Democrats trying to unseat each other III

[Derec]

'I Don't Give a F*ck About AIPAC,' Says Mark Pocan - "It's time to call them out for what they are—a front group for conservative policy here in the U.S.—instead of being afraid of them."

This article is by "Common Dreams" - another far left, anti-Israel site. You really know how to pick your sources.
And the reason AIPAC has to support more conservative candidates is that the so-called "progressive" ones are usually anti-Israel. like Mark Pocan himself.

"I don't give a fuck about AIPAC—period," Pocan (D-Wis.) told Slate politics writer Alexander Sammon. "I think they're a cancerous presence on our democracy and politics in general, and if I can be a surgeon, that's great."

Cancerous presence? Sounds pretty antisemitic to me.
I am pretty sure he does not consider groups like CAIR (which has ties to Hamas and whose director was "happy to see" the 10/7 massacre) a "a cancerous presence" even though, unlike AIPAC, they actually are that.

"The reason I'm poking the bear is because they've become a Trojan bear," Pocan explained. "AIPAC at least pretended to be bipartisan when I first got [to Congress]. Now they're basically a wholly owned subsidiary of the GOP."

That is BS. But I do not fault them for supporting a GOP candidate against anti-Israel Democrats like Tlaib, Omar et al. It is ultimately the Democrats' fault for selecting anti-Israel extremists to run for office.

Mark Pocan on X: "What @AIPAC doesn’t tell you is they raise money from big Republican donors & spend it in Democratic primaries against Democrats.

If you are involved in the Democratic primary you will spend your money against one Democrat or another. That is true of "progressive" groups as well - they also "spend [money] in Democratic primaries against Democrats", it's just that they spend it against moderate Democrats.

It’s a cynical, undemocratic strategy.

How is it "undemocratic"? Should only far-left and anti-Israel groups be allowed to spend money in Democratic primaries?

And since they clearly don’t care about dead, kids, it’s all about backing a conservative Netanyahu position." / X

I was wondering when he would bring out that cudgel. What about dead Israeli kids his friends from Hamas murdered?

They actively boost candidates who tried to overthrow the US election & run smear campaigns on members of Congress who stand up for human rights. Enough" / X

Islamic terrorism is not a "human right". Massacring Israelis is not a "human right".

 

[Derec]

Mark Pocan on X: "I should be glad to get tagged regularly by the GOP/Netanyahu front group @AIPAC. Without me, their tags would be all people of color, showing their generally more racial approach to their conservative politics. At least the more they tweet the more they expose themselves." / X

Doesn't the fact that they are also going after him prove that it is not about "color" (which fauxgressives want to make everything about) but about their political positions?
That said, the disproportionate number of Democrats "of color" (so-called, we whites have a skin color too!) that are anti-Israel is indeed concerning.

"Bluntly, a lot of what they've been doing is just going after women of color," Pocan told Slate. "I believe the reason I'm even thrown into the loop is because I'm a white guy, which gives them a bit of cover."

No, he is in the loop because of your politics, just like they.
People like Pocan want to make it about race and gender, because that helps them vilify their opponents.

AIPAC literally ran ads with my face next to Hamas rockets, resulting in a string of threats against my life.

Ilhan Omar has been against Israel defending itself from Hamas attacks for over a decade. Remember her 2012 tweet where she called Israel defending itself from Hamas rockets "evil doings"?

When Democratic Leadership called them out, they refused to apologize and kept the ads up.

Democratic leadership should be calling out Omar and other anti-Israel Dems.

What they are doing is insulting and Islamophobic.

How is it "islamophobic"? It criticizes Omar's anti-Israel stance, not her religion.

You cannot claim to be progressive while launching a Super PAC that exclusively targets progressives and supports Republicans in the general.

If those fauxgressives are opposed to Israel, then why shouldn't AIPAC support their opponents, regardless of party affiliation?

