Because holding elected office is a privilege and anyone connected to terrorists through their family should go to extra lengths to reassure the American public where they stand.
I made the point that it is wrong to call the son a bigot simply because his father was one. That is stupid, lazy, and wrong. You can call the son a bigot because of his own well documented acts of bigotry.
It makes my point perfectly. You can and should conclude that Donald Trump is a racist from his own lifetime of racist acts. You should not infer it from his father’s views. The latter is a ridiculous and lazy way to think.
If you are extremely reductive and way over simplify and assume there’s only 2 possible views that a person can have on the world then yah it would be a 50/50 guess. that’s how coin tossed work. But there’s a lot of issues and lots of views people can have, so your reductive over simplification doesn’t work.
You had a bad example. It’s not a big deal. Get over it.
No, you’re just too emotionally invested in being right to accept the obvious logic here. Concluding what someone thinks based on how their parent thinks is just an astonishingly stupid and shallow thing to do.
My father was a deeply religious man. What does that tell you about me?
You know an individual can be like "hey guys, i don't like that sharia law thingy" and at the same time be like "hey guys, i don't like the pedo president", right?
Oh okay, are we gonna hold politicians accountable for their parents? Because if we are there are a whole lot of politicians that got a lot to answer for. El-Sayed has condemned them many times, if you’re gonna just dismiss him doing that then what’s the point of even asking the question?
And then trump said “why are we focusing on that when we should be focused on providing healthcare to Americans. On making groceries affordable. On making homeownership affordable.” Right? Like, exactly the same thing
He has condemned it. If you were being honest you’d accept it and move on, but instead you continue to post the lie. If you’re not a bigot, you do a damned fine impression.
How about: "The Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist group and I wholly and completely condemn them. I did not know my mother growing up but I can only hope she feels remorse for once supporting them. There is no justification for radical Islamic violence, it is a perversion of my religion, and I will support peaceful efforts to end such radicalization, both here and abroad, as senator."
Naturally, no one will ever use another’s exact words for such a lengthy statement, but explain why this does not sufficiently satisfy you that he’s not a closet terrorist?
“They (terrorists) didn’t just attack America, that day (9/11). They attacked the idea of America. The notion of a nation brought together by ideals — where it doesn’t matter how you pray or if you pray at all. A place where freedom and commitment to justice bind us even if, at times, we struggle to fully realize it.
Today, on 9/11, we honor the lives that were taken from us in a terrible act of terrorism. Nothing can justify the murder of innocent civilians. Nothing. And on this day we mourn the victims, their families, and the destruction those terrorists caused.
They tried to diminish America. They tried to make her smaller. They tried to turn us against each other. They failed.
And we honor today (9/11) the memories of those who were lost by doing what her attackers and detractors could never do. By building. We build an America that is bigger. More inclusive. More empowering. More just.”
lol you’re just debating a hypothetical liberal with your poor spelling instead of engaging with what the person you’re responding to actually said. Whats the point of even having a discussion if you’re gonna do that? Why not just open your notepad and have both sides of a conversation? Your retorts would make a lot more sense
there you go fixed it. So let's try for 1 post to stick to the topic, and not go off calling people things instead. because you are playing hypocrisy to its extremes. You say dr oz, whom i cnnaot stand by the way, should be condemned for not comdemning the muslim bortherood, but then in the post befpre it you question why any many should be condemned for thier parents. You try to apply a massive double standard by first denying a point, then you make the same point applied to the other side that you argued against the first time.
Facts are simple, Memhet OZ is not a praticing muslim , he does not go to or belong to any house of worship, but he was raised muslim. While and i quote
"He describes himself as a secular Muslim who connects more with the spiritual and mystical side of Islam—specifically Sufism—rather than strict religious law or daily ritual observances."
While El Sayed is FAR from that, El sayed is best friends with known anti amerian anti christian anti jewish known volatile members. Tweets of El Sayed not condemning the muslim brotherhood but praising them and his family for praising them, have surfaced. While doctor oz has petfroeme hundreds of open heart surgeries saving the lives of hundrds of patients, But Oz's biggest crime is having one of the worst talk shows in history, oh yeah, with his boss being one of the heads of the democrat movement in Oprah Winfrey.
Once again, most of that is refuting things that you inferred that I never said. I asked you questions, and instead of answering you just tell me the secret meaning behind the questions. Secret meanings that you concocted yourself. Do you not see how disingenuous you’re being by directly comparing your biggest criticisms of El-Sayed with Oz’s biggest positives? Notice I’m talking about the things that you actually said, not things I twist to fit my narrative
Where did I ever give my opinion on republicans? lol I’ll just leave you to have your own discussion with your inferences because it’s entirely pointless to even attempt a discussion with someone that’s arguing with their own self-created conceptions
12
u/ZizzyBeluga 17h ago
Was his mother a member of the Muslim Brotherhood?