Thank you Fox News for the list of people to vote out of office during elections
It weird be weird to expect anything else from the democratic party and its hard capitalist alignment.
Jeffries will out-shill every last corporate boot licker, or die trying.
It’s Primary time!
Remember how hours ago AOC said now is not the time to primary Hakeem.
Pepperidge farms is feeling fucking gaslit af something something remembers…
AOC (or Mandami) is not the critical approver to primary Jeffries. Her being publicly at war with the minority leader of her party for the next year doesn’t do anything useful, so let her avoid answering. It doesn’t mean she’s a class traitor or has given up on progressivism. Nancy Pelosi “endorsed” progressive Democrats all the time. It didn’t mean she was their friend and it didn’t make centrists any more likely to vote for them in a primary. And this isn’t even an endorsement, it’s just dodging the question.
Third party time.
Fucken ass lickers. They’re already living off of some bastardized version of socialism the corpos create for them to do this heinous shit.
Hakeem, why do you hate libraries?
Did anybody read the resolution? Nah.
Democrats on Capitol Hill have dismissed the Republicans broadsides over Mamdani, and party leaders criticized the GOP-written measure ahead of Friday’s vote, saying it “selectively lists certain despotic leaders and the harms of totalitarian regimes self-labeled as ‘socialist.’”
They did not, however, formally recommend a no vote. A swath of moderate Democrats, especially from New York, are uncomfortable with Mamdani’s rise in their party.
The debate over the symbolic measure was derailed for about 10 minutes after Rep. Maria Salazar (R-Fla.) verbally attacked Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) on the floor, accusing her of being a “friend” of the late Cuban dictator Fidel Castro despite traveling to the country and seeing the abuses of his regime.
The resolution, H.Con.Res. 58 reads:
Denouncing the horrors of socialism.
- Whereas socialist ideology necessitates a concentration of power that has, time and time again, collapsed into communist regimes, totalitarian rule, and brutal dictatorships;
- Whereas socialism has repeatedly led to famine and mass murders, and the killing of over 100,000,000 people worldwide;
- Whereas many of the greatest crimes in history were committed by socialist ideologues, including Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, Pol Pot, Kim Jong Il, Kim Jong Un, Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chavez, and Nicolás Maduro;
- Whereas tens of millions died in the Bolshevik Revolution, at least 10,000,000 people were sent to the gulags in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and millions more starved in the Terror-Famine (Holodomor) in Ukraine;
- Whereas between 15,000,000 and 55,000,000 people starved to death in the wake of famine and devastation caused by the Great Leap Forward in China;
- Whereas the socialist experiment in Cambodia led to the killing fields in which over a million people were gruesomely murdered;
- Whereas up to 3,500,000 people have starved in North Korea, dividing a land of freedom from a land of destitution;
- Whereas the Castro regime in Cuba expropriated the land of Cuban farmers and the businesses of Cuban entrepreneurs, stealing their possessions and their livelihoods, and exiling millions with nothing but the clothes on their backs;
- Whereas the implementation of socialism in Venezuela has turned a once-prosperous country into a failed State with the highest rate of inflation in the world;
etc., etc. You get the idea. RepubliQans talking shit to whip their base up and take some mo back from the Dems. Vote No = you love genocide. Vote Yes = you hate socialism.
Pure bullshit, but sure. Dems bad. Fine.
Say that minds me, where’s the socialist candidates for House Rep? 11 months away! Put up or get nothin’.
My biggest beef with this isn’t that some Dems voted for it. It seems like I should criticize them because their policies are too conservative for me. But in reality, they have to politic and are constrained by same shitty rules as everybody else.
No, I’m more concerned with the idea that you can just tell a lie and have that be voted on in Congress. The fact that there are outright lies in the resolution, to me means that it shouldn’t even be allowed to come to a vote.
Where was the senate parliamentarian on this one?!
Agree.
Those societies they mentioned were also largely authoritarian, nationalist, xenophobic, isolationist, with state-controlled media and single-party rule. Sound familiar?
Indeed.
Aren’t you allowed to just vote present? Or not vote at all? I probably wouldn’t have even participated in such a stupid, performative effort.
Yep, two Dems voted present. How your constituency plays to this performative effort is the politics.
I think it’s more how your donors play to this performative bs, Jeffries is in Brooklyn and most of his district just elected a socialist for mayor.
goddamn can these boomers die already so we can replace with people less compromised by cold war red scare propaganda
Some of them are Millennials. This problem isn’t going to go away by waiting.
What great crimes of history has Hugo Chavez committed?, feeding the poor. I’m no fan of Maduro either but putting him up there with stalin and polpot is farcicle.
guess they gotta start manufacturing consent now if they want to go to war with Venezuela before the midterms.
*farcical*
And yes that’s exactly what I thought, too.
Getting important business done as usual
I mean these are all consevative Democrats
I’m not from the US. Can you explain the context to me?
It is a meaningless resolution, but the context / why they did is probably:
- A socialist just won the election for mayor of New York and they’re mad about that
- They’re gearing up for war with Venezuela and if people aren’t buying that Maduro is the head of a drug cartel, then they can try the good old fashioned “we need to invade to free these poor people from the horrors of socialism” schtick that worked so well in the Cold war. The resolution puts Hugo Chávez and Nicolas Maduro on the same level as Stalin and Polpot.
Some people said “We don’t like socialism” and some others said “Aye” we’re all supposed to care because of their job or something
Thanks, but i still don’t get it. I mean a resolution condemning socialism? What is that supposed to mean? That seems ridiculous even for today’s US.
Its a sternly written letter written by Congress that does nothing. They’ve been a thing for decades and are how Congress expresses it’s official opinion. Since members have different opinions there has to be a consensus mechanism to express this or else it’s just individual Congress members saying what they think.
Yes, of course, I’m aware what a resolution is, but usually they have some sort of statement, a purpose. “We condemn socialism” is a meaningless, utterly stupid statement. What does that mean specifically? What is the purpose, except perhaps to make a polemical statement that is so general that it can serve no purpose other than right-wing propaganda?
None. You hit the nail solidly on the head.
Isn’t this one of those non-binding resolutions that don’t actually mean anything? Who cares that this passed at all?
It shows politicians values or lack of it. Trust is everything