 

[Derec]

Bernie Sanders on X: ".@AIPAC has supported dozens of GOP extremists who are undermining our democracy. They’re now working hard to defeat progressive members of Congress. We won’t let that happen. Let us stand together in the fight for a world of peace, economic and social justice and climate sanity." / X

Bernie has really fallen far and hard since 2016. He used to be an independent thinker back then, but no more. Him selecting somebody like the antisemitic Linda "the Cockroach" Sarsour as a surrogate in 2020 says everything you need to know about Bernie's shameful downfall.

AIPAC has spent lavishly on both Republicans and non-progressive Democrats and was the number one donor to both House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) during the last election cycle. The group has also been a top contributor to lawmakers like Reps. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) and Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.), who not only vocally support Israel, but also attack colleagues like Tlaib and Omar for their pro-Palestinian views. AIPAC was by far Gottheimer's largest contributor in the 2022 electoral cycle, donating more than $216,000 to his campaign. The same goes for Torres, who received over $141,000 from the group during the same period.

So they are donating in a bipartisan fashion to people that support their cause. And they oppose candidates that oppose their cause. What's wrong with that?
It is unfortunate that so-called "progressivism" has become so tightly linked to hatred of Israel. There are some notable exceptions, like John Fetterman.

Mark Pocan on X: "Little sisterish groups ..." / X
Little sisterish groups of @AIPAC are now running false & racially-charged ads against @RashidaTlaib.

"Sisterish" is dismissive language. And how is criticizing Rashida Tlaib "racially charged"? Especially since she is as white as I am. Being Muslim does not make somebody automatically "brown".

Lies and distortions won’t save the lives of children in Israel or Palestine. No member supports Hamas attacks. We need to be better.

I have not seen Pocan et al criticize Palestinians or groups like CAIR. They reserve all criticism for Israel and AIPAC.

talmon joseph smith on X: "NYT: "More than 90% of Palestinians in the territory say they have regularly gone without food for a whole day, according to the United Nations." (pic link)" / X

Starting wars has consequences. In other words, "fuck around and find out".
There is food and other supplies entering the Strip through Rafah and Kerem Shalom crossings, but much of it gets diverted by Hamas.

Mark Pocan on X: "Let’s do this again, @AIPAC. ..." / X
Let’s do this again, @AIPAC. Not one peep from you on the NYT article re: conditions caused by Netanyahu’s attacks that are starving people in Gaza.

Pocan has it back-asswards. It was not "Netanyahu's attack". It was the attack by Hamas where they murdered over 1000 Israelis and kidnapped hundreds others. Everything that has happened over the last 13 weeks is due to this attack. And yet Pocan is blaming the victims for defending themselves.

Prior to the war supplies flowed more easily. Now starvation. Illegal acts of war?

Supplies do not flow as easily during times of war. He just realized that? That happens in every war.
But who started this war? He should be blaming Hamas and other Palestinians (including many in the US, such as the CAIR who cheered as Hamas was massacring Israelis on 10/7.

Now your turn to call Netanyahu out for this.

Netanyahu is to blame for intelligence and defense lapses. The buck stops at his desk.
But he did not start this war. Palestinians did. Blame lies with them.

 

[Derec]

So they hate RT so much that they would replace her with someone much like her.

Which is why I am quite skeptical of these claims.

 

[Swammerdami]

... Sounds pretty antisemitic to me.
... anti-Israel Democrats ... anti-Israel extremists
... far-left and anti-Israel groups...
...

And since they clearly don’t care about dead, kids, it’s all about backing a conservative Netanyahu position." / X

I was wondering when he would bring out that cudgel. What about dead Israeli kids his friends from Hamas murdered?

They actively boost candidates who tried to overthrow the US election & run smear campaigns on members of Congress who stand up for human rights. Enough" / X

Islamic terrorism is not a "human right". Massacring Israelis is not a "human right".

