Republicans have a constitutional duty to condemn Trump’s racist attacks

From left, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., respond to remarks by President Donald Trump after his call for the four Democratic congresswomen to go back to their "broken" countries, during a news conference at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, July 15, 2019. All are American citizens and three of the four were born in the U.S. From left, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., respond to remarks by President Donald Trump after his call for the four Democratic congresswomen to go back to their "broken" countries, during a news conference at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, July 15, 2019. All are American citizens and three of the four were born in the U.S. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

The president of the United States issued a series of racist tweets this week telling some members of Congress to “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.” Though he did not name them at first, his tweets appear to have been directed at four Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts.

No one seems to be surprised by yet another diatribe from Mr. Trump. The nation has, tragically, grown accustomed to such language from its commander in chief, from claiming he could shoot someone in Times Square and not lose political support to calling Kim Jong-un “Little Rocket Man” and deploring refugees from “shithole countries.”

Advertisement

Mr. Trump’s tweets have been, unquestionably, a distraction from the critical business of the country: Congress must soon raise the debt ceiling again to prevent the government from running out of cash; the Trump administration has once again taken steps to make it more difficult for asylum seekers to find safety in the United States; there are children still being detained at the border after being separated from their parents.

Behind Mr. Trump’s tweets is an attempt not only to delegitimize his political opponents but to appeal to nativist tendencies, suggesting that citizens born in other countries or born to immigrant parents are somehow less American than others. That is antithetical to the values of this country, for which generations of immigrant Americans have sacrificed to the point of shedding their blood on foreign shores.

Some have pointed out that, true to form, Mr. Trump has his facts wrong. Three of the four congresswomen were born in the United States. But Mr. Trump’s remarks would have been reprehensible even if they all had been born in Canada or Haiti, Somalia or China. To echo what Ms. Ocasio-Cortez said at a press conference addressing the president’s remarks on Monday: “No matter what the president says, this country belongs to you, and it belongs to everyone.”

These comments need to be called out as racist, xenophobic and sexist. They are wrong, full stop. The president’s lack of restraint has perhaps briefly unified Democrats in outrage, but they seem to have had little impact on Republicans. Only a small number of G.O.P. members of Congress have criticized the president’s tweets or even indicated that they are disturbed by them.

While we may have come to expect this sort of behavior from the president, it should not be treated as normal. Especially if they ally themselves with Mr. Trump’s public policy goals, members of Congress have a moral obligation and constitutional duty to denounce such remarks and to defend their colleagues against such attacks. Public debate and public decency require minimum standards. The United States Constitution and its separation of powers presumes those standards. Our national leaders should not stand by in silence while the voices of the elected representatives of the people are delegimitized by the head of the executive branch. What is left of the parameters of civil discourse in the United States must be defended.

[Want to discuss politics with other America readers? Join our Facebook discussion group, moderated by America’s writers and editors.]

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
J Cosgrove
3 months 1 week ago

Nonsense! What constitutional duty? What racist attacks? Trump said nothing about race. He was pointing out their unhappiness at the United States and could be applied to anyone of any ethnic background with similar attitudes. Besides it only applies to one person. . Why not examine this person’s comments? Claims of racism is a specious charge. One of Trumps best appointments was Nikki Haley, a person of color. There is talk of her replacing Pence as Trump’s running mate in 2020.

J Cosgrove
3 months 1 week ago

In response to one of the people in the photo above accusing Nancy Pelosi of racism., a black progressive said these cries of racism are phony

What a weak argument. Because you can’t get your way and because you’re getting pushback you resort to using the race card? Unbelievable

J Cosgrove
3 months ago

Is there much racism in the United States? Yes and no but what is here is catastrophic and not what most people think. The racism that exists is not discrimination or some inappropriate offensive comments but much more devastating. It is denial that certain social/political policies have led to the destruction of the family such that those born in these dysfunctional family structures have an extremely difficult time succeeding in society. But the ones who are to blame for this condition are the ones crying racism the loudest.

J Cosgrove
3 months ago

The real racism is never discussed on this site. But yet we have a constant stream of articles about racism here. Is it because of politics and nothing to do with the victims of the real racism?

rose-ellen caminer
3 months 1 week ago

My country right or wrong,
Love it or leave it.
Go back where you came from.
And as my husband read in a letter to the editor decades ago; We're the only free country in the world; you can't criticize us!

