“How Is Your Country Doing?”: Trump Draws Fire Over New Attacks On Rep. Omar

Many of us have previously denounced President Donald Trump for his disgraceful attacks on Rep. Ihan Omar’s (D., Minn.) roots in Somalia.  It is precisely the type of intolerant, anti-immigrant language that has led many former Trump voters to move away from his campaign in 2020. Nevertheless, President Trump resumed those attacks Tuesday night at a rally where he portrayed Somalia as “her country” as opposed to “our” country in the United States.

Trump declared  “She’s telling us how to run our country. How did you do where you came from? How was your country doing?”

It was a shocking attack from an American president and drew a well-deserved rebuke from Omar: “Firstly, this is my country & I am a member of the House that impeached you. Secondly, I fled civil war when I was 8. An 8-year-old doesn’t run a country even though you run our country like one.”

I have regularly disagreed with Omar on her own statements and policies.  However, this is her country and her extraordinary journey from child in a civil war in Somalia to a member of Congress is inspirational. It is precisely what our country — Omar’s country — is all about.

People of good faith need to be heard in calling out the President for this type of divisive and frankly unAmerican rhetoric.  We are a nation of immigrants like Omar.  This is our country.

334 thoughts on ““How Is Your Country Doing?”: Trump Draws Fire Over New Attacks On Rep. Omar”

  1. And Turley, can we just acknowledge what an accurate and sharp response Omar had for the idiot in chief? I’ve always wondered how trump has worked social media so well when it’s clear that at his rallies and on twitter he’s not even at a remedial level of communication. If trump were to continue on with Omar it’s clear she’ll kick his bulbous buttocks around the block.

    1. that was a good zinger she gave him about running the country like an 8 year old, i had to laugh, but, i suspect her staffers wrote that for her

    1. She recently won a primary against a black lawyer who ran as a fairly conventional liberal (and had his wife and children in his ads). Her predecessor was…Keith Ellison. NB, the district has a white majority and Somalis are a single-digit minority therein. What we’re seeing here is a mess of gentry liberals engaging in the joys of vandalism by throwing this rock through the national plate-glass window.

            1. ‘There is no scenario wherein the son of the Vice President legitimately receives million-dollar wires from the *wife* of a foreign politician.

              The Biden family is one of the most corrupt in American politics, and journalists covered for them for decades.’

              @davereaboi

            2. Hunter Biden isn’t running for President, and when a Russian oligarch bought Trump’s mansion in Palm Beach, the price included a $50 million gift. If you want to bring kids into it, look at Ivanka Trump’s patents in China, or the money Don and Eric are getting.

              1. While daddy was Vice President….”Hunter Biden received suspicious wire transfers from entities controlled by Ye Jianming, a mysterious Chinese businessman who was deputy secretary for a front group for the People’s Liberation Army that collected intelligence and peddled propaganda.”

                https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/23/hunter-biden-senate-report-ukraine-china-burisma/

                Hunter Biden’s Business Dealings Created ‘Counterintelligence And Extortion Concerns,’ Senate Report Says

              2. ‘Media had a meltdown when Donald Trump, Jr. met with a Fusion GPS client for a hot second, but they’re now going to pretend it’s no big deal that Biden’s dirtbag son used daddy’s name to grease deals with foreign crooks who just wanted to buy off the VP.’ @seanmdav

              3. After four years of paranoid Russia coverage you’d think it’d be somewhat big news that a presidential candidate’s son got $3.5 mil from a Putin stooge.

                1. ‘For the Russiagate xenophobes who’ve made “Russian money” an issue since 2016, something to chew on:

                  Between Bill’s $500k from a Russian bank & Hunter’s $3.5m from a Russian billionaire, both the 2016 & 2020 Democratic nominees have deeper financial ties to Russia than Trump’ @aaronjmate

          1. Media bias in action —->>

            “A Republican-led Senate inquiry into corruption allegations against Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, involving Ukraine found no evidence of wrongdoing by the former vice president.” @nytimes

          1. Whose the candidate that said first thing he would do if elected is issue a federal mandate that everyone MUST wear a mask or else? That would be Biden and Harris, no?

            1. Who’s the candidate who sent federal forces into cities around the country, is threatening to send them to election places, says that police firing rubber bullets at journalists is “beautiful”, and is trying to entice Republican state legislatures to send Republican electors to the EC regardless of who wins the state? That would be Trump, no? But you’re only worried about masks.

              1. When anarchists and arsonists attack a federal building and local officials stand down and allow it to continue, then yes, send in federal law enforcement to do the job local officials refuse to do. Antifa anarchists were wearing “press” labels on their clothing in order to confuse the situation.

              2. Take a look at how angry Joe Biden gets when he is finally asked tough questions by reporters. He blows his stack and loses his temper. Trump takes incoming fire from reporters all day long and he never gets over the top angry the way Biden does…and not just at reporters, Biden loses his cool and verbally attacks voters too. Not cool Joe, not cool.

                Here’s another question reporters should be asking: When did Hunter Biden file under FARA?

                1. “Here’s another question reporters should be asking: When did Hunter Biden file under FARA?”

                  Senate report slams Bidens for conflicts of interest, flags possible criminal activity

                  GOP-led investigation cites ‘glaring’ evidence of Burisma bribe, suspicious foreign money transfers and sex trafficking. …

                  Obama administration officials ignored clear warning signs about ethical conflicts and possible extortion risks involving Joe Biden’s family. …

                  …Hunter Biden received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina, the wife of the former mayor of Moscow and Russia’s only female oligarch.
                  Hunter Biden opened a bank account with Chinese national Gongwen Dong to fund a $100,000 global spending spree for the Biden family.
                  Hunter Biden had business associations with Ye Jianming, Gongwen, and other Chinese nationals linked to the communist government and the People’s Liberation Army. “Those associations resulted in millions of dollars in cash flow,” the report said.
                  The report did not expand much on its sensational claim of alleged links to sex trafficking or prostitutes, reserving most of the discussion to two footnotes….

                  https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/senate-report-slams-bidens-conflicts-interest-flags
                  ——

                  There is so much more here and elsewhere. It is just now being released and revealed. The democrats are corrupt, sex trafficking is in their blood as is bribery and lying. That is why I changed parties.

                    1. I will provide one piece of documentation to whet your appetite. There is a rule of a max of two addresses on the blog. You were given a link and that link takes you to the documentation of what Solomon said at the time. You have to go to the DIG IN section. He provides emails, and all sorts of information including more links for virtually every factual claim he makes. Apparently you were so lazy you didn’t bother looking for the proof.

                      Some documentation is stored at a separate private company but was initially open to readers for a certain length of time but now there may be a fee.

                      This is one of thousands of pieces of data documenting that what he says is true. If you find fault in any of them and can provide a more accurate representation he will document that as well along with your evidence and your written statement.

                      MINUTES OF AN EXECUTIVE SESSION OF THE INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF BURNHAM INVESTORS TRUST
                      https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2020-09/Baturina%20BIT%20Board%20meeting.pdf

                      https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/senate-report-slams-bidens-conflicts-interest-flags

                    2. An anonymous rat has left the rat latrine to ask for documentation. It was provided with links that lead to hundreds of documents that provide proof what was written was true or at least had significant backing. Anonymous, like a cowardly rat, ran away and never responded to the proof. That is typical. What we are seeing is Stupid people trying to act smart but demonstrate they are as dumb as bricks.