Hi Derec! Rational thought has to start somewhere, even if it's just with "baby steps." Lets start here with a question of simple arithmetic:

Which number is bigger? 31,000 or 1389? Choose from answer A or answer B.
A. 31,000 is a larger number than 1389.
B. 1389 is a larger number than 31,000.

These are the numbers killed or missing in the Israel-Hamas War, Palestinians and Israelis respectively. From your writings one might guess that every murder of a Palestinian baby brings you great joy, and that you wish Palestinian casualties were even higher. (You will almost certainly get your wish.) Every Palestinian baby is an evil terrorist in your opinion.

Understanding humanitarian values and the road to recovery may be very difficult for you. That's why I start with a simple arithmetic problem. Is 31,000 a larger number than 1389? This is an "open-book" quiz. Feel free to use a calculator.

 

[Derec]

Hi Derec! Rational thought has to start somewhere, even if it's just with "baby steps."

Could not agree more! I just hope you start with "rational thought" sometime soon.

Lets start here with a question of simple arithmetic:
Which number is bigger? 31,000 or 1389? Choose from answer A or answer B.
A. 31,000 is a larger number than 1389.
B. 1389 is a larger number than 31,000.

You commit the cardinal error of thinking that the side with more casualties is also the side that is in the right.
That fallacy is common among leftists but that does not make it any less fallacious.

From your writings one might guess that every murder of a Palestinian baby brings you great joy, and that you wish Palestinian casualties were even higher.

It brings me no joy whatsoever! But, unlike you, I recognize that these casualties are the fault of Hamas, just like civilian casualties in Dresden or Berlin were the fault of the Nazis. Hamas started this war with genocidal intent. That much is beyond rational dispute.

(You will almost certainly get your wish.) Every Palestinian baby is an evil terrorist in your opinion.

Disgusting libel!

Understanding humanitarian values and the road to recovery may be very difficult for you.

I understand humanitarian values. From a humanitarian perspective, it is necessary to fight evil, even if innocent victims suffer in the process. That is because evil, if allowed to fester and spread, will result in far more innocent victims suffering. Nazis were evil. Hamas is evil. So are ayatollahs in Tehran.

That's why I start with a simple arithmetic problem. Is 31,000 a larger number than 1389? This is an "open-book" quiz. Feel free to use a calculator.

The inequality might be simple, but your interpretation of it is simplistic. Both numbers should be on the same side, as they are both caused by what Hamas did on 10/7.

 

[Swammerdami]

Lets start here with a question of simple arithmetic:
Which number is bigger? 31,000 or 1389? Choose from answer A or answer B.
A. 31,000 is a larger number than 1389.
B. 1389 is a larger number than 31,000.

You commit the cardinal error of thinking that the side with more casualties is also the side that is in the right.

How in heaven's name did you derive that conclusion from what I wrote?
The lack of awareness astonishes! ToU prevents me from labeling a fellow Infidel STUPID so we pretend you have a pet racoon that occasionally jumps around on your keyboard composing posts over which you have no control. That racoon has remakable English fluency, but boy is he stupid!

Nobody here is defending Hamas. Write that on the blackboard 100 times. Grow up!

I tried to start you with a 1st-grade problem but your inability to think is even worse than I thought. Back to kindergarten you go!

Scenario: Billy punches Bobby and gives him a black eye. Bobby retaliates by gouging both of Billy's eyes out, blinding him for life.
Question: Was Billy "in the right" to give Bobby a black eye?

That fallacy is common among leftists but that does not make it any less fallacious.

"Leftist leftist leftist. Nanner nanner nanner."
Geez your racoon is stupid. In your diction anyone who opposes genocide becomes a "leftist" -- which to your ilk is worse than "Nazi" or "murderer."

 

[lpetrich]

Lets start here with a question of simple arithmetic:
Which number is bigger? 31,000 or 1389? Choose from answer A or answer B.
A. 31,000 is a larger number than 1389.
B. 1389 is a larger number than 31,000.

