Claiming it is a joke is as bad as saying what was said. This is more insensitive than posting “gun celebration” pictures of her family shortly after a school shooting.

31 thoughts on “Disgusted

  1. The article provides the explanation.

    She had been accused of helping people plan the capitol breach because she had given a large group a tour days earlier, so she was taking a jab at the Democrat representative giving this large group a tour, not at the group.

    She didn’t even know they were Jewish.

    Democrats remind me of hockey players whose primary skill is making it appear they have been fouled.


    1. You defense of the anti-Semitism displayed by the “gentlelady” from Colorado is noted.

      You attacked “The Squad” as being anti-Semitic for not being supportive of the government of Israel (which is NOT anti-Semitic) but now you give a pass for a direct anti-Semitic comment?
      Disgusted again.

      …”of hockey players whose primary skill is making it appear they have been fouled.”

      You got this one wrong, too. It is SOCCER players that do that.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Have you ever watched a hockey game?

        They should give Oscars. But yes, soccer players do it too.

        DO you have any evidence that she knew the group to be Jewish(or primarily so) to present?


        1. I watch a lot more hockey than soccer. Hockey player are tougher bastards than soccer player, IMO. I tis rare that you see a hockey plyer fake an injury. Soccer players are much more likely to do so.

          You are as blind to the intolerant act as she is. “The person leading the group was an Orthodox Jewish individual with a traditional beard while others had yarmulkes on.”

          By giving her a pass you appear to be showing some true colors of your own.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Oversensitive to actual anti-Semitism displayed by a member of Congress? If you believe that I am being oversensitive, I think YOU are as anti-Semitic as Ms. Boebert. Please remember that I am Jewish and am very sensitive to anti-Semitism, having lived it my whole goddamned life.

            And the story does not indicate if the Congressman from NY was even present when she said it. And is completely irrelevant if he were.

            Talk about grasping at straws. You are defending the indefensible again.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. And I am oversensitive to ill will by government, so I have to remember Hanlon’s Razor in evaluating events.

            You might want to do the same.

            We all have our triggers, we have to take them intio account.


          3. Seeing things when they aren’t there is something we all have to be on guard against.

            If I got into a bar fight with someone who turned out to be Jewish, would that automatically be antisemitism?

            But would that possibility immediately come to your mind?


          4. “Seeing things when they aren’t there is something we all have to be on guard against.”

            I STRONGLY recommend you follow your own advice.

            WRT your bar fight analogy, if you used a phrase such as “you stupid kike”, then yes.

            But in this instance, there was one very obvious member of the party in question that was Jewish. And even if he were the only one, the comment made by Ms. Boebert, would be extremely inappropriate.

            Will the next excuse be she doesn’t have any Jews in her district? I got news for you: There is a healthy Jewish population in Colorado.


          5. By your definition then, any jibe aimed at a Congressman with at least one Jew in his district would be antisemitic.

            If Bobert had said anything to indicate her comment was specific to a group of Jews, you would be justified, but simply because at least one Jew was in the group does not make it about their being Jewish, the Jibe was about a large group getting a tour, which Bobert had been unfairly criticised over herself.


          6. Spinning back to the comment was made to the Congressman? Nope. An obviously Jewish member of that party and the comment was made.

            As far as Boebert’s tour group, maybe they were doing recon, maybe not. We don’t know for sure yet one way or the other. But her insensitivity, and your defense of it, disgusts me to no end.


          7. Is she legally blind? Is she so obtuse as to not know how traditional orthodox Jews dress and groom?

            Your under-sensitivity to a verbal jab at a group there to meet with a Congressman (not go on a tour, as you imply), is part and parcel of why I continue to say you are a hypocrite.


          8. If I understand there was one person so garbed and groomed,

            Should we assume that anyone in the same group as an orthodox Jew is also Jewish?

            Would that not be a prejudiced judgment? Does it not assume that an Orthodox Jew would not associate with people who are not, or vice versa?


  2. Didn’t know they were Jewish? An Orthodox Jew in beard and garb, and everyone else wearing yarmulkes?

    That legislator really needs to get out more among Americans.

    And lie less.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Everyone else is wearing yarmulkes. Boebert isn’t that short.

        This is probably just a clueless oversight by the Congressperson from CO. So long as the “joke” plays well for her constituents, she probably doesn’t know better or care to know better.

        In her defense, maybe she thought it was a group from the Smith Bros. Cough Drop empire.

        Cough. Cough.😇

        Liked by 1 person

          1. I did? Must have been in my young, radical days. I don’t recall accusing her of much except her Trumpian wannabe “tough” routine.

            I think you are referring to some speculation well after the attempted autogolpe.

            The report will be out in the spring and might shed some light on who knew what, when, where and why. Personally, I think Gosar, Meadows, Jordan, Brooks, and some assorted others might be more concerned than Boebert.

            Liked by 1 person

      2. It doesn’t matter if it were one or one hundred. The comment was an attack on the integrity of the group and anti-Semitic.

        Let me know the next time you are discriminated against for your religious beliefs based on lies that have been told for centuries about your people.


        1. Your oversensitivity is showing again,

          I,m a Cajun, Our history only goes back to 1730 but it’s what I have,

          If someone made a joke about Cajun drivers, I would be offended because there is nothing to indicate that Cajuns are any less good at driving than anyone else. But if you made a joke about Cajuns having a somewhat lax attitude toward game and fish laws, I would laugh at it because there is traditionally some truth in that(even though I am personally scrupulous in following them,)

          But if I was upset about anything critical said about Cajuns, that would be my problem,


          1. Are you saying I don’t have the right to be oversensitive to anti-Semitism? Then you are saying that Black people don’t have the right to be oversensitive to racism.

            Cajuns haven’t been blamed for everything since the beginning of time. Cajuns were not targeted in 1930’s-40′ Germany for extermination.

            Comparing Jews to Cajuns is NO comparison. IMO, it minimizes the impact of anti-Semitic thought, rhetoric and action.


          2. As I wrote, our history is far shorter, but that isn’t the point.

            The undeniable evil done to Jews over thousands of years has nothing to do with whether an act committed today is antisemitic if the actor isn’t aware of subjects of the act are Jewish, or even if the actor were aware but not connecting their being Jewish with the act.

            Your being oversensitive doesn’t impact on rights. It is something you should be on guard against yourself.

            You should take care in evaluating other people’s actions BECAUSE you are oversensitive and that can lead you false conclusions about other people.


          3. For someone who says that anti-Israeli government is anti-Semitic, but to deny that this is willfully blind.

            It is not a sensitivity issue. It is an issue of a Congressional representative asking a group of people if they are doing recon based on some stupid hidden bias. She is a known provocateur; this is just another instance of being idiotic for idiocy’s sake.

            As far as false conclusions, I am drawing my conclusions on your inexplicable defense of this.


  3. Do you always fall for hearsay baloney? Someone’s sister heard her aunts boyfriends cousin say they heard from a friend that…blah, blah, blah…too funny. Wallow in your phony disgust….yawn

    Back to judge Judy…


      1. I enjoy watching a fact finding judge over reading a partisan article completely based on hearsay. The Hill trustworthy news??? Thats rich!!! It’s a third liberal rag that spreads rumors like the one you posted. Why are you so averse to facts?


        1. …”a third liberal rag that spreads rumors like the one you posted. ”

          Just because I use it as a news source regularly does not make it a liberal rag. Your attempt tp demean is milk to the nose hysterical.

          Judge Judy fact finding? Seriously? She spends more time demeaning people less educated that her on a regular basis. THat is why I refuse to watch her.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s