                    3. Funny, I also see a moron adopting the language of the 3rd Reich in his miserable comments in a blog comment section.

                    4. Your lack of concern for fact is noted. I suggest you not ask for references unless you intend to at least glance at the results and then contribute. Now you can run back to your rat latrine. Who knows maybe you will find a few to swarm with you or invent new names for yourself so a small Cowardly and Stupid rat can look bigger.

                    5. Kurtz, you’re an elitist lawyer advocating the support of a misguided murderer as a result of your racism. Trying to add being an accomplice to your resume of being a thief around the SCOTUS as well?

                    6. Kurtz, it seems you are being called an elitist and a racist because you support a person’s right to defend himself. These leftists are so cowardly that they want to attack and potentially kill you but they want to make sure you are totally disarmed first.

                    7. Actually just want to make sure crazed and unbalanced white boys have as little chance at serial killing as possible. But hey, have it your way.

                    8. “just want to make sure crazed and unbalanced white boys have as little chance at serial killing as possible. ”

                      What a racist.

                    1. It sounds like you are foolish enough to believe that Hunter’s actions had nothing to do with Joe Biden. Most of the Anonymous comments on the blog lack knowledge and the intellectual ability to put things together. I accept your acknowledgement of that fact.

                      I understand that there is now proof about Joe Biden speaking to Hunter when Joe said he didn’t. More on that later.

                    1. Really inconclusive footage, Kurtz. And Carlson, per usual, tossed out much false syllogism while live on the air in this push piece.

                      Love the special touch of adding the past charges on to footage of the victims. Cool, I’ll file it right along with the footage of Rittenhouse punching a girl on the town green.

                      Curious to see the states evidence making them go with murder 1 versus a lesser murder charge or manslaughter. It’s not self defense by any stretch of the imagination no matter how much inconclusive footage is brought to bear.

                    2. Really inconclusive footage,

                      Isn’t that interesting. You admit then, the video evidence doesn’t support what you previously concluded was a clear case of 1st degree murder. Well that’s a start.

              3. “Who’s the candidate who sent federal forces into cities around the country”

                That’d be Trump. Which he did to prevent Federal buildings from being burned to the ground. The reason he had to do so was because the Mayors of those cities refused to protect them.

                Now. Who is the candidate that when asked if money should be “redirected” away from police, answered, “Yes, absolutely.”

                That’d be Biden.

                Best of luck with that…..anonymous.

                1. Bwahahaha!

                  You admit that Trump sent federal forces to cities around the country, when most of those cities didn’t have any risk of federal buildings being burned to the ground, and you can’t admit that he is also threatening to send federal forces to election places, says that police firing rubber bullets at journalists is “beautiful”, and is trying to entice Republican state legislatures to send Republican electors to the EC regardless of who wins the state.

                  1. “You admit that Trump sent federal forces to cities around the country”

                    Why would I have to “admit” it, when it is true?

                    Count the cities:

                    https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2020/08/07/Trump-admin-to-send-federal-troops-to-Memphis-St-Louis/7211596772279/

                    then tell me if you actually think the honest hard working residents of those cities were glad that he did?

                    You are very slow on the uptake, and it’s obvious that you haven’t seen Biden’s new campaign commercials where he promises to do the same thing as Trump.

                    This isn’t one of your video games, junior. It’s reality.

                    1. It’s also true that he is threatening to send federal forces to election places, says that police firing rubber bullets at journalists is “beautiful”, and is trying to entice Republican state legislatures to send Republican electors to the EC regardless of who wins the state. But you cannot admit this, even though it’s true, junior.

                  2. “Federal officials and law enforcement long before Trump have been in many locations throughout the US. There are other things than federal buildings for federal officials to protect.”

                    Surprised you didn’t already know that.

  2. Omar: “”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,”
    ****************************
    She hates America and her institutions and has made that quite clear. Not too crazy about jews, Trump or American soldiers either. Does love her some Soleimani and her brother, though, in a fraudulent kinds way. Given all that, it’s fair to link her with her country of origin since she didn’t chose to come here and hates most of the folks here. Let’s give her the wish she richly deserves and send her packing back to Somalia.

      1. Anonymous:

        Again blockhead, bigotry is hating someone or some tribe for their immutable characteristics and not their actions. Let me know if you need flash cards on this topic.

        1. bigotry is hating someone or some tribe for their immutable characteristics and not their actions.

          Mark,
          That’s such a fundamental truth that I thought it worth repeating.

        2. mespo727272, if you think it’s impossible to be bigoted on the basis of religion, since it’s not an immutable characteristic, then you don’t consider the Nazis to have been bigots in their views towards Jews, you don’t consider the Chinese majority to be bigots in their views of their Muslim minority, …

          You sure that you want to stick with that? Might you be a Neo-Nazi who wants to deny that it’s bigotry?

          1. You seem to lack the ability to understand what Mespo is saying. Being Jewish could lead to death during the Spanish inquisition but that was based on actions, non conversion. Being Jewish in Nazi Germany was based on immutable characteristics, the day the egg and sperm combined. That is why the Germans took their bayonets and shoved them into the clothing bunched up thinking a Jewish baby might be hidden there even though elsewhere they were creating an environment to increase their population by increasing the number of pregnant women..

            Nazism didn’t just happen. It took irresponsible people like the hard left democrat of today to create such an environment. It also depended on cowards much like those that cannot take one identity and keep it.

            I think there is a big difference with regard to the subject at hand between the Uyghur population of China and the Jewish population in Nazi Germany.

            You shouldn’t be accusing anyone of being a Nazi. You are too ignorant to even attempt and try. You are the one that falls into place so easily.

            1. So you’re arguing that the Nazis weren’t bigots because they pretended that being a Jew is an immutable characteristic, and you won’t address whether the majority Chinese are bigots towards the Muslim minority.

              1. Apparently you are more ignorant than assumed.

                “So you’re arguing that the Nazis weren’t bigots because they pretended that being a Jew is an immutable characteristic”

                Wrong.

                “you won’t address whether the majority Chinese are bigots towards the Muslim minority.”

                Wrong again.

              2. “whether the majority Chinese are bigots towards the Muslim minority.” is a formation that shows a certain ignorance of Chinese society. There are a small number of Han Chinese ethnics who are muslim. They are called Hui Min. They generally have no problem in China at all.

                The current problems relate to the Uighur population of Xinjiang which is largely Muslim. They are a Turkic people. There is indeed a jihaadist element which had committed acts of terror in China. I am sure it is a small number and they are generally peaceful people. But it is not my affair. The issue seems more ethnic than religious, from what i can tell. I could be wrong.
                However, from news accounts, it seems the PRC has rounded quite a large number up into “Re-education camps” which would be totally illegal under US law. But, they are not in the US. This is some sort of human rights violation, some sort of ethnic oppression, certain a forced propaganda campaign, but there is no proof of mass starvation nor executions. From here it may be bad, but, i think it is hyperbole to call these concentration camps.

                They are also doing this now to a number of Tibetans too they say. This may have a small religious dimension, but again it seems more an ethnic issue.

                Yes the PRC is not shy about favoring the Han Chinese majority population (92%) and keeping the ethnic minorities in a subordinate posture. This is how they run their country. I will skip the moralizing over that point for now.

                But I will say this about labor. The PRC has a large slave labor force in jails and is probably supplemented from these “reeducation” facilities. Moreover their workers may not form unions. One might argue the whole nation is kept in a quasi enslaved posture vis a vis the CCP. it is wholly unfair for US workers to have to compete with Chinese slave labor and I thank POTUS Trump for his fair trade initiatives.