You commit the cardinal error of thinking that the side with more casualties is also the side that is in the right.

Derec, since you seem to believe that there is no such thing as disproportionate response, I must ask if you are willing to accept that for yourself. Let's say you make a pass at a woman and she responds by Tasering you then raping you in your rear end with a broom handle and then neutering you with garden shears.

From your writings one might guess that every murder of a Palestinian baby brings you great joy, and that you wish Palestinian casualties were even higher.

It brings me no joy whatsoever! But, unlike you, I recognize that these casualties are the fault of Hamas, just like civilian casualties in Dresden or Berlin were the fault of the Nazis.

No they aren't. In my scenario, your position implies that woman is totally blameless and you raped yourself and neutered yourself.

I must note a classic statement of lex talionis, law of retaliation, Leviticus 24:19-21 in the Bible (NASB 1995):

If a man injures his neighbor, just as he has done, so it shall be done to him: fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; just as he has injured a man, so it shall be inflicted on him. Thus the one who kills an animal shall make it good, but the one who kills a man shall be put to death.

What Israel has now done is far beyond lex talionis.

 

[lpetrich]

Let's get back to the original subject. Democrat vs. Democrat. AIPAC's threats seem to have forced organizations like Justice Democrats into a defensive crouch, fundraising to protect existing Congressmembers rather than to elect new Congressmembers.

Is AIPAC Good for the Jews? - The American Prospect - "The complex connections between the Israel lobby and the rise of antisemitism"

The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations took out a full-page ad in Sunday’s New York Times headlined “Hatred of Israel Is Endangering American Jews.” I had to read that line several times. It could more plausibly have warned that the unqualified embrace of Israel’s policy right or wrong is endangering American Jews. Or that the actions and arrogance of Prime Minister Netanyahu are endangering American Jews.

Then noting that Jews have felt safer in the US than in most other places in the world.

But the demand that American politicians in general and Jewish Americans in particular grant unwavering support for Israel regardless of Israel’s policies contributes to the new increase in antisemitism. This is compounded by the flagrant pressure on universities by billionaire Jewish donors, and the actions of the Israel lobby to spend massive amounts on campaign donations to defeat progressive members of Congress. This plays into two ancient, ugly, and antisemitic tropes: one of Jews as more loyal to their tribe than to their country, the other of Jews using their money to buy influence.

All of this upends a long period in which Jews felt secure, safe, and mostly accepted in the new promised land—America.

Then talking about AIPAC.

The effect of AIPAC’s efforts is to push the Democratic caucus to the right, and not just on Israel. AIPAC widens strains between Blacks and Jews by opposing Black incumbents who are well liked in their districts, as well as between Jews and labor, which needs progressives in Congress.

...
In the United States as elsewhere, Jews as a small minority are only as secure as the tolerance of their non-Jewish neighbors. AIPAC and its allies are spending down a legacy of acceptance that goes back to Jefferson. Yes, there is plenty of antisemitism that has ancient sources. But as new waves of virulent antisemitism increase, some virulent backers of Israel ought to be looking in the mirror.

It's still the fault of those who become anti-Semitic as a result of the US Jewish community defending Israel no matter how nasty it acts and wrapping that nation's actions in Jewishness and saying that it's anti-Semitic to criticize those actions. But it should not be an uphill struggle to avoid becoming anti-Semitic.

 

[lpetrich]

Rep. Mark Pocan is awfully brave.