These stupid tropes have been part of America for ever. Criticizing your country to make things better materially for the people , and more just, is not betrayal of ones country, any more then criticizing ones child is not, not loving ones child. The attacks on the "squad", specifically on Omar and Thalib are xenophobic and racist. [ non- European ethnic/religious origin]. These attacks from Trump have percalated up, from as Omar has said; the chat rooms of the right,and even the left , and Fox news and other right wing media outlets.And from the streets. In having a US president talk like this too, he has exposed the dirty laundry that has always been here;xenophobia and negative nationalism can be and is, as present in the country comprised of immigrants and "founded on an idea",as it is in countries founded on "blood and soil." The targets here change;as wave after wave of groups get incorporated' as" real " Americans over time, But there are always new targets of xenophobia, racism and bigotry that is fodder for existing negative nationalism.
Now Trump is forcing everyone to take a stand;do you believe immigrants have a duty to go along with how things are in their new country? Do you believe Muslim immigrants should shut up and not rock the boat regarding our cherished narrative on Israel? Do you believe all immigrants should be good House Negroes , only happy to be in the house, and not speak out against what they may perceive as unjust and needing change? No uppity new ethnics such as you all from non European countries/religions are welcome.?
Trump in his trickster way,is smoking out the bigots, racists Islamophobes, ethnic haters, intolerant negative nationalists and xenophobes. And those who oppose them.Everyone has to lay their cards out now!

Laura Gonzalez
3 months 1 week ago

Oh, please. This is an old racist trope. If you can't see it, you're blind, have no knowledge of US history and are likely racist.

J Cosgrove
3 months 1 week ago

Now if I support Scherie Murray over Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez am I a racist? Calling someone a racist is the phoniest part of this editorial. It is all about what one believes is best for all people. The four people pictured above have been advocating very dysfunctional policies. So the editors and others should cut out all the racist charges. The real problem is false claims of racism and advocating very bad policy. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=v6geoLhv8LM&time_continue=135

J Jones
3 months 1 week ago

If you support Murray because you believe Jamaican-Americans s are racially superior or more deserving of participation than Americans from the American territory of Puerto Rico and/or that is what you say, then yes, it would be racist. And you know that. If you vote for Murray because you like her politics and you do t like Ocasio&Cortez's politics and THAT is what you say, no problem. And you know that.

J Cosgrove
3 months 1 week ago

It will be because i support her politics. So we both disagree with the editors that it is not racism but about politics. I can guarantee you that if these four congress women were advocating free market capitalism to solve the problems of poor Americans, Trump would be all in. So the racism claims are phony.

J Jones
3 months 1 week ago

Tbe Editors weren't writing about you or your conduct. You and I were writing about you and your conduct. I agree with the Editors that the President's tweets were racist. He doesn't find his own similarly intense criticisms of Americans and the US cause for him as President/candidate/citizen to return to the country from which his family immigrated. He does find the criticisms of Congresswomen/citizens of color cause for them to return to the countries from which their non-white families immigrated. He revealed his racism: white immigrant citizens and their descendants are Americans who can say anything they want about "their" country; non-white immigrant citizens and their non-white descendants are always immigrants here at our pleasure and they better not criticize "our" country. His tweets were racist.

Ysais Martinez
3 months 1 week ago

I am Hispanic too and I think J Cosgrove is absolutely correct. These 4 provocateurs are only popular among white liberal newspaper editors and the handful of people --out of 320 million-- that have Twitter in the US. They consistently attack this country that has been a blessing to many immigrants like myself. I'd be eating garbage off a dumpster in the Caribbean if it wasn't for the United States of America. It boggles my mind when I see people piling on this blessed land.

J Jones
3 months 1 week ago

One of the great things about this country is that, based on the Constitution, every person living here gets to have their own individual opinion about the US. You get one. I get one. They each get one. And none of us has to get the others' permission or approval and my opinion doesn't diminish or cancel out yours or theirs and vice versa. My opinion in fact has no relationship with yours or theirs or vice versa except that each is an opinion about the US held by a person living in the US and each is protected by our Constitution. I am glad we are all here together. So are they and they have made that clear as American citizens and as elected American Congresswomen. Peace.