                However, I am reminded of one unpleasant comparison. The taxes in the PRC are lower than they are here.
                as a percentage of GDP, 2017 numbers, the PRC is at 21.3%. In US, if we include social security taxes, etc, we were at 22%. this small difference, however is deceiving. in practical reality, regular people find the US tax system far more onerous.
                The USA has an estate tax, albeit at a high level, the PRC has none
                The PRC supposedly has an income tax, but few pay it and it is poorly enforced. Here, we know what a nightmare it can be.
                They collect a lot of their taxes via VAT and a consumption tax.

                We might be tempted on april 15 to ask ourselves, what forms may enslavement take?

          2. if you think it’s impossible to be bigoted on the basis of religion,

            We’re back to your lack of reading comprehension. First of all, he did not say it was impossible to be bigoted on anything. Secondly, he was making the distinction of hating someone based on characteristics, whether they be immutable or not and hating someone based on their actions, which is measured against a different set of criteria. Where you fail spectacularly is in engaging in a discussion of actions relative to that latter criteria and your default accusation of bigotry, racism, etc.

            1. He said bigotry is hating someone or some tribe for their immutable characteristics, which indicates one cannot be bigoted on the basis of religion, since religion is not an immutable characteristic. You’re the one changing it to whether they be immutable or not.

              1. You’re the one changing it to whether they be immutable or not.

                You’re picking the fly$shit out of the pepper in an effort to validate your assumption that Mark doesn’t believe it’s bigotry to hate someone based on religion. Of course you could ask him to clarify, but be prepared to be mocked for having completely ignored his point about hating people because of their actions. If you had any ability for critical-thinking, you’d quickly see Mark’s point was about hating the action…period.

                  1. In what context are you asking that question? Are you suggesting the Nazi’s were justified by hating certain actions of Jews? Are you suggesting Nazi’s weren’t bigots? Clarify.

                    1. I don’t think he knows much of what he is talking about. The anonymous crowd are mostly lacking in critical thinking kills and they “riot” on this blog much like Antifa/BLM riot in the streets without knowing why they are rioting.

                      This one sounds a bit more like Anonymous the Stupid but with some context to his replies, I want to see if he can add new intellectual comments without copying words previously mentioned.

                    2. Watch his head explode justifying the immutability of the LGBTQ community, but not the religious community. 😁

                    3. I’d say the Nazis were genocidal bigots.

                      You said be prepared to be mocked for having completely ignored his point about hating people because of their actions, so I asked about actions. Are you suggesting the Nazis hated the Jews because of something immutable?

    1. Omar: “”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,”

      It wasn’t founded after 9 / 11. I remember first hearing about CAIR ca. 1999 when Richard John Neuhaus wrote a brief note in his monthly about the threatening letters they’d been sending them. Here’s a brief piece he’d published about a year or so earlier discussing the outfit’s activities.

      https://www.firstthings.com/article/1998/02/001-islamic-encounters

      1. They hate Bat Ye’or because she blew the whistle on the obvious intention to demographically annex Europe into the Ummah via migrant invasion and fecundity

        So they had to kick him in the ankles for writing about her

        typical

        thanks for the link; not surprising to hear the bishops replied weakly

    2. Mespo, criticism of ones own country doesn’t mean they hate it. That seems to be your logic, but you and nearly everyone on this blog criticizes things about this country. So based on your own logic. You too hate this country with a passion. It doesn’t matter whether you’re born here or not, but you hating your own country is as American as apple pie. Especially when you have elements that you despise, like liberals and your own government.

      Ignorance seems to be a prideful quality to the people of this country and nothing makes that more obvious than when someone who has lived life from a perspective not jaded by privilege and comfort away from reality.

      Taking offense that someone points out how easy most have it in this country compared to those who truly know real hardship and adversity.

      1. Mespo, criticism of ones own country doesn’t mean they hate it. T

        No, it means they despise their neighbors. Thomas Sowell and Paul Hollandar have explained how it works in public discourse. Gentry liberals are people who think they’re better than the places where they grew up.

        1. Art Deco x2,

          No, criticism isn’t always about hating something or despising something or someone.

          It also is about pointing out an injustice or a misconception based on ignorance.

          She doesn’t think she’s better than anyone else. That notion comes purely from those offended at the idea that anybody dares criticize something they hold dear, even when the criticism is deserved. Those taking offense from her remarks see a bigger offense because she’s foreign born and is a citizen AND has achieved something most wouldn’t really contemplate, running for office. It’s ironic that most of her detractors are the very ones complaining about things that they want their government to do or not do, but she actually went and got to a position where she can actually achieve what most here complain about. Being able to do something about it.

          Racists and bigots can mock all they want, but only she is in a position to influence policy just like anyone else who CHOOSES to run for office.

          Those mocking her are only doing so because they’re resentful because she’s in a position they believe shouldn’t be her right. Trump shouldn’t be in his position either, but he RAN for office just as Congresswoman Omar did.

          1. She doesn’t think she’s better than anyone else. That notion comes purely from those offended at the idea that anybody dares criticize something they hold dear, even when the criticism is deserved.

            You’re not insightful, Peter.

            Here’s a suggestion, if you’re open to one. See if she ever offers a ‘criticism’ that does not incorporate making an accusation against a social rival.

            1. Here’s a suggestion, Art Deco x 2: see if Trump ever offers a ‘criticism’ that does not incorporate making an accusation against a social rival.

                1. Correct, it’s not difficult to point out that Trump criticizes everyone who he deems insufficiently “loyal” to him personally, even when they’ve taken an oath of loyalty to our Constitution and are loyal to America. His criticism of social rivals includes Democrats like Schiff and Republicans like McCain.

                  1. IOW, Trump has personal and professional disputes with people.

                    Omar may be the boss from hell, but that’s not why people know who she is.

                    1. Again, ‘racist’ and ‘islamophobic’ are nonsense terms progtrash use because they lack argument. She’s actually known because she’s a bizarre character who advocates all manner of things not in the best interests of her constituents.

                    2. Only a racist and Islamophobe would say that ‘racist’ and ‘islamophobic’ are nonsense terms.

                    3. The term racist has been so misused by the left that it has become meaningless. Likewise the term Islamophobe is a meaningless term because it is a label used by Islamists to libel and slander people that are merely stating the facts.

                      One would think you knew this.

                    4. “ She’s actually known because she’s a bizarre character who advocates all manner of things not in the best interests of her constituents.”

                      You’re describing trump to a “T” here.

                      What makes her “bizarre”. What “manner of things” are you referring to?

                    5. You’re describing trump to a “T” here.

                      Trump is not a bizarre character at all, just not manufactured and scripted like an ordinary politician. And he advocates nothing irrelevant to or at loggerheads with what benefits his constituents.

      2. Sevelaz starts in on the usual tsk tsking finger wagging condemnation of American natives who must prostrate ourselves before all refugees and lick their filthy sandals

        I decline

  3. Good for President Trump. Omar is not entitled to be treated as though she has diplomatic immunity. Omar is a perfect example of why only natural-born citizens can be President. And given her hatred of the very country that has enabled her rise to Congress, we would do well to make that a requirement for Congress and the Judiciary.

      1. ‘The Trump economy pre-Covid was the best I’ve experienced in my adult life. I will be voting for four more years of prosperity. A return to stagnation, regulation, and stifling taxation that were the hallmarks of the Obama presidency is simply untenable.’ @mkolken

        1. Voters trust Trump to handle the economy over Biden who said he will raise taxes! (But he’s only gonna raise taxes on the rich people who should pay their fair share, of course.) Biden: Read my lips, no new fracking! or taxes! You have my word!