Mark Pocan on X: "@AIPAC @AOC @JamaalBowmanNY @SummerForPA @CoriBush @Ilhan @RashidaTlaib Zzzzzzzz. Big Republican money conservative group @AIPAC attacking people on another imagined grievance. Setting up their skirting of campaign finance law attempts at auctions instead of elections. People aren’t buying your BS. " / X

Mark Pocan on X: "The truth: @AIPAC is a conservative org, raising money from rich Republicans & tries to buy Democratic primaries with it. It distorts campaign finance law in the worst way. Their big money influence is toxic to democracy. Forget what they claim, look at their record. Toxic money." / X

Mark Pocan on X: "@larrybird19701 @AIPAC Read. What. I. Said. Raised GOP money, spent in Dem primaries to beat some Dems they don’t like. Progressives. Thus spent money on Dems that leaned more conservative in most cases. Counts as “Dem” money but millions in a single race, distorting campaign finance law." / X

Mark Pocan on X: "@AIPAC You continue to lie about your oversized spending that you raise from Republicans & spend disingenuously in Dem primaries. $ more than candidates spend. You & crypto money were the only to do this last cycle. Crypto guy prosecuted. If the NRA did this everyone would complain. " / X

Mark Pocan on X: "Oh good. I thought the conservative dark money group @AIPAC forgot about me for a day. Glad I’m still living rent-free as your token white boy. (Got the feeling your money will be toxic in 2024.) xoxoxo Mark" / X

Mark Pocan on X: "For some of you who don’t know who @AIPAC is, here’s a shot of their website. Did I mention they also endorsed over 100 people who supported overturning state’s electoral college votes to keep Trump President in early 2021? And then there is the GOP dark money…
Sound fun, huh? (pic link)" / X

 

[lpetrich]

Mark Pocan on X: "Once again, @AIPAC lies. I don’t want Hamas to stay armed or in power. Unlike Netanyahu, or apparently AIPAC, collective punishment of all Palestinians could make this a regional war that empowers Hamas. What an awful idea. How about let’s stop killing kids & try for peace?" / X

Mark Pocan on X: "Why does conservative dark money group @AIPAC attack the same members of Congress for caring about peace? Because in reality over 40 to 50 members have called for a cease-fire, but many of them are white. I’m the token white boy to critique. What does that say about this group?" / X
I like that.

Mark Pocan on X: "Have any of the “To Hell With Elections, We Want Auctions” crowd, called out the toxic effect of big money on our democracy & support for insurrection’s in their elections?
Looking at @AIPAC, @NRA, @USChamber, @AFPhq.
Trojan horse money will be toxic in Dem primaries in ‘24." / X
AIPAC's approach is not to talk about Israel very much, but instead to manufacture some other issues.

Mark Pocan on X: "The lie @ AIPAC tells is that money spent on Dems often comes from Republicans and is spent AGAINST some Dems usually for more conservative ones. Technically Dem spending.
Not sure why the truth is so hard for you. But you are more like Republicans than Dems, so there’s that." / X

Mark Pocan on X: "@jwigderson @AIPAC Strategically strike Hamas, not the population in general." / X

Mark Pocan on X: "Noticeably silent. @AIPAC refuses to condemn Netanyahu for his blistering, untargeted attacks on kids in Gaza. Nor will it call out his refusal to consider a two-state solution. What will they condemn? US Members of Congress who want peace. Why? Conservative big money group. " / X

Mark Pocan on X: "Two attacks on me by @AIPAC by 9am.
But no attack on the Pope for calling out bombing in Gaza.
Or attack on news expose on Netanyahu’s false claims on Gaza hospital.
Or attacks on killing of hostages by Netanyahu’s forces.
Some conservative dark money group has bad values." / X

Mark Pocan on X: "My bad. @AIPAC has no conscience. When you raise conservative money from big Republican donors & spend it in Democratic primaries, disingenuously, there is no conscience or moral compass. You’re just one of the conservative special interests that pollutes DC. Toxic dark money." / X

Mark Pocan on X: "@AIPAC @AOC @JamaalBowmanNY @CoriBush @PramilaJayapal @AyannaPressley @SummerForPA @IlhanMN @RashidaTlaib Not one conservative dark money group disingenuously spending Republican money in Dem primaries has called out the brutal attack/response on the Palestinian people by Netanyahu." / X

Thanx to Mark Pocan for being so willing to poke the bear. I can imagine AIPAC's leaders shouting "Primary him! Primary him! There must be someone willing to run against him."

