No she isn’t. That vote means she does not want to support the totality of the messaging amendment, which includes saying offensive weapons are fine, the priority is America First, and that an antisemite should be lead writer on bills on Israel. You guys are acting like this was a real bill that just needed political support to pass and not voting for the Jewish Space Lasers lady’s bill just supercedes every actually meaningful public statement on the issue she’s made.
No she isn’t. That vote means she does not want to support the totality of the messaging amendment, which includes saying offensive weapons are fine, the priority is America First, and that an antisemite should be lead writer on bills on Israel. You guys are acting like this was a real bill that just needed political support to pass and not voting for the Jewish Space Lasers lady’s bill just supercedes every actually meaningful public statement on the issue she’s made.
So I’m exposing my ignorance here, but I have a question.
Apart from MTG’s association, how am I to make the distinction between a “real” bill and a “statement “ bill?
I understand what you’re saying, and have been persuaded by your latest comment; I’m just hung up on that “just a statement bill” thing.
E: I guess it’s literally as simple as “MTG is such a joke that her bills will never pass”.