earnest desire to help people other than themselves.

 

There is nothing that can be said that can't be used, real or unreal it simply doesn't matter. What she said is fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Anathema- said:

Look, the GOP has weaponized bad faith, calcified a white identity, destroyed truth as a concept for their constituents.  If they don't care about the bad faith they won't care about lies. What they care about is reinforcing the idea that their identity is good and any other identity is bad on top of a notion that their bad faith is justified by what they believe is the bad faith that anyone else demonstrates by professing an otherwise earnest desire to help people other than themselves.

 

There is nothing that can be said that can't be used, real or unreal it simply doesn't matter. What she said is fine.

Thanks! People who think like you are literally the reason Trump won.  You are the problem.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Jose said:

Ilhan Omar is my favorite. 

For what reasons?  I’m honestly curious and have yet to say one way or another.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Boyle5150 said:

For what reasons?  I’m honestly curious and have yet to say one way or another.  

 

Jose also hates the Jews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SimpleG said:

Agreed 

I can’t say I’ve heard her speak or really know much about her , is English her first language?

No, she's from Somalia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

Jose also hates the Jews.

 

I'm one of the few Hispanics who don't!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Boyle5150 said:

For what reasons?  I’m honestly curious and have yet to say one way or another.  

 

She triggers the dummies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Jose said:

 

She triggers the dummies.

Well yeah, but let’s not pretend that we don’t call out the same shit “ to own the libs”.  

Honestly curious to what draws you into her ideology?  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Boyle5150 said:

Well yeah, but let’s not pretend that we don’t call out the same shit “ to own the libs”.  

Honestly curious to what draws you into her ideology?  

 

 

The "own the libs" rhetoric is criticized because cons will support policies and politicians they don't even believe in simply because liberals are against them. I'm not doing that even remotely here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Boyle5150 said:

Honestly curious to what draws you into her ideology?  

Because she actually does "own the libs".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Jose said:

 

The "own the libs" rhetoric is criticized because cons will support policies and politicians they don't even believe in simply because liberals are against them. I'm not doing that even remotely here.

Yes you are.  What exactly do you agree with Omar again? Given the context. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...