          1. If Dr. Fauci is the expert charged with staying on top of “infectious diseases’ and advising the president on Covid, and Fauci is the “scientist” who gave advice to Trump, and Trump followed all the recommendations of the “scientists” and experts, and now Dr. Fauci is being lauded as some kind of hero by the left, then how does that equate? Fauci good. Trump bad. It does not follow.

            1. According to the left and their media: Fauci is a hero. Trump killed them all! Dr. Birx is bad.

              Figure out why the only “expert” in charge of handling Covid who is being praised by the left is Dr. Fauci. None but Fauci. All failed but Fauci. Fauci is a hero. Fauci is all over the celebrity shows and cover shoots for In Style magazine and tossing out first pitches. Figure it out.

          2. “Obama handed Trump a great economy.”

            If you were a waiter or waitress, it was getting better.

            Obama did exactly what Bush was already doing. That being bailout the same Banksters that crashed the economy, all at the expense of the middle class. Which shrunk even further during Obama’s 8 years in office.

            Stick to making latte’s, anon.

    1. Omar is a perfect example of why only natural-born citizens can be President.

      Disagree. She’s a passable example of why: (1) refugees should be classified as temporary residents and not be put on a path to naturalization and (2) why anyone on a path to naturalization should have obtained a settler’s visa which can only be had by passing an English proficiency test (and some other screens) before entering this country and (3) why naturalization should only be available to settlers and denizens who have spent the majority of their natural life as lawful and palpable residents.

      That Jennifer Granholm was born abroad (arriving here at age four) shouldn’t be an impediment. Given the length of the queues, Oman shouldn’t have received a settler’s visa for a dozen years after she arrived as a refugee and shouldn’t have been eligible for naturalization until she was past 50 even if she did get a settler’s visa.

      1. DSS,
        I’m certain we can identify any number of naturalized citizens that have no allegiance to any other country and who are committed to making our existing form better. Similarly, we can also identify any number of natural-born citizens that have no allegiance to this country and who are committed to the destruction of our existing form. Clearly, the N-BC technicality is not the root problem, but it does have at its root a meaningful purpose. No one wants to talk about that purpose. Instead we get the nation of immigrants, racism, xenophobia, bigot accusations to deflect attention away from legitimate concerns regarding public officials that are openly disinterested in improving our existing institutions. Right now, legitimate scrutiny of our public officials fidelity to their oaths of office is shielded by any number factors. One major factor is political party. I changed my registration to Independent because I realized this party construct did not serve a purpose beyond protecting the political class. This has now morphed into protecting the criminal, political class.

          1. No fidelity to his oath of office?

            In just one sentence, you’ve managed to completely disqualify yourself from rational discourse. It’s no wonder you’re anonymous.

    2. Olly, your massive ignorance is not helping you here.

      Nobody is claiming she should or has immunity from criticism.

      “Natural born citizens” as you put it are anyone born of American parents or parent. I was born in a foreign country, but my mother is an American. I qualify for the office of the president.

      She has no hatred of the country, criticism of one’s own country doesn’t equate to hatred of it.

      Trump spends more time complaining about this country than Omar has. By your very logic. Trump is more hateful of this country and he was born here.

      1. She has no hatred of the country, criticism of one’s own country doesn’t equate to hatred of it.

        The use of the word country in the context I used it was to describe our traditional system of government, it’s institutions, capitalism and the rule of law. In that context, Trump loves our country and hates anyone undermining it. Omar may love our country, but only in the sense that she has been provided the opportunity to fundamentally transform it into something else altogether.

  4. Korematsu. Up yours Turley. The Supreme Court said the government could round up Japanese people, even if they were born here, and lock em up in concentration camps.

        1. Omer took a oath to the laws and the constitution, something Trump supporters know nothing about. Nor do they care for the law and the constitution.

    1. It was a shameful ruling.

      Chief Justice Roberts … The forcible relocation of U. S. citizens to concentration camps, solely and explicitly on the basis of race, is objectively unlawful.

      1. Anonymous:
        Spoken by a guy whose nation’s western border wasn’t under imminent attack from a hostile power with a history of atrocities against civilians and who used Fifth Column tactics in the past. Easy to critique the past when you’ve got no skin in the game.

        1. Easy to critique the past when you’ve got no skin in the game.

          Roberts is 65 years old, not some nosepicking collegian. He ought to know better.

        2. China suffered 3 million military deaths from Japanese in WW II and about 8 million civilian

          Most people aren’t aware of that

          Russia suffered more, but, their military deaths were a higher proportion of overall losses

          Japanese government actions in WWII against civilians were horrible and atrocious, rarely considered in Western education which is obsessively focused on certain other tragedies. .

            1. fools ever misunderstand.

              first of all, i offer this information because most people are ignorant. i am well versed in history but the massive scale of civilian casualties was unknown to me up only till a few years ago

              secondly, the Korematsu decision was not per se racist. It may have been national origin discrimination, but not racial.

              this is a subtle point made to fools who count all such things as the same today. but, bear with me for a minute.

              saying it was racial discrimination is wrong, though that’s what we hear all the time. the japanese and chinese are fairly close racially i am sure you will agree. chinese americans were not detained at manzanar et al. japanese were.

              (though, many japanese americans patriotically volunteered for service in the war, the stories are often very impressive)
              (I personally think japanese americans are a fantastic group too, in spite of their ancestral nation’s egregious actions during the war)
              (i feel the same about german and italian americans too. did anybody mention some of them were rounded up too? oh I guess I just did)

              To further round out my assertion that the discrimination against japanese americans was national origin and not racial, and justifiably related to the conduct of the war, here’s a little known fact. of the many thousands of Chinese Americans who served in WWII, 3/4 were integrated into the otherwise segregated white units of the time

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese-American_service_in_World_War_II#:~:text=It%20has%20been%20estimated%20that,served%20in%20non%2Dsegregated%20units.

              1. now, if you want me to put this bluntly, i will. national origin discrimination is often a rational government policy. in some cases people may be surprised to learn that it is very much legal. it most certainly is used every day in foreign affairs

                it can and should be implemented in immigration law too.

                we should seek migrants from those nations famed for industry and intelligence, and spurn those from backwards and benighted locales.

                simple as that. we could assign national origin a rational favorability score, based on empirical observations of national quality

                now, of course, we are not getting a lot of migrants from some places with the highest quality. today there are very very few Swedes and Japanese coming to USA

                but among those who do migrate, we could assign some rational preferences, based on things like rates of violent crime and education in nations of origin.

                this might lead us to wanting more Chinese, and less Somalis. Pretty easy choice in my book.

                I could give empirical reasons why we should favor Mexicans over Hondurans too. One could make many useful gradations.

                we are blessed in the US with many fine Pakistani doctors. but, if you count all the chain migrants they will bring, and you consider the difficulties the US has had in that part of the world, neighbor of Afghanistan, and the persistent problem of “jihaadis,” why risk it. Perhaps we might find a sufficient number of Indian Hindu doctors to fill these berths, and save ourselves a lot of trouble in the long run. I only hypothesize here– it could be worked out based on sound factual criteria.

                There’s a lot of information out there and if you toss out this preposterous lie that “all humans are basically the same” it very quickly comes clear that some migrants will likely be better additions to the national community than others.

                “horrible! awful!” someone will say. That’s ok; when you get past people calling you names, a whole world of previously forbidden insights and opportunities arise.

