116th Congress

The eldest of 14 children, Rashida Harbi was born on July 24, 1976, to working-class Palestinian immigrants in Detroit. Her mother was born in Beit Ur El Foka, near the West Bank city of Ramallah. Her father was born in Beit Hanina, a neighborhood in Jerusalem. He moved first to Nicaragua, then to Detroit, where he worked on an assembly line in a Ford Motor Company plant. As the eldest, Tlaib played a role in raising her siblings while her parents worked but sometimes relied on welfare for support.[8]

Rashida Tlaib attended elementary school at Harms, Bennett Elementary and Phoenix Academy. She graduated from Southwestern High School in Detroit in 1994, and from Wayne State University with a Bachelor of Arts in political science in 1998. She earned a Juris Doctor from Western Michigan University's Cooley Law School in 2004.[9]
......................

" Reasons it's ok ... "

How's about simply, reasons
then move on from there

But Brietbart and Washington Examiner and Dem Socialists ...
pretty scary stuff
 
thethe said:
Is bigotry ever ok? Thats a simple question.

Would you care to answer it?
Click to expand...

understandable in some cases -- ok -- who knows

I dont see her as bigoted ---
............................................................

Amash

In 2011, Amash was one of six members of Congress who voted "Nay" on House Resolution 268 reaffirming U.S. commitment to a negotiated settlement of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict through direct Israeli–Palestinian negotiation, which passed with 407 members in support.[17][97]

In 2014, he was one of eight members of Congress who voted "Nay" on a $225 million package to restock Israel's Iron Dome missile defenses, which passed with 398 members in support.[98] He supports a two-state solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.[17]

He voted against Israeli interests -- is he too bigoted ?

..................

This issue is far too complicated to broad brush who is and isn't "bigoted"
 
57Brave said:
understandable in some cases -- ok -- who knows

I dont see her as bigoted ---
............................................................

Amash

In 2011, Amash was one of six members of Congress who voted "Nay" on House Resolution 268 reaffirming U.S. commitment to a negotiated settlement of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict through direct Israeli–Palestinian negotiation, which passed with 407 members in support.[17][97]

In 2014, he was one of eight members of Congress who voted "Nay" on a $225 million package to restock Israel's Iron Dome missile defenses, which passed with 398 members in support.[98] He supports a two-state solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.[17]

He voted against Israeli interests -- is he too bigoted ?

..................

This issue is far too complicated to broad brush who is and isn't "bigoted"
Click to expand...

LOL no he votes against all unconstitutional foreign interests.

He doesn't claim Isreal has no right to exist and doesn't cover them up on maps with sticky notes proudly.

These junior folks can learn a thing or two
 
so he is from the 18th century.
Why does he live in the past ?



this read
http://ikhras.com/meet-justin-amash-an-arab-zionist-and-tea-party-palestinian/


I believe in the parlance of the African American Amash is a "House ******"
.............

Personal experience --- I am 2nd generation of an immigrant family that was not allowed to use the old language at home
So i relate to Amash in that respect -- but, completely understand the source of Talib's anti Zionism

.....................
 
Last edited:
50PoundHead said:
Don't subscribe, so I can't read the article, but I believe the gist of it is correct. Markets can, but don't always, work and I think one of the problems in the Western European model is that they, like us to a lesser extent, are having trouble transforming their economies. They aren't to, and won't get to, Greece-level issues, but they have generous public benefit structure that will have to be pared back a bit along with a recognition that they have to compete in a global economy. I wonder how many of the market-based reforms are some sort of state capitalism.
Click to expand...

I linked it because I wanted to introduce a little nuance into the discussion we are having...just about any modern economy is a mixed economy...some state control (which people can call socialism) and some private markets...it is a spectrum...not black and white (get it spectrum...black and white)...ha ha

and really the debate should about finding the sweet spot (which undoubtedly changes over time and circumstances) that works for a particular country...sweden went too far toward socialism for a while and has benefited by undertaking certain reforms
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
I linked it because I wanted to introduce a little nuance into the discussion we are having...just about any modern economy is a mixed economy...some state control (which people can call socialism) and some private markets...it is a spectrum...not black and white (get it spectrum...black and white)...ha ha

and really the debate should about finding the sweet spot (which undoubtedly changes over time and circumstances) that works for a particular country...sweden went too far toward socialism for a while and has benefited by undertaking certain reforms
Click to expand...

