Hysterical Walz Told to Calm Down by the Us Holocaust Museum...
The bumbling, stumbling disgraced wreck of a Governor, facing possible indictment for covering up billions in fraud got singled out for his unhinged rhetoric by the US Holocaust Museum Not easy to stand out in that department among his fellow Democrats.
After he bizarrely tried to compare the situation of Americans to Anne Franke the US Holocaust Museum had enough:
Anne Frank was targeted and murdered solely because she was Jewish. Leaders making false equivalencies to her experience for political purposes is never acceptable. Despite tensions in Minneapolis, exploiting the Holocaust is deeply offensive, especially as antisemitism surges.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Just another offensive, insane claim from the radical who might be the worst Governor in America.
What's shameless is watching people attack Trump for trying to deal with this loon.
Trump is doing exactly what he should do in trying to lower temperatures? Do you want to him to act like a Democrat and issue increasingly deranged messages to incite violence? Make Walz like offensive comments to drive hatred of the other side?
Walz has to keep making hysterical claims and not "give in" by agreeing to enforce the law of the land because he has no actual power over the mobs who attack anything related to federal law enforcement. He has to appear to have some relevance so he shrieks hysterically like this into microphones because this is what plays with the loons attacking hotels. .
A Trump supporter calling any other politician a loon is hilarious.
Another day, another But Trump...
Funny how you delete posts about Walz on a seed about Walz as off topic and then come and attack Trump on a seed about Walz.
They'll be doing but Trumps for the next 25 years. Thats how long the stench will last.
There is a word for that...
The far-right wing cop wannabees who are now untrained ice agents should get used to being opposed by citizens who know what it is to be an American. Fuck Trump's stormtroopers!
Walz invoked Anne Frank’s diary not as a story about gas chambers but as a record of people hiding in their homes, living in fear, being hunted by authorities, waiting in silence, and not knowing what would happen if they were found, which directly parallels families today staying indoors out of fear that a knock on the door could tear them from their homes and send them into the unknown.
And to be clear, drawing a parallel about fear, hiding, and uncertainty is not the same as predicting genocide, no matter how badly some people want to pretend otherwise.
If that distinction is uncomfortable, it is still a distinction, and the more productive question is why it makes you uncomfortable at all.
You should ask yourself why the Holocaust Museum's position on cheap political holocaust comparisons bothers you so much.
I’m making a nuanced, historically grounded point. You’re responding with demagoguery by collapsing it into something easier to condemn instead of engaging what was actually said. Walz mentioned a book. Not the Holocaust. Anne Frank writes explicitly about families being taken away without warning and about children discovering their parents are gone, with no knowledge of where they were taken or whether they would ever return. The comparison was apt and directly transferable to today's lived experience in this country.
I don’t disparage the Holocaust Museum’s position. Their caution about Holocaust analogies is understandable. But their response treats any reference to Anne Frank as if it were a claim about genocide, rather than engaging with the specific historical conditions her diary documents.
You just called it demagoguery.
Not at all. I called your sloppy use of what they said demagoguery, not their position. You’re doing it again now by collapsing my criticism of your argument into a criticism of the Holocaust Museum. That move is consistent, and it’s exactly the problem.
My position is the Holocaust Museum's.
I wasn’t aware the Holocaust Museum even knew who I was, much less issued a statement in response to my argument. The statement they issued was about analogies to the holocaust, not the specific issue that I am raising.
Indeed, rigid and reactions to nuanced questions will not help one of the core missions of the museum, which is educating people about how fear, persecution, and state power actually unfold in lived human experience.That is what the book is about, like it or not, and it serves as a warning of what happens when government falls from legitimacy and makes force carry the day.
Why would that have anything to do with you calling their position demagoguery?
I did not. I called your lack of logic in 4.1 demagoguery.
The pathetic part about that is that unlike Anne Frank, the know why they are being "hunted", why they are being apprehended, what would happen if they were found.
What's additionally pathetic is the very same thing happened under previous administrations and you all kept your mouths shut. The only thing that changed was the person in the WH; telling everybody that it has nothing to do with the removal illegals, but with WHO is in charge when it happened.
So your first assertion is that Anne Frank did not know why her family was being hunted. That is simply false. Anne Frank knew exactly why they were in hiding. I suggest you read the book before invoking it.
That claim is not true. I have always been pro-human, regardless of administration. Nothing approaching this level of government-sanctioned intimidation, normalization of force, and indifference to collateral harm has occurred in recent memory. Saying this is “the same thing” is not analysis, it is erasure of scale and context, and also a mind bendingly stupid assertion.
Sorry. Try again. I don't recall gangs of thugs invading the suburbs and illegally, immorally, and unconstitutionally picking fights with the residents under any prior administration. What changed is the willingness of the federal government to tolerate escalation, spectacle, and unaccountable force as ordinary tools of policy. Leadership matters because leadership sets boundaries. Those boundaries have been abandoned.
This is a novel escalation marked by poor supervision. Lawful, restrained, and humane options exist, and they were not chosen. That is a leadership failure, and the administration has encouraged the lack of professionalism now on display.
Yep, Tim Walz is a typical Democrat politician. Walz plays to the ignorance of the masses to stir the pot and divide us. But, then, Kristi Noem is little different than Walz.
We're being forced to choose between an unlawful and unaccountable ICE - or - open borders. Personally I reject both those extremes. ICE must comply with law, use legal methods, and be held accountable for violating the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments and possibly the 14th and 15th amendments. But illegal immigrants must continue to be deported.
Yeah, complying with the Constitution and the rule of law makes the job more difficult. Too bad. Big Government has to be controlled. Letting ICE roam the streets without warrants, oversight, or accountability only to pursue some sort of political retribution is stupid, lazy assed party politics deliberately intended to divide us and make America weaker. It's not supposed to be easy for Big Government to threaten, intimidate, coerce, or control the citizens of the United States. Constitutional guarantees have been twisted into a pretext for violence against citizens.
What's happening is wrong. What's happening is un-American. And it can't be allowed to continue. Deporting illegals is not an excuse to rip up the Constitution and militarize an even BIGGER Big Government. If it can't be done the right way then it shouldn't be done at all.
Minneapolis is not Fallujah, you dumb sons of bitches. And don't pull that Semper Fi shit on me because I can see you are lying.