L Hoover
3 months ago

NOTE: I wrtte this in response to Ysais Martinez's post. If I read his post correctly, he, in essence, said it's un-American to criticize America. I see the right to criticize one of the greatest American freedoms. I don't at times agree with the opinions and biases of The Squad....but will respect and defend their right to have those opinions----without branding them as un-American. Here goes to Martinez:

Well, then, you must be appalled and extremely upset about all the horrible things Donald Trump has said and implied about this country, our people, our institutions. No? Well, it boggles my mind. I love my country and will fight to the end for truth and justice, the rule of law, constitutional freedoms, respect for diversity and differences, and compassion for illegals even when we have to say no to them. I am fighting against fascism and a corrupt, authoritarian form of government. As a student of history with some wisdom and a love for the truth that is of Christ.....I will fight against Donald Trump, who should never have been accorded presidential powers. Never. Remember, Donald Trump has done nothing to save you or others in similar situations.

J Jones
3 months 1 week ago

The federal EeOC explicitly cites the statement "go back to where you are from" as an example of illegal workplace racial harassment and duscrimination.
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5d2e815de4b085eda5a390cc

Alan Johnstone
3 months 1 week ago

just one example of blithering idiocy from Obamarama

J Jones
3 months 1 week ago

Truly bizarre thing to object to, Alan, not being able to tell an employee or coworker to "go back where you came from". The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) was established by Congress in 1952.

Opting Out
3 months ago

The faux outrage by the Editors while they gave Hillary a pass for doing something far far worse to 50 Million Americans:
"You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? [Laughter/applause]. The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people, now have 11 million. He tweets and retweets offensive, hateful, mean-spirited rhetoric. Now some of those folks, they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America.“
- Hillary elitist racist Rotten Clinton to the applause and laughter of her elitist racist supporters.
America Magazine is that you ?

J Jones
3 months ago

Jose, what is the evidence of the pass given to Clinton (who is not a candidate today nor is she President today nor will she ever be either) by the Editors of America? She was absolutely wrong in calling *people* "deplorables" and she did it EXACTLY once and she acknowledged in her book that it was one of the reasons she lost.

Her list of -isms? That list of behaviors, belief systems, words? Those ARE deplorable. And Trump is comfortable with those behaviors, words, beliefs and so, apparently, are his supporters because they decline - every single time he engages in them - to denounce those behaviors, words, beliefs. And he engages in them over and over and over and over again. Clinton made the reprehensible statement you mention EXACTLY once and she paid for it and she acknowledged she paid for it.

A worthwhile leader isa leader whose supporters can critique with the sure knowledge that their leader will engage with their concerns. Trump was absurdly and absolutely and frighteningly correct in his hyperbolic statement that he could shoot someone in Times Square and he wouldn't lose a single supporter. He knew exactly who his supporters and Republicans ARE: people so unconcerned with his lack of basic human decency that as long as they think they will get what they want from this indecent man, they wont speak back to him and they will not criticize him no matter how badly or disrespectfully or childishly or dishonestly he behaves. Clinton was and is broadly and deeply and publicly criticized by Democrats. Trump supporters - voters and leaders alike - are afraid of him and they love his routine and characteristic ugliness. Had Trump not said all the other racist, sexist, xenophobic, hateful, divisive things he has said, had he done this kind of thing exactly once, he would be getting the same "pass" you think Clinton got for making a deplorable statement exactly once: America's Editors would not have demanded his censure. He is being censures for the worst of his deplorable statements (to date). And still his supporters haven't batted an eye.

J Jones
3 months ago

Jose, what is the evidence of the pass given to Clinton (who is not a candidate today nor is she President today nor will she ever be either) by the Editors of America? She was absolutely wrong in calling *people* "deplorables" and she did it EXACTLY once and she acknowledged in her book that it was one of the reasons she lost.

Her list of -isms? That list of behaviors, belief systems, words? Those ARE deplorable. And Trump is comfortable with those behaviors, words, beliefs and so, apparently, are his supporters because they decline - every single time he engages in them - to denounce those behaviors, words, beliefs. And he engages in them over and over and over and over again. Clinton made the reprehensible statement you mention EXACTLY once and she paid for it and she acknowledged she paid for it.