Incentives work, but they have to be available to a very wide swath of the population. To accomplish that, a country needs to have a commitment to education that gives even the downtrodden hope that there's a chance at upward mobility. And for education to really work, you have to have some measure of social network in place to have kids physically and emotionally prepared to learn. Hungry kids that are moving every couple of months are really at a disadvantage.
 
50PoundHead said:
Incentives work, but they have to be available to a very wide swath of the population. To accomplish that, a country needs to have a commitment to education that gives even the downtrodden hope that there's a chance at upward mobility. And for education to really work, you have to have some measure of social network in place to have kids physically and emotionally prepared to learn. Hungry kids that are moving every couple of months are really at a disadvantage.
Click to expand...

Yes. I think any good faith discussion has to recognize two things:

1) Incentives matter

2) Sometimes people end up in bad situations (health, being born into a bad situation) that do not in any way reflect a moral failing on their part and that it is heartless not to try to design public policy to help those people

I find that once people stipulate to those two things, the discussion becomes much more reasonable.

I would add one more that I don't expect everyone to agree with but that I believe: even if some people end up in bad situations due to moral failings or bad choices, as a society it is often in our best interest to try to help them with a second chance (keeping in mind it is important not to create perverse incentive structures)
 
Last edited:
thethe said:
I disagree with your last point but there are definitely purists on the right that just can't see the danger of an unchecked system and what its doing the majority of the country. I know he is not for everyone but Tucker Carlson really nails the point. The destruction of the family unit due to dual incomes and 'female empowerment' (yeah yeah call me a bigot) is a rot that that is destroying the country from the inside.
Click to expand...

If you take women out of the work force, either get ready for the biggest demand side economic depression (no, not recession) in modern history or a massive influx of immigrants to fill the vacant jobs. Male immigrants of course.
 
nsacpi said:
its not...so any thoughts about Trump's comments regarding judge Curiel
Click to expand...

His comments there were not the bigoted piece. His mass characterization of immigrants is where he stepped over the line and deserve condemnation.
 
thethe said:
His comments there were not the bigoted piece. His mass characterization of immigrants is where he stepped over the line and deserve condemnation.
Click to expand...

so its ok to say person X can't do his/her job due to race/ethnicity/national origin/religion. That's what Trump said about Curiel. I agree with Paul Ryan, who said it was a textbook example of racism.

btw Judge Curiel showed great professionalism in handling that case and helped to guide it to an outcome everyone could live with
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
so its ok to say person X can't do his/her job due to race/ethnicity/religion. That's what Trump said about Curiel. I agree with Paul Ryan, who said it was a textbook example of racism.
Click to expand...

It was not a statement stating her ethnicity was a demerit on skills or ability. It was a statement on bias. Just like he says the 'angry democrats' can't hold a fair investigation. Is he bigoted against Democrats now?
 
one more thing on Talib.
One has to recognize the difference between an Anti Semite and an Anti Zionist.
They are not one in the same
 
57Brave said:
one more thing on Talib.
One has to recognize the difference between an Anti Semite and an Anti Zionist.
They are not one in the same
Click to expand...

That's true. I'm just having a difficult time discerning the difference with her and Omar. I had lunch with one of my Jewish friends a couple of weeks back (and he's more liberal than I am and is very critical of Netanyahu) and his concern is that all the divestment talk and other strong anti-Israel chatter is doing is undermining the Jewish population that wants accommodation with the Palestinians. There are those on the right (both in the U.S. and Israel) that equate anti-Israel comments with anti-Semitism and I think the recent noise plays into their hands. For the record, I think the Israeli settlements on the West Bank and the confiscation of Palestinian property within Israel's traditional boundaries is truly deplorable.
 
thethe said:
It was not a statement stating her ethnicity was a demerit on skills or ability. It was a statement on bias. Just like he says the 'angry democrats' can't hold a fair investigation. Is he bigoted against Democrats now?
Click to expand...

i dont think so...Trump did not say Curiel couldn't be fair due his being an angry democrat...he explicitly said he couldn't be fair due to having Mexican ancestry
 
nsacpi said:
i dont think so...Trump did not say Curiel couldn't be fair due his being an angry democrat...he explicitly said he couldn't be fair due to having Mexican ancestry
Click to expand...

yes because the issue was regarding Mexicans. It was pretty clear but that doesn't make his remarks about immigrants as a whole any less disgusting. This was just not an example of bigotry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top