                1. You’re overthinking this. An English proficiency test (written and oral), a physical, and what can be done of a background check by the local consulate should suffice. After that it’s first come first serve. An additional screen could be applied to problem countries (essentially the Arab states and some adjacent) which would prevent the settlement of their bachelor herd. We need to put up screens which tend to filter out people who are not willing to do the work to learn to speak to us in our own tongue and to savor American life as is. We also do not benefit from excess inflow. An issuance of 400,000 settlers’ visas a year would be more than enough.

  5. I think our country will be doing a lot better when they get the old biddy, Ruth Ginsberg, in the dang ground. My God, it is Barf Fest 2020 listening to all the talking heads go on and on about her. Thank the Lord she wasn’t Catholic or they would be trying to canonize her.

    Ashes to ashes, and dust to dust, just put her in the ground already!

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

      1. A coward believes he will ever live
        if he keep him safe from strife:
        but old age leaves him not long in peace
        though spears may spare his life.

        –Havamal

    1. Geez squeaky, mocking and disrespecting Ginsburg? She made it possible for you to enjoy a lot of things that you now take for granted. You may be confident that your ignorance, bigotry, and stupidity are worthy virtues and freely admit it. That’s your prerogative. It’s also the example of why Ilan Omar’s points when she criticizes her own country. It means she’s smart enough to recognize its problems.

      She rightly criticizes things about this country and she also has to deal with her criticisms of Israel. She’s free to express them. You may not like them, but at least she’s airing certain truths that many here who barely understand their own country are getting butt hurt because it’s uncomfortable.

      1. Svalez, what exactly (details please) did Ginsburg do to “make it possible for you to enjoy a lot of things that you now take for granted?” I don’t recall her doing anything when I was out there working in a male-dominated field and had to get by on my own wit and intelligence.

        1. DV, if you have to ask you obviously are not diligent enough to do a little research for yourself.

          Here are five for your perusal,

          “ ACLU Women’s Rights Project attorney Susan Deller Ross and Ginsburg pushed to have pregnancy discrimination recognized as a form of sex discrimination, according to the ACLU. The pair is credited for helping pass the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, an amendment to Title VII in 1978 which acknowledges pregnancy discrimination as unlawful. Women are now more protected against getting fired, or not considered for a job because they are pregnant or have plans to get pregnant.”

          “ In 1996, Ginsburg led the ruling decision in the United States v. Virginia case. Until then, women had been prohibited from attending the Virginia Military Institute. Ginsburg argued that rather than create a separate women’s program, they should be allowed to join the same program as men.”

          “ Ginsburg’s work paved the way for the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, which passed in1974 and allowed women to apply for bank accounts, credit cards, and mortgages without a male co-signer. She also helped ensure that women could receive the same military housing allowances as men, and women are no longer required to pay more for pension plans than men to receive the same benefits, according to the ACLU.”

          “ In 1968, Ginsburg represented Charles Moritz, a man who had never been married and claimed a tax deduction for caring for his mother, according to Smithsonian Magazine. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) denied his deduction because he was a man and unmarried. The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled that the IRS had violated the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution and in 1971 Section 214 of the IRS Code was amended to allow individuals to claim caregiving deductions, regardless of sex.”

          “ Up until 1979, jury duty was considered optional for women in the US. Several states argued that women should be exempt from participating due to family and household obligations. Ginsburg fought to require women to serve on juries on the basis that their civic duty should be valued the same as men’s.
          “Women belong in all places where decisions are being made,” Ginsburg told USA Today in 2009. “It shouldn’t be that women are the exception.”

          https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/gender-equality-laws-quotes-ruth-bader-ginsburg/

          If it wasn’t for Ginsberg, squeaky fromm wouldn’t be able to do much beyond Secretary work or teaching.

          1. If it wasn’t for Ginsberg, squeaky fromm wouldn’t be able to do much beyond Secretary work or teaching.

            I have news for you, Peter. Professional-managerial employees account for perhaps 15% of the workforce. Still, women were present in significant numbers in all of them in 1959. More women weren’t there, among other reasons, because it was commonly assumed that professional women were celibates, and most women did not want that kind of life. Of course, women were quite welcome in a broad array of hourly employments and common-and-garden salaried positions.

            Women at that time were not to be found (odd exceptions) in heavy industry, construction, or protective services. Guess what, Peter? They’re still a single digit minority in those segments of the economy except where lawyers have bullied hiring managers. It doesn’t matter how many nuisance suits creatures like RBG file, women simply do not want these jobs.

          2. “ Ginsburg’s work paved the way for the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, which passed in1974 and allowed women to apply for bank accounts, credit cards, and mortgages without a male co-signer.

            Again, Peter, this is a myth you’re peddling. There was no legal impediment to women having a bank account or a line of credit or a mortgage. There were practical impediments when she didn’t have her own income and a stable work history. These laws are dreamed up by lawyers who know nothing of underwriting or making business decisions.

          3. “ Up until 1979, jury duty was considered optional for women in the US. Several states argued that women should be exempt from participating due to family and household obligations. Ginsburg fought to require women to serve on juries

            IOW, she devoted her efforts to eliminated a common courtesy offered by the courts. What kind of harridan does that?

          4. “ In 1996, Ginsburg led the ruling decision in the United States v. Virginia case. Until then, women had been prohibited from attending the Virginia Military Institute. Ginsburg argued that rather than create a separate women’s program, they should be allowed to join the same program as men.”

            IOW, she insisted the legislative bodies of Virginia and South Carolina bow to her preferences. NB, the military academies in those states enrolled all of 2% of those students to be found in public higher education in Va. and SC. They prepare people for an inherently masculine role. The notion that women’s ‘educational opportunity’ was impaired by the admissions policies of VMI and The Citadel cannot be taken seriously.

            What you’re describing is a rude woman who wanted to boss people around.

      2. She made it possible for you to enjoy a lot of things that you now take for granted.

        Uh huh. The highlights of her career as an advocate was bringing suit against the Social Security Administration contending the formula used to calculate Survivor’s benefits was unconstitutional because widows got better benefits than widowers. One of the highlights of her career as a lawfare artist on the bench was the opinion debarring the Commonwealth of Virginia from operating an all-male military college. NB, the total enrollment at the Virginia Military Institute and The Citadel accounted for 2% of the enrollment at public colleges and universities in Virginia and South Carolina and both states had operated women’s colleges as recently as 1972.

        I’m sure Squeeky’s taking all that for ‘granted’.

        1. Art Deco, she also made it possible for women to be financially independent. To be able to hold a mortgage and a credit card etc.

          She also made it possible for women to work despite being pregnant or possibly getting pregnant. Employers used to discriminate against that. Many women and girls like squeaky would still be deemed inferior or “only useful in the kitchen” if Ginsberg didn’t advocate for the changes that you now take for granted.

          1. Svelaz where do you come up with this stuff. Trust me women were able to have credit cards long before the notorious rbg came along and did her legal work.

          2. Art Deco, she also made it possible for women to be financially independent. To be able to hold a mortgage and a credit card etc.

            I have news for you, Peter. Women of means were financially independent before RBG began filing nuisance suits.

          3. She also made it possible for women to work despite being pregnant or possibly getting pregnant.

            She did nothing of the kind, Peter. A third of the workforce was female the year RBG was admitted to the bar. The majority of women employed were married with a husband present. And, yes, pregnant woman often had workaday jobs. What her nuisance suits did was to rob employers of discretion on how to handle these problems, and subject them to the second-guessing of lawyers.