A worthwhile leader isa leader whose supporters can critique with the sure knowledge that their leader will engage with their concerns. Trump was absurdly and absolutely and frighteningly correct in his hyperbolic statement that he could shoot someone in Times Square and he wouldn't lose a single supporter. He knew exactly who his supporters and Republicans ARE: people so unconcerned with his lack of basic human decency that as long as they think they will get what they want from this indecent man, they wont speak back to him and they will not criticize him no matter how badly or disrespectfully or childishly or dishonestly he behaves. Clinton was and is broadly and deeply and publicly criticized by Democrats. Trump supporters - voters and leaders alike - are afraid of him and they love his routine and characteristic ugliness. Had Trump not said all the other racist, sexist, xenophobic, hateful, divisive things he has said, had he done this kind of thing exactly once, he would be getting the same "pass" you think Clinton got for making a deplorable statement exactly once: America's Editors would not have demanded his censure.

J. Calpezzo
3 months 1 week ago

Trump is a traitor, a racist, and a fraud. And so are his supporters

J Cosgrove
3 months ago

Unbelievably un-Christian statement. You just called millions of people racist because you don’t understand another point of view.

Douglas Fang
3 months 1 week ago

As usual, there are some die-hard Trump believers/followers who would defend him no matter how despicable his words/actions are… Luckily, there are honest and courageous people like the Editors of this Magazine who speak up the truth about his latest tweets… “…Go back to your country…”

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-07-15/trump-s-racist-tweet-most-vile-made-by-a-recent-president

It brings tears to my eyes when I saw this video about the last speech of President Reagan:
https://twitter.com/ValaAfshar/status/1117039035657142272

To tell the truth, the Republican party of Reagan no longer exits. It is now the Trump party.

As an immigrant myself, more than once, someone asked me why I didn’t speak English with my spouse, who was also an immigrant…

These white nationalists are now rejoicing when they see that the POTUS is now speaking their same language.

Is the American Idea dead???

Cecilia Gonzalez-Andrieu
3 months 1 week ago

Thank you to my colleagues at America for telling the truth, the role of the prophet, and denouncing in no uncertain terms behavior that should make every single Catholic pause and take stock. We can no longer be silent and pretend that hatred of neighbor, attacks on the poor and the sick, turning away the stranger, and not feeding the hungry, not welcoming the children, and doing all manner of evil being tolerated and covered up by the Republican party is something we can tolerate any more as Catholics who believe in a loving God. I am grateful for your voice.

Charles Morgan
3 months 1 week ago

This editorial is short on reason and long on name calling and isn't that the crux of the problem for which you are condemning Trump? Unfortunately, for me this editorial is representative of what the Jesuits have become and it saddens me. Note that I didn't call you a name.

Eugene Fitzpatrick
3 months 1 week ago

The editorial is eminently logical and eschews name calling. It’s a bit lame when your need to express negativity clashes with the editorial’s patently clear verbalization presented right in front of your eyes.

J Cosgrove
3 months ago

How does it eschew name calling when it calls someone a racist?

J Jones
3 months 1 week ago

The federal EEOC explicitly cites "go back to where you came from" as an example of illegal workplace racial harassment and discrimination. https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5d2e815de4b085eda5a390cc

Alan Johnstone
3 months 1 week ago

I agree Charles.

Crystal Watson
3 months 1 week ago

I agree - Trump and his Republican toadies should apologize. They won't, of course. There's no doubt anymore that Trump is a racist, a sexist, a crook, a liar, and a sociopath. I don't know how his followers can live with themselves.

Michael Bindner
3 months 1 week ago

Their duty is to force him to resign or vote him out in impeachment.

FRAN ABBOTT
3 months 1 week ago

Even more reprehensible that being racist, xenophobic and sexist is USING racism, xenophobia and sexism to get what you want, and I believe that that is exactly what Trump is doing. He will say anything, stop at nothing to achieve his goals, which obviously include an imperial presidency. Thank you, editors, for your stance on this atrocity.

joan knothe
3 months 1 week ago

Very on point.....imho.
Thank you.

Lisa Weber
3 months 1 week ago

Thank you for calling out bigotry and defending decency in public discourse. The damage this occupant of the White House is doing will last a long time past his miserable, hate-filled life.

arthur mccaffrey
3 months 1 week ago

just curious to know if America editors ever think that this gang of four ever say anything reprehensible? All the criticism seems to be very one-sided--is it really that simplistic?

