If your organization knowingly tolerates any number of Nazis in its ranks, you have a Nazi organization.
something something nazis at the table
Republicans are NOT Nazis! They just want to be able to associate with Nazis!
I mean that’s basically a rule that says they can’t associate with other GOP members, so it’s not surprising they’d reject it.
And, as awful as Nazis are, there’s this thing called “freedom of association.” We’d have to change our Bill of Rights before a law like that wouldn’t be stricken by the courts.
That means our only recourse is to work as hard to protect our democracy as they are trying to dismantle it.
And, as awful as Nazis are, there’s this thing called “freedom of association.”
Which includes the freedoms of private organizations to not associate with Nazis.
We’d have to change our Bill of Rights before a law like that wouldn’t be stricken by the courts.
We’re not talking about the government limiting associations, this is a private organization trying to limit what it’s members can do, which is perfectly legal and not even out of the ordinary. As far as I’m aware, the bill of rights is immaterial to this situation, considering we’re talking about private people interacting, something which you have no right to force upon people aside from protected classes.
Well from what I understand it was supposed to be an internal code of conduct for the FL GOP rather than a law.
They know their audience.
Of course I know them, they’re me!
To be fair, this sounds like a poorly written law. A photo or video can look like association but even more important is that nobody knows the full contents of somebody else’s brain. This person I’ve never met before, are they a Nazi? What if today they’re normal but they spend too much time on YouTube? If they’re a Nazi tomorrow then what?
Not that they’d vote yes on a better written law, but still…
Not a proposed law. It was a proposed rule for the organization, by the organization.
That’s what I was trying to understand from the article. They cannot even give themselves proper standards for their party. They are truly disgusting.
Yeah I have to agree. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Banning anything based on on the thoughts and opinions in someone’s head feels a little too much like thought police to me.
As rules for their own party? The GOP seems just fine with excommunicating Liz Cheney for upholding the rule of law, even if she agrees 100% with the platform, but they cannot keep Nazis out of their party? Weird.
Wow, the US GOP is both nazist and zionist. I did nazi that coming!
They’re Zionist because they believe that all the Jews have to go back to Israel and claim it as a new kingdom and rebuild the temple for Jesus to come back. Then he’ll throw all those horrible little Jews into Hell where they belong.
So it’s not the contradiction you think.
Evangelical Christianity is a death cult dedicated to the end of humanity just so they think they’ll be able to say “I told you so!”.
“It’s the same photo.”
Republicans will never turn their back on their base.
Is this a ban they themselves would have been enforcing for their own party rules, or…?
Yes; it would have been a rule requiring themselves as a group to stay away from Nazis.
Not a law impacting anybody outside the Florida Republican Party leadership
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In a 32-29 vote on Saturday, members of the Texas GOP’s executive committee stripped a pro-Israel resolution of a clause that would have included the ban— delivering a major blow to a faction that has called for the party to confront its ties to groups that have recently employed, elevated or associated with outspoken white supremacists or antisemitic figures.
In October, The Texas Tribune published photos of Fuentes, an avowed admirer of Adolf Hitler who has called for a “holy war” against Jews, entering and leaving the offices of Pale Horse Strategies, a consulting firm for far-right candidates and movements.
Rather than calling for a break from Defend Texas Liberty, the faction proposed general language that would have barred associations with individuals or groups “known to espouse or tolerate antisemitism, pro-Nazi sympathies or Holocaust denial.”
The party’s internecine conflict has exploded into all-out war since the impeachment and acquittal of Paxton, a crucial Defend Texas Liberty ally whose political life has been subsidized by the PAC’s billionaire funders.
After Paxton’s acquittal, Defend Texas Liberty vowed scorched-earth campaigns against those who supported the attorney general’s removal, and promised massive spending ahead of next year’s primary elections.
The day prior, Sen. Bob Hall — an Edgewood Republican who has received $50,000 from Defend Texas Liberty — was also at the Austin hotel where executive committee members were meeting, and in a speech condemned attempts to cut ties with the group based on what he called “hearsay,” “fuzzy photographs” and “narratives.”
The original article contains 1,151 words, the summary contains 248 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