      3. Geez, if there had been “safe and legal” abortions when her mom got knocked up, Ruth Biddy Ginsberg probably would not have been born. You know, her mom might have decided that a baby would interfere with her career, and plus, they needed to be in a better place financially. That is what was sooo important to the old hag – women being able to kill their babies. What a wonderful legacy! Hopefully a hundred years from now, rowdy Americans will be tearing down statues of her and stripping her name from history.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

  6. It is well known in Africa that Somali’s make the Nigerians look like Boy Scouts, by comparison.

    Regardless of her citizenship, it is in Omar’s blood.

      1. What’s wrong with bigotry??? Sane people should sometimes make generalizations and extrapolate from them. If half of cocker spaniels bite strangers and seriously hurt them, are you telling me you would not be bigoted against cocker spaniels??? The same with black people. If half of them are savage, stupid and violent, should a sane person not notice that, and act accordingly.

        Now, in a Cosmic Sense,is that fair to the good cocker spaniels or the Good Blacks? No, but that “unfairness” can save the life of somebody who would otherwise fill up their car in a black neighborhood, or walk down a street at 3:00 AM in New Orleans, or was thinking about that heckuva great deal on a house in South Chicago.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

          1. The Universe cares not one whit about fairness. It cares about survival. Deal with the issue. Would you live in a predominantly black neighborhood in the inner city? If not, why? Would you be bigoted? Probably yes, but you would be a lot safer eschewing that choice. Bigotry is not necessarily a bad thing. Bigotry can save your life.

            Squeeky Fromm
            Girl Reporter

            1. RIGHT ON SQUEAK. like it or not this is the existence we are born into.
              ———————————————————-

              Might was Right when Carthage flames
              lit up the Punic foam–

              And – when the naked steel of Gaul
              weighed down the spoil of Rome;
              And Might was Right when Richmond fell–
              and at Thermopalye–
              It’s the Logic of the Ancient World–
              and the Gospel of To-Day.
              Where pendant suns in millions swing,
              around this whirling earth,
              It’s Might, it’s Force that holds the brakes,
              and steers through life and death:
              Force governs all organic life,
              inspires all Right and Wrong.
              It’s Nature’s plan to weed-out man,
              and Test who’re the Strong.”

              –ragnar redbeard

              1. we must adapt to survive and prosper

                to adapt we must understand the dynamics in play in history and worldwide and not just according to some fake and fantastical set of sterile Enlightenment bromides and shibboleths.

                the idea that this country can contain all the multitude of humanity in our geographic space without bringing with it all the multitudinous conflicts of humanity?

                is total nonsense. it is a preposterous notion that withers and dies before our eyes.

                wake up and reckon your interests and fast before Nov election day and vote accordingly

      2. Look up the definition of a Bigot, and you’ll see yourself and Omar defined.

        Omar is a Clannish hate monger, who hates Jews, Caucasians, Christians, and anyone else who isn’t in lock-step with her ideology.

        Clans are why her country of origin is a hell hole. I’m just stating the facts as evidenced by the history of Somalia. About which you obviously know nothing.

          1. “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time. You’re a bigot.”
            ********************************
            No, that’s the very definition of someone who is NOT a bigot but one deciding on individual characteristics.

          2. This is you, anon. (But you have plenty of company here).

            https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/bigot

            “bigot

            noun

            a person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who does not like other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life”

            You’re welcome for the education. (Which you could have acquired yourself by running a simple search).

            It is painfully obvious that your government school education was sadly lacking, and as a result, so is your intellect.

            Again, I stated a well known fact about Somalia, Somali’s, and their Clans. That reality has nothing to do with the color of their skin.

        1. oh, I think clans have their place, even here in the west. you consistently disapprove of tribalism rhodes but tribalism is the last thing which may save our own necks in the end

    1. Just like Nazism is in Trump’s and your blood. Those that lean towards good old ethnic cleansing and only descendants of those that came over on the Mayflower, appear to be on the Republican side. Just listen to their champion. In Germany, during the thirties, Trump would have been wearing an arm band and holding rallies. Think about that. The question is where would Turley be, on a court fiddling with the laws?

      1. Issac, this is so much out of reality. If Trump were truly the Nazi you claim and was into ethnic cleansing, etc. it seems that he would have taken advantage of Covid to crack down on people’s freedom and liberties. Instead, it’s been mostly Democrat governors who have taken advantage of the “crisis” to severely limit people’s freedoms. Even those not into politics can see the glaring differences and have taken note.

        1. If you read what I wrote carefully, you will understand that Trump is forced to recognize those hard fought values that make up the world today. There is a clear and present question of whether or not he truly believes in these values. Trump has slipped more than often that he is a bigot, a misogynist, a racist (Trump and his father refused to rent to Blacks back when they were working together. They were charged, paid hefty fines, rented to Blacks, but never admitted guilt-think on that), and above all an incompetent. Trump’s incompetence is the primary reason he did not take advantage of the Covid-19 condition to either rise to the occasion or rise to any other nefarious means. Trump’s a one trick pony, himself. Himself, lies, blame, and blithering. It wears his followers down. Those with a brain onto of a functioning spine are switching to Biden. Those without, blither and blather on, heads loosely nodding back and forth, red cap perched on top of a vacuum.

          1. “Those with a brain onto of a functioning spine are switching to Biden”

            Did Biden write that for you?

            I hope so for your sake, Isaac. Because if he didn’t, it appears that you also have Dementia, like Joe does.

          2. “Those with a brain onto of a functioning spine are switching to Biden.”

            Democrat party is in the process of fracturing and moderate Dems are bailing and backing Trump.

      2. “Nazism is in Trump’s and your blood”

        Isaac. What was the “National Socialist German Workers’ Party” also known as?

        1. Rhodes, Trump’s own father was a well known Nazi sympathizer and avid kkk member.

          Trump was heavily influenced by his dad and it shows.

          1. Svelaz, keep on living in the past. We are oriented to winning the battle of today and scolding and epithets have lost their power to intimidate the people

            this is the unexpected blessing of 3 plus months or riot and intimidation by the mob: the escalation towards violence sorts people out much more quickly than name calling.

            You too will have to pick sides. law and order, or chaos. There’s still time to change the road you’re on

            https://youtu.be/6hBLHkmBKDg

          2. The sock puppet is starting with his same ignorant statements.

            Let’s hear the evidence. You have none. You are a liar and a libeler. Along with that you are a baby killer who supports the destruction of races different than your own. No more need be known about you.

      3. Who is Isaac ranting at?

        I had ancestors here from Europe nearly 3 centuries ago and some only 1. They were all from Europe. Immigrants!

        But Im a native born American, Hallelujah!

  7. Legal immigrants are not exempt from criticism of their ideas or the inevitable result of said implemented ideas. Debate exposes ideas and rightly evaluates whether they have merit or not. Labeling criticism as racism is a smoke screen and a cowardly approach while undermining real debate. Equally, transplants from another state are not exempt from criticism for their beloved policies. If someone moves from New York due to high taxes, incompetent politicians, and overreaching government to the Southeast carrying the same “policy ideas” from New York why are they surprised when their voting decisions change the Southeast and bring about the same circumstances from which they came? This criticism must be said because many will not self evaluate or take responsibility. If your ideology/policy has demonstrated that it creates chaos and destruction (see Somalia), then YOU are the problem.

  8. Seriously? AOC is the poster child for college grads with the actual expertise in their subjects of kindergartners, and Omar is the poster child for people that think America is a dung heap yet inexplicably flock here anyway. That she holds office is the only element to this conversation to leave one in a state of being gobsmacked. It isn’t ‘anti-immigrant’ to single her out as an ***hole, a simple human thing, which she is on both counts. TDS usually involves contradictory logic, as it is motivated by personal dislike rather than situational reality – i.e., that person supporting Trump isn’t REALLY black, defund the police so long as WE can still call 911, or we will single her out as an immigrant while simultaneously proclaiming her nothing but a citizen the rest of the time.