Does he know something that the rest of us don't? Did AIPAC find it hard to recruit a challenger for him?

 

[lpetrich]

Justice Democrats Endorses Chicago Progressive Among First to Call for Gaza Ceasefire - "Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill., is the first candidate to win an endorsement from Justice Democrats for the 2024 cycle."

She's an incumbent, and I think that AIPAC has forced JD into defense of incumbents as opposed to supporting new candidates.

"Recruiting progressive challengers to take on corporate Democratic incumbents and run for open seats is still important to the organization, said Usamah Andrabi, head of communications for Justice Democrats."

As she continues to oppose the war in Gaza, Ramirez is focusing her 2024 campaign on support for tenants rights, Medicare for All, abortion rights, and creating a pathway to citizenship for recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. She is currently running unopposed in the March 19 Democratic primary, and the only current Republican candidate, attorney and former police officer John Booras, is running unopposed in the GOP primary.

But there is a difficulty.
US progressive groups facing ‘five-alarm fire’ ahead of 2024 as donations down | US political financing | The Guardian - Sun 24 Sep 2023 06.30 EDT

Justice Democrats (@justicedems) / X - its banner currently shows

GRIJALVA AZ-03 | KHANNA CA-17 | RAMIREZ IL-03 | PRESSLEY MA-07 | TLAIB MI-12 | OMAR MN-05 | BUSH MO-01 | OCASIO-CORTEZ NY-14 | BOWMAN NY-16 | LEE PA-12 | CASAR TX-35 | JAYAPAL WA-07

 

[lpetrich]

Why I like this new wave of progressive politicians. Their policies are actually good for people, and they don't bend over backward to apologize to the Republican Party for their positions.

The Life-and-Death Cost of Conservative Power - The American Prospect - "New research shows widening gaps between red and blue states in life expectancy."

Conservatives often argue against proposals for public remedy on grounds of futility. Public remedy will be ineffectual, they say, because the problems it is meant to fix arise from intractable social conditions or human nature. When the new Speaker of the House Mike Johnson recently responded to demands for gun regulation after a mass shooting by saying that “at the end of the day” the true problem is not guns but the “human heart,” he was making the futility argument.

...
Since the 1980s, states in Republican hands have increasingly preempted local laws, preventing Democratic-run cities from adopting such policies as tobacco taxes and anti-smoking regulations, paid sick leave, and higher minimum wages.

The other two developments advancing the power of states are the work of the Supreme Court. By striking down the constitutional right to abortion, the Court has given states leeway to adopt diametrically opposed policies on reproductive rights. And by refusing to impose any limits on partisan gerrymandering, the Court has enabled incumbent state parties to expand their legislative majorities and entrench themselves in power.

What is the result?

While life expectancy continued rising in all the high-income countries in the late 20th century, the United States began lagging behind its peers. By 2006, it ranked last, and after 2014, life expectancy in this country began falling. The pattern, however, varies considerably across states.

noting
From Backwaters to Major Policymakers: Policy Polarization in the States, 1970–2014 | Perspectives on Politics | Cambridge Core
and
US State Policies, Politics, and Life Expectancy - MONTEZ - 2020 - The Milbank Quarterly - Wiley Online Library

Some US state policies appear to be key levers for improving life expectancy, such as policies on tobacco, labor, immigration, civil rights, and the environment.

US life expectancy is estimated to be 2.8 years longer among women and 2.1 years longer among men if all US states enjoyed the health advantages of states with more liberal policies, which would put US life expectancy on par with other high-income countries.

Back to The American Prospect.

Connecticut and Oklahoma were the two states whose policies shifted the most, Connecticut toward the liberal side and Oklahoma toward the conservative side. In 1959, life expectancy in both states was 71.1 years; by 2017, it had increased to 80.7 years in Connecticut but only to 75.8 years in Oklahoma.

