House Votes To ‘Strongly Condemn’ Anti-Semitism; Nearly 100 Democrats Vote ‘Present’ | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the The Daily Wire. The author of this post is Virginia Kruta.

    The U.S. House of Representatives voted on Tuesday to "strongly condemn" the rise of anti-Semitism "in the United States and around the world" - and while the measure passed 311-14, nearly 100 House Democrats voted "present."

    C-Span's Craig Caplan shared the break down in a post on X, saying, "311-14: House voted to 'strongly condemn and denounce the drastic rise of antisemitism in the United States and around the world.' Resolution approved by a two-thirds vote 'clearly and firmly states that anti-Zionism is antisemitism.' 92 Democrats voted Present."

    The breakdown across the parties was as follows: 216 Republicans voted "yea," one voted "nay," and four did not cast a vote. Among Democrats, in addition to the 92 "present" votes, 95 voted "yea," 13 voted "nay," and 13 did not vote.

    Rep. John Rose (R-TN) touted the resolution - and called out the Democrats who had not voted in favor of the measure - in a comment on X. "Today, I proudly voted in support of @RepDavidKustoff's H. Res. 894, which strongly condemns and denounces the drastic rise of antisemitism in the United States and around the world. It's a shame a number of Democrats couldn't join us in what was a widely bipartisan vote."

    "I don't understand. The media told me that the problem was right-wing antisemitism," Jeremy Carl responded.

    "'Do you condemn hate and bigotry against Jews? Against threatening them in the streets? No new laws, just a public rebuke.' 'Nah, some of us are here tho' - Democrats," another posted.


    The push for Democrats to vote "present" on the resolution was led by Reps. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), Dan Goldman (D-NY), and Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and was based on their objection to the resolution's statement saying that anti-Zionism was anti-Semitism.

    They called instead for the House to take up the resolution they had authored, which called for "implementation of the National Strategy to Counter Anti-Semitism."

poll#201

Considering what real news is available for all to witness, and in great specificity, should one pursue what is true outside of the channeled realm of the corrupt corporate /legacy media, and: Is Institutionalized Corruption real, and is it a hindrance to sustaining our Constitutional Republic now, and for future generations of American citizens?

  Yes

  No

  Not sure

450 total vote(s)     What's your Opinion?

poll#212

A majority of Americans still believe in OUR 1st Amendment guaranteed Freedom of Speech; however, at what bold point does the constitutional right to Free Speech becomes unabashed anti-Semitic Hate Speech, and while it should possibly be tolerated on our college campuses, and on the streets of mostly Sanctuary Cities, these events should be rightfully observed and scrupulously monitored ... or, not? What is your true opinion of when too much of enough is just too much, or not?

  The answer to Free Speech I don't agree with is more, and incredibly robust Free Speech.

  There is a point when Free Speech becomes counter productive to sustaining a peaceful society.

  Free Speech should only be tolerated if it represents the status quo of the highly educated orthodoxy.

  Early in life, I learned to speak only when I am spoken to.

187 total vote(s)     What's your Opinion?