House Censures Rashida Tlaib

A negative court decision (thanks to Cuomo's picks the Democrats in the N.Y. Senate supported) led to re-re-districting in New York. Result? I lost the chance of being represented by AOC. My residence is down the block from the new line. It's Rep. Ritchie Torres for me.

Rep. Torres is an openly gay Latino-African American. He generally supports the usual liberal policies. My first bad vibes about the guy occurred after I found out he would be my congressman.

The bestie of my former state senator ran for Congress in a crowded field. She did not concede right away. Torres tweeted out that he supported the presumptive winner (Dan Goldman, who overall is fine) and everyone else should concede. He framed it this way:

The time has come for the Democratic Party to coalesce around the nominee.   

Unlike Republicans who insist on perpetuating the big lie, we as Democrats respect the results of elections.

I thought this was an asshole move. The implication is that Yuh-Lin Niou (a great person, who wore her heart on her sleeve supporting her constituents in the New York Assembly) was promoting "the big lie" for not immediately (she conceded shortly after) conceding when the results were not all out.  The race was hard fought. The winner garnered like 27% of the vote (ah for instant run-off voting). Some on the left even alleged Goldman was a DINO. What are you doing man?

Torres is also a gung ho Israel supporter. He has led with "I'm 100% for Israel" during the ongoing Israeli-Gaza conflict, then getting around to saying he supports the Gaza people too. Sort of an also-ran comment that suggests it is just something he has to say.  

He is now among twenty-two (including Goldman and various other Dems with Jewish names particularly) Democrats who voted to support a measure censuring Rep. Rashida Tlaib, the first Palestinian-American member of the House for statements regarding the Israel-Hamas war.

One of the twenty-two, Brad Schneider (D-Ill.):

We are at an exceedingly perilous moment when emotions and intentions are on a razor’s edge. I believe that Members of Congress should be free to express their opinions, no matter how distasteful they may be. I also believe they must express the values and priorities of their district.

What a load of crap. You can "express the values" of your district in a variety of ways. This is a hypocritical selective attack by a party filled with people who say horrible things with no sanction. This is freedom of expression? A censure is symbolic. It is of limited effect. But, it is not meaningless. It has some effect of tarring the people targeted. 

A censure is not the only way to "answer" people. A handful of Republicans did not go along, including Ken Buck (who said he wouldn't support an election denier for speaker until he did), who stuck to principle regarding selective censure of opinions. 

There is a strong division of feeling -- including even in the State Department according to recent reporting -- about the appropriate path in the current conflict. Many strongly reject certain policies of the Israeli government and are upset that the U.S. seems to selectively choose sides. The censure of the first Palestinian-American in Congress, the PALESTINIAN AMERICAN member of Congress, is putrid. It's disgusting. 

As with some comments by Rep. Omar, without trying to parse them, maybe some things she said were questionable. What else is new? Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) is correct:

"It’s not our job to censure somebody because we don’t agree with them,” he said. “Let the Ethics Committee look at it. Let others look at it, but I will not be voting for a motion to censure unless it’s very serious conduct.”

She is not unhinged like Rep. Taylor-Greene, who on basic principle should not be censured either. Democrats did not strip her of her committee assignments because of some unhinged comments she made on policy. They cited comments that were violent in nature, including support for threats against Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. For her views alone, I too would oppose a censure of Taylor-Greene. 

Rep. Torres represents a diverse district. I have seen more immigrants in my area in recent years, including those from Muslim-majority countries. One voter yesterday even wanted to write a pro-Palestine message on her ballot (I told her not to do so, but I should have let it be since it was an absentee -- it would not go in the machine at the polling location that probably would reject it). And, their alleged representative censured comments allegedly too pro-Palestianian.  

I miss being represented by AOC.  

ETA: NYT had a profile comparing Torres and AOC. It is interesting that one of the "moderates" was part of the 10% who voted to censure Tlaib. How "'moderate" is this? Now, AOC is being put out as a "reasonable" bridge between the sides on this issue. Okay.  

The profile suggests that his strong position on Israel is a means he uses to separate himself from left-leaning Democrats. His district has "only a few thousand Jewish voters." I would not be surprised if there were more Muslims in the area. It would be a good idea for an article to address that.

Schumer, the older senator, is in his early 70s. That probably means another term or two. But, of the two, I rather have AOC as my senator.  

... here is a breakdown of how much b.s. is in the censure.