Gillibrand Is The Lone Democrat to Criticize Omar By Name For Her Anti-Semitism

As someone who cannot stand President Trump, I am quite dismayed with the Democratic Party.

House Democrats passed a mealy mouthed resolution condemning anti-Semitism among other forms of hate and did not mention Ilan Omar by name. Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied Omar is anti-Semitic and incredulously claimed, "She didn't have a full appreciation of how they landed on other people where these words have a history and a cultural impact that might have been unknown to her." Um, Omar's "Israel hypnotizing the world" tweet was composed in 2012 and was defending it back in January. Omar is well aware of her message and its intent. Needless to say, whatever warmth I was feeling towards Pelosi before, during and after the government shutdown has gone out the window.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Omar's comments aren't as bad as Iowa Republican Steve King's history of racism. Of course, I've already commented on House Whip Jim Clyburn's view that Omar's experience was more personal than those who had family members perish in The Holocaust and in the hours since has not budged from that position.

Sadly, a lot of the Democratic presidential contenders weren't any better. Bernie Sanders declared:

Criticism of the Israeli government itself is not anti-Semitism, and we have to make that separation quite clear. So, anti-Semitism, absolutely, unacceptable and must be fought at every level. Criticism of the Israeli government and their policies is not, per se, anti-Semitism.

How exactly does criticizing the loyalty of American Jews have anything to do with criticizing the Israeli government?

Meanwhile, both Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris also defended Omar and treated her like the victim. Here's Warren:

Branding criticism of Israel as automatically anti-Semitic has a chilling effect on our public discourse and makes it harder to achieve a peaceful solution between Israelis and Palestinians. Threats of violence -- like those made against Rep. Omar -- are never acceptable.

But criticizing the loyalty of American Jews to this country is absolutely anti-Semitic. And who exactly is making threats of violence against Omar? AIPAC? The ADL? Warren doesn't say who.

Most disappointing though is Kamala Harris who I thought had some pro-Israel bonafides. Alas, Harris hears where the wind is blowing and is following instead of leading:

We all have a responsibility to speak out against anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, homophobia, transphobia, racism, and all forms of hatred and bigotry.

But like some of my colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus, I am concerned that the spotlight being put on Congresswoman Omar may put her at risk.

At risk by whom? What Harris is really saying while we have a duty to speak out against anti-Semitism it only applies if it comes from Republicans and that someone like Omar who is a woman, a racial minority and a Muslim is above criticism. The corruption of identity politics on full display.

Much to my surprise, the only Democrat who was prepared to criticize Omar by name is New York Senator and 2020 presidential hopeful Kirsten Gillibrand. While Gillibrand was strongly critical of Republican tolerance of Trump's racism, she did not shy away from the real elephant in the room (or in this case donkey):

Speech that fuels hate and prejudice has no place in public discourse, whether it’s directed at Jews, Muslims, African Americans or other Americans. Those with critical views of Israel, such as Congresswoman Omar, should be able to express their views without employing anti-Semitic tropes about money or influence, just as those critical of Congresswoman Omar should not be using Islamophobic language and imagery that incites violence, such as what we saw in West Virginia.

We must also call out the hypocrisy of the Republican Party in this instance. Many Republicans have taken offense to Congresswoman Omar’s remarks and condemned her in the harshest terms, but said little or nothing when President Trump defended white supremacists at Charlottesville or when Leader McCarthy promoted a conspiracy about Jewish donors buying elections.

Both are unacceptable. As elected officials, we must be held to a higher standard and we must all do better.

Who would have thought that Gillibrand, who has a long history of flip-flopping, would emerge with the profile in courage.

Knowing Gillibrand's history, there is always the possibility she could change her mind tomorrow. No doubt this stand won't help her with the Democratic Party's so-called progressive wing. Perhaps she already knows her chances aren't good and is putting political considerations aside. While I have reservations about Gillibrand, I'll remember her for going against the wind on this one. If she is still around by the time New York has its primary I could very well cast a vote for Kirsten Gillibrand.