The Era of Progress on Gun Mortality: State Gun Regulations... : Epidemiology - "We find strong, consistent evidence supporting the hypothesis that restrictive state gun policies reduce overall gun deaths, homicides committed with a gun, and suicides committed with a gun."

The shift of policymaking to the states is often justified on grounds of federalism and the belief that decisions should be left to the level of government closest to the people. But if conservatives genuinely believed in that principle, would they be agitating now for a national law to ban abortion? Would they be hoping that the Supreme Court continues to strike down state and local gun restrictions? Would they continue to support decisions by state legislatures to preempt local laws? What unites the right is not a principled belief in federalism or local control but a preference for making decisions at whatever level of government they dominate.

 

[lpetrich]

Then Jamelle Bouie's Opinion | Red States and Blue States Are Becoming Different Countries - The New York Times

It’s the “anti-woke” policymaking of Gov. Ron DeSantis’s Florida, from laws that stigmatize L.G.B.T.Q. students and teachers in public school classrooms to an assault on higher education that has driven professors out of state. “What we are witnessing in Florida is an intellectual reign of terror,” LeRoy Pernell, a law professor at Florida A&M University, said in an interview with a special committee of the American Association of University Professors.

Then Republican-state anti-trans legislation, also anti-abortion and gerrymandering. By contrast, Maryland, Michigan, and Minnesota politicians passed lots of good legislation.

For Democrats, that purpose is usually the public good. For Republicans, that purpose is harsh social regulation, with little apparent regard for the lives of those who have to endure these policies.

 

[lpetrich]

Hakeem Jeffries Bucks AIPAC, Endorses Squad Member Summer Lee - "The House Democratic leadership, normally staunch allies of AIPAC, bucked the Israel lobby in favor of incumbent progressive Summer Lee."

Members of the House Democratic leadership have mostly remained close to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee even as it sought to unseat Democratic incumbents. On Wednesday, though, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., bucked AIPAC, a major donor, and endorsed Lee. House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., and House Minority Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., joined Jeffries in the endorsement.

“A civil rights champion, advocate for organized labor and the first Black woman to represent Pennsylvania in Congress, Summer Lee has worked tirelessly to deliver for working families,” the three leaders said in a statement Wednesday morning. They added that Lee had fought for good union jobs and reproductive rights since her first day in Congress and would help oppose “the extreme MAGA Republican agenda” in Pennsylvania.

What's going on here? Do they feel stabbed in the back by AIPAC? After attacking progressive candidates in the 2022 primaries, AIPAC refused to support Democrats in the general elections of that year, and it supported some 100 election-denying Republicans in that election.

Summer Lee:

“Our progressive movement is creating a blueprint, not just for Western Pennsylvania, but for our entire country for what it looks like to beat Trumpism by leading with compassion and equity and justice,” Lee said in the statement, released Wednesday morning. Lee’s primary opponents include Bhavini Patel, a borough council member in Edgewood, Pennsylvania, and Laurie MacDonald, who leads a victims services organization in Pennsylvania and describess in a new tab herself as a moderate.

Noting
AIPAC Targets Black Democrats — And the Congressional Black Caucus Stays Silent - "AIPAC has given at least $3.6 million to the CBC’s old guard since last year, while members of the Squad draw the Israel lobby’s ire." - September 21 2023, 6:00 a.m.

According to three sources with knowledge of the recruiting process, who asked for anonymity to protect professional relationships, AIPAC asked Pittsburgh-area Democrat Lindsay Powell to challenge Rep. Summer Lee, D-Penn.; Powell declined. Allegheny County Controller Corey O’Connor also declined an AIPAC invitation to challenge Lee, according to two of the sources. (Powell declined to comment, and O’Connor did not respond to a request for comment.)

Bhavini Patel, a council member in the city of Edgewood, Pennsylvania, is reportedly planning to run against Lee. Jewish Insider reportedOpens in a new tab that it was unable to confirm if AIPAC had met with Patel. (Patel did not respond to a request for comment.)

 

[lpetrich]

Jessica Cisneros seems like she won't be challenging Henry Cuellar again this time around.

I checked on who is in the race using Ballotpedia

• AOC, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib, Delia Ramirez, Greg Casar, Pramila Jayapal: no D challengers
• Cori Bush: Wesley Bell
• Maxwell Alejandro Frost: Vibert White
• Mondaire Jones (attempting a return): MaryAnn Carr
• Summer Lee: Laurie MacDonald, Bhavini Patel
• Ilhan Omar: Sarah Gad, Tim Peterson, Don Samuels (trying again)
• Jamaal Bowman: Marty Dolan, Michael Gerald, George Latimer

MTG-like Republican Tina Forte is running again against AOC.

 

[Derec]

Justice Democrats Endorses Chicago Progressive Among First to Call for Gaza Ceasefire - "Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill., is the first candidate to win an endorsement from Justice Democrats for the 2024 cycle."

And yet again you are using the rabidly anti-Israel "The Intercept" as your source.
Ramirez is either pro-Hamas or else she is a useful idiot.
What does she think a "ceasefire" would mean? It would mean Hamas staying in power. It would mean Hamas rearming, recruiting more fighters and rebuilding their tunnels so they can attack Israel again in a few years, like they vowed to do.
No, the only sensible ceasefire is the one after Hamas is thoroughly defeated.

One other thing. There has been a lot of destruction throughout Gaza. It is different than previous wars, where air strikes and ground operations involved relatively limited areas - usually so-called "refugee camps" like Jabaliyah or Shati or neighborhoods like Shujaiya, all of which are hotbeds of Hamas support. This time the operation are all over the Strip. The reconstruction will take much longer (more than a decade for sure, and likely close to two) and cost a lot of money (>$20G probably). But if Hamas is still in power, and they attack Israel again, all the started reconstruction projects would be for nothing, as Israel would again be forced to defend itself. No, removing Hamas is a necessary condition for any lasting ceasefire and for restoring Gaza to a functional state.

She's an incumbent, and I think that AIPAC has forced JD into defense of incumbents as opposed to supporting new candidates.

Good. She deserves to be primaried. This Delilah wants Israel to cut its proverbial hair off.

"Recruiting progressive challengers to take on corporate Democratic incumbents and run for open seats is still important to the organization, said Usamah Andrabi, head of communications for Justice Democrats."

The fact that so many Muslims are in senior positions of these far left outfits explains in part why they are so staunchly and rabidly anti-Israel.
Also Usamah (aka Osama)? That's like calling your kid Adolf.

 

[Derec]

Hakeem Jeffries Bucks AIPAC, Endorses Squad Member Summer Lee - "The House Democratic leadership, normally staunch allies of AIPAC, bucked the Israel lobby in favor of incumbent progressive Summer Lee."

Bad move by Hakeem. Summer Lee needs to go.
By the way, that name:

(Oldie, but goodie)

 

[Derec]

Mark Pocan on X: "Once again, @AIPAC lies. I don’t want Hamas to stay armed or in power. Unlike Netanyahu, or apparently AIPAC, collective punishment of all Palestinians could make this a regional war that empowers Hamas. What an awful idea. How about let’s stop killing kids & try for peace?" / X

How does he envision destroying Hamas without military force?
And since Hamas hides behind civilians, there will be a lot of civilian casualties. That is on Hamas though.

Just like with Delilah Ramirez, what does Pocan think a "ceasefire" would accomplish?

 

[Derec]

Rep. Mark Pocan is awfully brave.

Don't know about being "brave" (what danger is he putting himself in?) but he sure seems to be suffering from Twitter diarrhea.