    If she were an American-born white male, her attitude and actions would be regularly lit on fire on this blog, methinks, though I have no doubt the professor would insist we honor her freedom of speech (which is nothing to say of decorum, which the professor is also quick to call out and disseminate out for others).

    If anything, Trump is being egalitarian in his refusal to give her special consideration based solely on the circumstances of her birth, and the criticisms are simple fact, whether one finds them
    Pleasant to consider or not: she is from there, that country is in severe disarray, and she very clearly has little respect for the people, principles, and laws of the country she has been chosen to represent.

    It’s hypocritical, to say the least, but TDS seems to legitimately fry the neurons of otherwise intelligent people.

  9. Trump says what many of us “less sophisticated” rubes from flyover country have been thinking, this is why this “gotcha” outrage from the left bears no fruit. You’re outraged because someone dared speak an intolerable truth.

    Yes, she’s an American…because Americans showed the grace to extend a hand and help her when she was fleeing from a war-torn hell-hole, provided her sanctuary and an education and a stable, free society in which to live. But that’s not all…America didn’t just help her survive, it enabled her to thrive; American society provided her with the opportunity she needed to elevate herself from an 8 year old war refugee to one of the highest political positions in the nation.

    And she repays by preaching to us how horrible and racist and islamaphobic and xenophobic the society that enabled the election of a black, muslim, female immigrant to congress is. That’s what Trump is saying and what many of us feel; and is why your self-righteous indignation falls on deaf ears.

  10. Real leaders, of any political party, try to “unite” their people and find common ground. Dividing and exploiting Americans, using tribalism to pit one group against another is not a leader that should serve in government. If a sports team were as divided as we are today, that team would never win a game. How can Americans compete against other nations being this divided? The force behind the Republican Party, Abraham Lincoln, warned that a house divided against itself cannot stand. Congress could help this situation by creating a annual “referendum” – an official vote annually on just the issues (not candidates) to prioritize what Congress should be focusing on. Most Americans, of either party, probably want less government in some areas but want more government in other areas.

    For example: your children’s share of the national debt is a bi-partisan issue, warrantless domestic spying, gun rights, LGBT rights, etc has bi-partisan support. Both parties should be supporting what Americans want them to focus on.

    1. Ashcroft, I agree with you. It appears that at this point, as the saying goes, we should throw all the bums out. The fact that Congress (in this case, the Democrats) can’t even pass a bill that contains the stimulus help that both parties agree is needed, because the Democrats didn’t get all the goodies they wanted in that bill, is despicable. It would be easy to at least work around the edges, so to speak, to work on issues that both parties can agree need fixing. Doing so would encourage working together and help grease the social relationships needed to negotiate the harder issues. I see no adult behavior with the divided House or Senate. Where is the modern-day Tip O’Neill and his like?

    2. Ashcroft, tribalism may be what one day saves your neck.

      I’ll tell you the real game plan for every politics.

      WEAKEN THE TRIBALISM OF YOUR FOES — AND STRENGTHEN THE TRIBALISM OF YOUR OWN

      this is ancient wisdom and contemporary practice, whatever the false slogans tossed about to the contrary

      “America is a creedal nation” is a false bromide disintegrating before our eyes. We are Americans and will outlive the empty slogans regardless

  11. What you’re not acknowledging here is our TWANLOC problem. You’re not acknowledging it because it’s all around you where you work. Your ‘colleagues’ fancy they’re visitors from a superior neighborhood and the people all around them are of no consequence and have rights of self-government contingent on the concessions professional-managerial types like themselves are willing to grant. They’re not loyal to their country, but to a transnational class of chatterati.

    Omar’s an odd but kindred problem. She’s not loyal to her host country, which she openly despises. This is countenanced by her constituents, largely gentry liberals who suffer from the TWANLOC problem. Given where she started and given the characteristics of her journey from there to here, this is just extraordinarily graceless on her part.

    Please note, she came here as a refugee. Refugees are properly cared for in camps proximate to their country of origin, with a view to their eventual repatriation. Somalia is nowhere near here. The only troubled countries on our doorstep are Haiti and Cuba. Refugee admissions from Somalia should be strictly retail.

    Of course, her family was politically prominent in Somalia, so her father might have qualified under a retail admissions policy. Note though, it’s a reasonable wager he was himself implicated in the ruin of the place. We’re harboring his relatives who may have enemies back home because they are bad people.

    And we know Omar is a bad person. It’s not merely her attitude. She’s also a known (and creepy) immigration fraudster. And she uses her public office for crooked patronage of various sorts. She has very little history of productive private-sector employment, btw.

    If we had a sane immigration regime, this woman would never have been naturalized, much less be sitting in elective office.

    As ever, you’re missing the salient issues because you’re looking at the landscape with faculty glasses. Don’t do that. Most faculty are fools and jack-wagons.

      1. those who are no longer our countrymen

        http://the-american-catholic.com/2013/10/13/twanloc/

        “I was reading a post on liberal incivility in social settings at the blog Legal Insurrection by Professor William Jacobson who indicated that he is not going to put up with it anymore. I think that is a fine resolution, but I was struck by this comment in the com boxes:

        Subotai Bahadur | October 12, 2013 at 10:03 pm

        ‘Some time ago, on another site, I created a term for them. TWANLOC. Those Who Are No Longer Our Countrymen. We do not speak the same language. We do not share a common history. We have diametrically opposite world views. We do not share a common culture. They hate us with a fervor that is literally religious. We share a common piece of territory, but they literally hate that territory. We are not of the same nation. History shows what happens when people that different and hostile are not allowed to separate peacefully.

        This is not going to end well.

        I tend to be an optimist by nature, but lately, especially with the use of government against conservatives, as typified in the IRS scandal, I am beginning to wonder if “this is not going to end well.” My brain continues to tell me that American politics has always been rough, that we are nowhere near the conditions that led to the Civil War, and the habits of a very long domestic peace will keep the country from going off a very violent cliff. However, my heart is beginning to wonder. ‘ ”

        I am not sure of those quotation marks, and i do not know him, but I like the way this psuedonymous Subotai thinks

        You know who Subotai was right? Ghengis Khan’s general who cut through northern asia like a hot knife through butter. he conquered more territory than any other war leader in history until his time and subdued 32 nations. he compressed the princes of kievan russ between two wide planks set under the table on which he and his colonels feasted to celebrate their victory, the bodies of the rus slowly crushing

        1. That’s bunk, written by a hater who’d rather not work with his fellow Americans when their views are different.

  12. Trump certainly does not put every word right. However, Trump’s actions, in total, prove he is NOT anti-immigrant, for heaven’s sake he’s married to an immigrant. Trump is anti bad ideas. What he’s really saying is Omar’s IDEAS are bad. He’s suggesting that her ideas haven’t worked in the country of her birth, or anywhere else. In fact, he’s really pointing out that her ideas, generally speaking, contributed to circumstances that led to a civil war that led to her needing to flee her country for this one. He’s saying her ideas were bad there and they’ll be bad here. I will agree that he could have made the argument more eloquently.

    1. Well, of course. But in the addled heads of the faculty, you cannot ever speak disrespectfully about anyone who is in the Anointed’s portfolio of mascot groups. You can say anything you want about evangelicals, because the chatterati despise them.