J Jones
3 months 1 week ago

Congress sanctioned Representativee Tlalib for her use of the anti-Semitic trope "it's all about the Benjamins" in her statements about the outsized power of an Israeli group that lobbies the US government and donates huge amounts of money to the GOP. Few people disagreed that her words on Twitter were anti-Semitic; most disagreement was with calls for the House to sanction her as it remained institutionally mum about the repeated White Supremacist statements of GOP Representative Steve King. Criticism of Israel is not the same thing as criticizing Jews, a reality reinforced by the fact that many Jews - inside and outside Israel - protest Israeli policy and the influence Israel has on US policy, for example, re : the rest of the Middle East and the Palestinians in particular. Tlalib is critical of Israel's state treatment of Palestinians and she is critical of US policy that diminishes and dismisses the Palestinian people and she used a reprehensible anti-Semitic trope to criticize both. She got her a** nailed for it.

Rep Omar made an inarticulate reference to the (predominantly) Saudi Muslim criminals responsible for 9/11 and how that crime of epic proportions has used in the US to demonize and smear and slander and ban Muslims in general. It never ceases to amaze me --- and all of the Muslims I know --- that all too often the very people who use 9/11 against all Muslims tend to be mum on our ongoing relationship with Saudi Arabia, the home country of the vast majority of the 9/11 criminal masterminds and direct actors.

As far as I know, Tlalib's anti-Semitic comment is the only "reprehensible" -by which I assume you mean morally reprehensible - comment one of these elected officials have made. If you mean people disagree with their politics, well, Kevin, welcome to the United States with it's Constitution that guarantees every elected leader and every citizen the right to disagree with you.

Laura Gonzalez
3 months 1 week ago

It was Omar who made the comment about money, not Tlaib. There was also a comment about loyalty or something, that was considered "anti-Semitic." However, she didn't mention Jews, her detractors just assumed she did. In fact, it is Christian Zionists who have a divided loyalty much more than American Jews. And for all this talk of anti-Semitism, I don't remember any Republicans condemning the Charlottesville thugs marching and chanting "Jews will not replace us." In fact, Trump said there were "good people on both sides."
Ironically enough, Tlaib should take up Trump's offer to return to her "homeland." And then could all other Palestinians have Right of Return as well? Oh, Israel will lose it's mind, what's left of it.

J Jones
3 months 1 week ago

Laura, thanks for the clarification. You are correct. Tlalib was responding to pro-Israeli US politicians who criticized her right as an American citizen and elected Congresswoman to exercise freedom of speech through a boycott of Israel for its treatment of the Palestinians and for get decision to boycott an AIPAC-sponsored Congressional trip to Israel and to instead organize a Congressional trip to Palestine. She was asking why they weren't most committed to the American ideal of freedom of speech as expressed through boycotts (remember the Boston Tea Party anyone?) Givrn our history as a nation with accusations of dual loyalties (the internment of Japanese citizens during WWII, the treatment of citizens in or believed to be members of the Communist party, etc), it is a serious mistake to accuse any American of dual loyalties. Some refreshment of US history was in order and she was rightly condemned for that word choice. She was 100% correct in her observation that they abandoned their sworn commitment to the American Constitutional right to freedom of speech when they denied her Constitutional right to boycott Israel because of their support for Israel. Both can be and ARE true.

rose-ellen caminer
3 months 1 week ago

The word Benjamin is not an anti Semitic trope.That's BS.She did not say Abe's; no Abe is on a bill.The word Benjamin is a hip hop in the hood term meaning money. Rep.Omar speaks like one from the hood.That is not derogatory; it is a sociological observation.To not know this or discount it, as much of the media and the anti Omar politicians are doing and even some defending her are ignorantly doing ,enables one to make things up to further smear her for using what in her societal mileau is not a loaded word but is a common word for money.

Do you have to hate Jews to believe that AIPAC is a powerful lobby?Do you have to hate Jews to say that lobby's need money to be powerful?Do you have to hate Jews to condemn Netanyahu? Do you have to hate Jews to oppose Israeli policies.?She never mentioned Jews but is being smeared as anti Semitic , by pro Netanyahu, pro AIPAIC/Trump right wing Israeli supporters to discredit criticism of Israel. There's your anti Semitism; against anyone who sides with the [Semitic]Palestinians in that conflict, and opposes Netanyahu/Trumps polices. And then again against Muslims[Semitic religion]like Omar who don't tow the pro Netanyahu, AIPAIC,Trump anti Palestinian line .
When AOC was on Firing Line shortly after being elected, and being vetted by the host, she was asked about the Israel /Palestinian conflict. AOC expressed moral indignation that the Israeli military was shooting at demonstrators and had killed some.The host of Firing Line was caught of guard by this comment and ,This educated, woman responded by saying;well they don't have a constitution! Meaning that demonstrators have a right to not be shot at only if they have a constitution?Of course she does not believe this,nonsensical reply, but such a stupid comment underscores how she just reflexively sides with the Israelis and how she does not regard the Palestinians as worthy of any human rights like the right to live.There is your anti Semitism; directed at Semitic Palestinians.That Muslim Reps are challenging this reflexive anti Palestinian.pro is Netanyahu ,pro right wing AIPAC policies that are virtual sacred cows, and are being attacked as Jew haters for it, hopefully will not succeed in shutting them up in their defense of the Palestinians in that conflict with Israel.

J Jones
3 months 1 week ago

Rose Ellen, I agree with 99% of what you say here. Where I disagree is that Jews/money/power IS a historical anti-Semitic trope and, while I do agree 100% that it is fair and NOT racist to question and criticize the relationship between AIPAC, Israel and US policy and politicians and the impact on the Palestinians, I believe it is also essential that antu-Semitst language be strictly avoided just any and every other racist language should be strictly avoided.

rose-ellen caminer
3 months 1 week ago

Point taken. When she was called out for her use of that word, she did apologize,I believe, for the offense she gave. But ones awareness that anti Semites connect Jews with money and influence, cannot mean that one must never mention except as a positive, the existence of the AIPAC lobby.Which is what right wing Israel/AIPAC supporters want and have been complacent about. Till Omar [ a real expansion of US democracy that someone genuinely seeped in hood culture was even elected] pushed back against.

J Jones
3 months 1 week ago

I agree 100%.

Vince Killoran
3 months 1 week ago

Trumps comment was despicable, but I don't see the "constitutional duty" element.

John Walton
3 months 1 week ago

Query -- where did race enter into any of Trump's remarks? For the left, charging someone with "racism" just means that "you're not as far to the left as I would like."

For the record, one of the subjects of Trump's remarks is a noted anti-Semite and supporter of Hamas and Hizballah, both on the State Department list of terrorist organizations since 1997.

joan knothe
3 months 1 week ago

Love it or Leave it...
Should not be used regarding Church or State....in the same way the People are the Church...so we are America.....in all of our multifaceted diversity and views.

Laura Gonzalez
3 months 1 week ago

Seriously? "Where did race enter into" it? Are you not familiar with US history? Do you not know this is an age-old racist trope? It's been used since the Know Nothings. You obviusly do not have your finger on race relations in this country, so stop pretending.

None of the women is anti-Semitic or a supporter of those organizations. Both Omar and Tlaib have criticized, and rightly so, the hold that Israel has on this country, and the slanted view of msm. And speaking of anti-Semitism, did Trump speak out against the men chanting "Jews will not replace us"? Remember, he said there were good people on both sides.

rose-ellen caminer
3 months ago

None of them expressed hatred for Jews.Support of the Palestinians , in their conflict with Israel, does not mean you hate Jews. Believing that siding with the Palestinians makes you a Jew hater, is anti Semitism; directed at Semitic Palestinians. Labeling people as anti Semitic Jew haters for their support of Palestinians is a powerful propaganda trope used to silence criticism of Israel AND to dehumanize Palestinians. Omar and Thalib are hip to that and were not cowed by that. Unless they cow tow to AIPAC beliefs,and unless they do a million mea culpas for terrorism, unless they tow the line by saying that Alquada attacked us for not being Muslim, and not that we got attacked as blowback for our policies, they will be vilified anyway just for being Muslim, by Muslim hating anti Semites. It is illegal to support any terrorist organization. It does not mean that one can't believe that they should not be declared terrorist organizations OR that the Israeli military/Mossad hit squads should also be declared terrorist organizations..

ALTONETTE STONE
3 months 1 week ago

Trump expressed anger and complaints about America through his entire presidential campaign. He continues to make bigoted remarks about Hispanics, Muslims and Blacks along with falsely claiming President Obama was not born in America. Often he talks in code. Apparently, Trump believes he has a "right" to express displeasure with America which he claimed was a mess. But, women of color cannot express their concerns. Yesterday, the four women stated they love America. He certainly continues to make bigoted statements and anyone who agrees with his statements is as bigoted as him. It is suspect that only certain people can complain but when people of color express concerns they are told to go back from which they came. Well, most of these folks ancestors have been here for hundreds of years. This is their country, so get over it already, Trump and supporters.

Crystal Watson
3 months 1 week ago

The Director of the Anti-Defamation League speaks out against Trump and his effort to drag Israel into his racist rant ... https://youtu.be/7rRy5gql3lc

Adeolu Ademoyo
3 months 1 week ago

I will like to thank the editors of America Magazine for once again standing up for our faith, decency, reason and common sense. I have argued on this platform before, and I will say it again that the relation between racism and Christianity is contradictory and antagonistic. The two beliefs are fiercely antagonistic and irreconcilable. The contradiction between the two cannot be resolved. So, one cannot plausibly combine the two, and not irreparably damage Christianity and inflict deep wounds on our faith-the Christian faith . Yes you can be racist and pretend to be a Christian, but very soon in the fullness of time your cover will be blown off and you will be seen for who you are-someone who is not a christian but who is pretending to be one.

You are either a racist or a Christian. You cannot be both. One cannot simultaneously be a racist and a Christian and vice versa. One has to abandon one for the other. I challenge anyone to show the readers based on the Word of God, the nature of our faith Christianity, the Gospel and the scriptures how one can be a racist and a Christian at the same time. Christians who continue to support Mr. Trump, his racism, xenophobia, hatred and bigotry have put our faith on the line. Good enough, we have the editors of America Magazine to thank for strongly standing up in defense of our faith against racism.

My second point is pretty straightforward. Mr. Donald Trump launched his 2016 presidential campaign criticizing America and the then president Barak Obama. To Mr. Trump, America was hell, America was not good under the then President Obama. When Mr. Trump criticized the then President Obama and the administration of the country under President Obama, nobody said that Mr. Trump should go back to where he or his ancestors-maternal and paternal- came from. If the four congress women-Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who are not of the same gender, ethnic and racial background as Mr. Trump, criticized America the way Mr. Trump did under President Obama, and they-the four Congresswomen are asked to go back to where they came from and no one told Mr. Trump the same thing, then that is classic structural racism. The questions are: As the saying goes, is what is good for the goose no longer good for the gander? What gave Mr. Trump the warrant to criticize America under President Obama while the four congresswomen cannot ? Is it the difference in the color of Mr. Trump’s skin and that of the congresswomen? Is it the difference in their gender, race and ethnic background?

Those who still defend Mr. Trump have the moral duty to respond to this double standard which is nothing but structural racism. Once again, I thank the editors of America Magazine for standing up for our faith-the Christian faith, reason, common sense and decency.

J Jones
3 months 1 week ago

Well said, Adeolu. Thank you.

Advertisement

The latest from america

The connection between the Amazon region and the church in the United States runs deeper than it might first appear.
Kevin JacksonOctober 22, 2019
A fire burns a tract of Amazon jungle on Sept. 2, 2019, as it is cleared by a farmer in Machadinho do Oeste, Brazil. The Brazilian Catholic bishops are pressuring the government to guarantee the safety of several Amazonian indigenous peoples. (CNS photo/Ricardo Moraes, Reuters)
Rainforests are not the only things under threat in the Amazon region. There has also been an uptick in violence against native peoples: land invasions, illegal exploitation of natural resources and damage caused by invaders of indigenous lands went from 96 in 2017 to 109 in 2018.
Eduardo Campos LimaOctober 22, 2019
photo from iStock by RedEye
While climbing down off a freight train in western Texas, I committed to giving my life to God.
Andrew Robert LaBarreOctober 22, 2019
Truth and beauty can be found outside the walls of church, in a space that belongs to those who worship differently.
Jordan Denari DuffnerOctober 22, 2019