    2. Trump likes white immigrants. Just like he tells his rally crowd in Minnesota that they have good genes. He’s racist.

      1. I like white immigrants too! What, you want to bring in head hunters from Borneo??? I live in a predominantly white neighborhood just as I bet you do. If I had kids, no way I would send them to a predominantly black school and neither would. Sooo, quit virtue signaling. Even Maxine Waters chooses to live in a white neighborhood.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

      2. all my ancestors were white immigrants to America at one generation or another. you say it’s racist, this is your free speech. & here is mine: you’re an antiwhite racist

        and we will VOTE TRUMP

  13. Of course, he resumed his attacks. Hate is his platform and his base loves it and they hate the AMERICAN ideals and the Constitution It’s sad, distasteful and disgusting. But who cares, it makes certain people feel superior.

    1. Says the supporter of the ideology who’s proponents are merrily burning down the cities and assaulting people who don’t agree with them.

      Projection. It’s a thing.

  14. She’s an anti-Semite who hates this country. She’s not responsible for the conditions in Somalia; she came her as a child. But she’s also a lawmaker who defies the laws of the United States, notably the immigration laws (by helping her brother commit immigration fraud), the tax laws, too (relating to her fake marriage), and fund-raising rules of Congress. Naturalized citizens take an oath to “support and defend…the laws of the United States.” If she took the oath as a 17 year-old (and 14 year olds and older are required to), she has violated it. Her own party wouldn’t even censure her for her anti-Semitic statements because it’s so desperate for the young, pro-BDS, anti-Israel, anti-Semitic vote. In my view, Trump went easy on her. He could have called her a criminal and would have been within his rights to do so. Where have you been, Mr. Turley?

    1. Being pro-BDS doesn’t make someone anti-semitic or anti-Israel.

      She isn’t a criminal. She hasn’t even been indicted for breaking any laws.

      1. Being pro-BDS doesn’t make someone anti-semitic or anti-Israel.

        Oh, yes it does. There is no purpose to boycotts, divestment, and sanctions but to injure Israel and its inhabitants. The people who advocate it advocate it because they believe it will make the Jews’ world worse. The excuse is ‘the occupation’, but Israel’s occupying the West Bank, Gaza, &c because the political class of these loci (and people professing to act on their behalf) have rejected or sabotaged six previous efforts to institute self-government for these areas. Its the stated position of the BDS crowd that Israel’s obligation is to allow Arabs to subjugate and kill them. They hold to this position because they think Jews are untermenschen who must never have authority over Muslims.

          1. Oh, yes it does. That you can get a collection of dupes with Jewish relatives to sign on to some travesty doesn’t change it’s essential nature. It just demonstrates that the dupes are dupes. Try to get a relatively sophisticated tool like Peter Beinart to write out the algorithm of how you get from here to there and you get nonsense. It’s all been tried and failed before. What’s your argument, it’s not anti-semitic because some of its promoters are stupid?

              1. See reports on and critiques of J-Street. These people aren’t typically Jewish per halacha (though Peter Beinart is). Now, you gonna answer my question, or are you going to play shi**y little games?

      2. I have criticized Israel on countless occasions in my life and American politicians who kowtow to them too. I feel free to criticize Jewish groups too if they earn it. I have been called an ant eye seemite, more than once, although my Jewish friends seem content to continue to interact with me. I offer no apologies to those who have tried to bully me with such epithets.

        However, I reject BDS. A “one state solution” to the Israeli Palestine problem would swamp Israeli Jews in radical votes and end the nation as such.

        Because in principle I believe that “ethnostates” are a valid social and political construct, which reflect normal human nature and provide stability in international relations, and because I affirm the right of ethnic groups to exist, in general, i therefore do approve of the aspirations of the Jewish people to their own ethnostate in Israel, and recognize its right to exist as a Jewish state.

        I find it hypocritical that some politicians take third world ethnostates for granted but if it came to the question of a jewish ethnostate they will immediately resort to cries of racism. The same thing would be true of any European nation that wants to preserve its ethnic character by repulsing teeming hordes of refugees, like Hungary.

        Hungary is a whipping boy of George Soros, but they know him well. Look to the state actions Hungary has taken to restrain his mischief there, as a blueprint for what the US should be doing to him here.

        Ironically,. one of the most notorious financiers of BDS outfits, is George Soros, a Jewish person himself

        https://acdemocracy.org/soros-anti-israel-bds-funding/

        Soros and his ilk weaponize refugees and ethnic minorities to attack the remaining stalwarts of Westphalian sovereignty like Israel.
        His ilk includes centi-billionaire buddy Mikey Bloomberg who pays the court fines for black and hispanic felons to be able to vote in Florida and purposefully attack the core population with their weaponized votes.

        Life is full of ironies and politics ever chooses strangebedfellows

  15. Agreed.

    Ms. Omar’s frequent negative comments about the U.S. are unpleasant (and frankly, so is she), but she is allowed to both say and be unpleasant.

    Now if the ethics committees would just investigate her probable sham marriage to her brother.

  16. Omar is a expert liar, anti-semite, socialist/Marxist. While what Trump says is offensive to some I can understand Trump’s desire to get more personal with her. Not qualified to be in our Congress. All trash that comes out of her mouth nothing I see that is useful to our country. Go home to Somalia Omar.

    1. Trump is an expert liar, an anti-Semite, and a dictator-wannabe.

      The U.S. is Omar’s home, and she’s more qualified to be in Congress than Trump is to be in the WH.

      1. Now he’s also “an anti-Semite”?! His daughter is married to a Jew.

        Actually the anti-Semite would be the Muslim from Somalia named Ilhan Omar.

        Just ask the Israeli’s.

        1. Yes, Trump is an anti-Semite. Ask American Jews who they think is more anti-Semitic, Trump or Omar. American Jews know both better than Israelis do.

          1. Ask American Jews who they think is more anti-Semitic, Trump or Omar.

            You first. And if Roz Goldner still insists that Jared Kushner’s father-in-law is anti-semitic, tell her to show her work.

  17. Sadly this just the kind of stuff that makes him so popular with his base and wins him elections! He wins on his racism. Hard to admit but it’s the truth. From his initial opening of sending millions back to now.

      1. “. . . her extraordinary journey from child in a civil war in Somalia to a member of Congress is inspirational.”

        Which is like saying that a man’s rise from poverty to crime boss is “inspirational.”

        “. . . Omar’s country . . .”

        If so, then it is no longer the country of Jefferson, Washington, Madison.

        You are either easily impressed or are blind to the nature and consequences of her revolting ideas.

    1. You just proved you’re a bigot.

      But, have you embraced your inner racist yet, Martha?

      Because you are definitely an example of “a guilty dog always barks the loudest”.

      Why do you feel so guilty?

        1. “Why do you feel so guilty?”

          I don’t feel guilty, which is why unlike you and her, I’m not the one calling people I’ve never even met, a racist.

          That is the barking I’m referring to. It’s like someone who tells you unprompted that they are honest and never lie. Which of course means that they are dishonest and they lie.

          So,what did you do to black people that makes you feel so guilty?

          1. Rhodes, that is Anonymous the Stupid who is making another one of his Stupid statements. He can’t help himself. He was born that way.

            1. That is Allan the Stupid who is making another one of his Stupid statements. He can’t help himself. He was born that way.

              1. The Brainless Wonder, Anonymous the Stupid has been posting a lot today but not as many to me as yesterday. I feel slighted. There have been something over 200 comments made on the blog so far and Anonymous’s name has been mentioned almost 100 times.

Leave a Reply

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks
%d bloggers like this: