Huma Abedin in hot water for dismissing AIPAC as ‘that crowd

Mevater

Fri, Oct 07 2016, 9:45 am

http://nypost.com/2016/10/06/h.....rowd/

WASHINGTON — Hillary Clinton’s closest aide, Huma Abedin, is catching heat for dismissing the American Israel Public Affairs Council as “that crowd” in a newly revealed email exchange.

In a 2009 email to Bill Clinton aide Doug Band, Abedin recommended that former President Clinton turn down an invitation to speak before the pro-Israel lobbying group.

“U really want to consider sending him into that crowd?” Abedin asked.

The email exchanges were unearthed by The Daily Caller, which reported various Jewish leaders have taken offense to the “that crowd” reference as open hostility to Israel and its allies.

“Appalling,” Morton Klein, national president of the Zionist Organization of America, told the conservative news website. The reference “shows hostility toward Jews and Israel in light of the fact that ‘that crowd’ gives huge ovations to White House speakers.”

It was Hillary Clinton herself who spoke at the next AIPAC conference in 2010.

She and Donald Trump both delivered major speeches to the group in March. Bill Clinton has previously addressed AIPAC as president in the 1990s.

It’s unclear from the email exchange what drove the reluctance.

The email exchange started with Band writing Abedin that Bill Clinton was hesitant to attend the AIPAC forum that year.

“Aipac begging for wjc to come speak at conference. He doesn’t think he should unless you all do,” Band wrote to Abedin and Cheryl Mills, Hillary’s former chief of staff.

Mills said it was up to Hillary and she would check with the secretary of state.

Meantime, Abedin wrote: “U really want to consider sending him into that crowd?”

Band pressed for an answer: “Go or not go?”

Abedin responded: “No go to aipac.”

Sadie

Fri, Oct 07 2016, 10:26 am

People are really getting upset over the phrase "that crowd"?

Wow those PC liberal language police are really scraping the bottom of the barrel to gin up the latest meaningless outrage...

Oh wait, it's conservatives criticizing a liberal? Carry on then!

But seriously, "that crowd" has absolutely no bigoted meaning, it's not in any sense antisemitic or a dog whistle of any kind. Now if she had "that crowd of Skypes" there would be be something to get upset about. Now the people who would say something like like, who are they going to vote for again??

(I bet there are approximately 2 people here who know what a Skype is and the rest can, um, Google)

Fox

Fri, Oct 07 2016, 10:43 am

Sadie wrote:

(I bet there are approximately 2 people here who know what a Skype is and the rest can, um, Google)

It's one thing for people to feel passionately and state their opinions here on Imamother.

It's quite another to insult every participant on Imamother (well, minus me and one other, I guess).

Some people are more into tech and Internet culture than others. Not being up on the latest 4chan slang hardly invalidates one's political opinions.

But you are making an excellent case for why the Democratic Party has an "enthusiasm gap." Positioning yourself as smarter, savvier, and hipper than everybody else is not a persuasive argument -- it's a signal that you don't have one.

Yours truly,

Deplorable Skype (((Fox)))

Fox

Fri, Oct 07 2016, 11:11 am

For those of you who have better things to do with your time than apparently Sadie and I do, we're referring to online slang that originated among 4chan users in order to avoid censorship of racist, anti-Semitic, etc., comments.

Here's one version of the scandalous list, though it's probably evolved by the time I type this:

Skittle: an Arab or Muslim
Skype: Jew
Butterfly: Gay man
Fishbucket: Lesbian
Google: black person
Yahoo: Mexican
Car Salesman: Liberal/Democrat
Reagans: Conservative
A Leppo: Libertarian
Pepe: Alt-right

There. Is everyone suitably triggered?

Note that a significant percentage of the usage is not necessarily negative -- it's sometimes more like a secret code than a way to fling epithets around. For example, "Why so many skypes are car salesman?"

Now, it is true that certain sub-sections of 4chan are truly horrific. However, it's ridiculous to compare the ravings of 4chan 1488ers (neo-Nazis) and garden-variety bigots with the attitudes expressed by someone who might be expected to serve in an influential role in a Presidential administration.

marina

Fri, Oct 07 2016, 12:16 pm

Fox wrote:

A little harsh. And sort of silly to claim this one sentence of one post made by one anonymous person on one forum reflects the entire Democratic Party's flaws ...

But maybe you're just joking and I missed it?

Fox

Fri, Oct 07 2016, 12:49 pm

marina wrote:

Harsh? I don't think I was anywhere harsh enough. Don't go insulting my Imamother homies!

Now, if the poster had been speaking respectfully about some kind of obscure knowledge that she'd acquired as a result of her profession or hobby or whatever . . . fine. Lots of us have specialized knowledge that we can share.

But 4chan slang is hardly obscure knowledge. Anyone who reads a few news websites has likely heard of this -- and probably skimmed right past the article, figuring that it wasn't that interesting. Actually, the fact that so many general interest media outlets have picked up on it means that the shark has been jumped on 4chan.

So patronizingly telling Imamothers that only two of them are likely to be au courant on 4chan slang is (a) insulting; and (b) suggests an alarming degree of elitism based on a highly questionable criterion.

And while the charge of elitism may not be the only cause of Democratic malaise, I'm hardly alone in identifying it as a perception among voters.

Not to mention that it led an Imamother to that execrable Gawker-wannabe, mic.com.

Miri7

Fri, Oct 07 2016, 2:43 pm

What was going on at the time in 2009? I'm wondering how US - Israel relations were, and if she meant "that crowd" as in pretty fired-up Israel supporters (speaking from my own experience). They are a tough crowd, and, personally, I'm proud of us/them for that.

I've worked in politics and supported a candidate who appeared at AIPAC. They are known as a strong, determined, powerful group. If something was going on in international affairs or Israel relations that AIPAC was concerned about, then Bill Clinton may not want to go in front of "that crowd" and have to deal with questions, etc. I think it's pure political calculation here - what does the person have to lose, or have to gain? Hillary was Secretary of State at the time and Bill appearing at AIPAC may have presented some political risk depending on what was going on vis-a-vis Israel at the time.

Isn't this soon after Obama went to Egypt? AIPAC was probably ticked about that. I'm thinking that there was a bee in AIPAC's bonnet about something and Ms. Abedin rightly knew that Bill may have to answer for it if he appeared there. Apparently the political calculus had changed by 2010 and Hillary determined that she should go to AIPAC herself.

Fox

Fri, Oct 07 2016, 2:56 pm

sequoia wrote:

Hello, she's got like one staff member...

Well, I would be happy to head up her campaign in Illinois, but I don't think she's ever been indicted or prosecuted for corruption, influence peddling, or even jury-tampering. That makes her almost unelectable in Chicago. We require elected officials to demonstrate a certain amount of prior experience.

SixOfWands

Fri, Oct 07 2016, 3:12 pm

Fox wrote:

Why do you assume that everyone here is a staunch Republican and supporter of Trump? That's clearly not the case. So if no one else knew the meaning of the term, it referred to members of ALL parties. Including non-Americans.

And why do you assume the comment was unflattering? It could simply mean "I know that most people here don't dirty themselves with that sort of racist drivel."

But even if you were correct, do I also get to attribute all of the comments of every supporter of a candidate to the candidate, or to his/her party? So, how do you feel about supporting someone who is a member of the Ku Klux Klan? And do you wear a white sheet on Yom Kippur? You think Trump isn't in the KKK? And you're not either? Well, David Duke supports Trump, as do you. And if you attribute Sadie's rather flip comment to every Democrat, then clearly I can attribute David Duke's comments to you.

SixOfWands

Fri, Oct 07 2016, 3:28 pm

Miri7 wrote:

Yup. Its right after Obama addressed the Muslim and Arab publics in Ankara in
April 2009, and Cairo in June 2009. Its pretty likely that "that crowd" was plenty hostile.

It was (IMNSHO) a poor choice of words. I think she probably meant "into a very hostile crowd," but it can be taken otherwise. But it was a poor choice in a casual email (not an official comment or statement) made 7 years ago.

There's no equivalence between that and, for example, Trump's condemnation of a judge (born in Indiana, not that it matters) solely because of his Mexican heritage. Or his birtherism. Or his mocking a disabled reporter. Or calling women fat, ugly, etc. Or accused them of attacking him because they were menstruating. Although clearly that's what the Republicans want you to believe.

ora_43

Sat, Oct 08 2016, 2:13 pm

Sadie wrote:

People are really getting upset over the phrase "that crowd"?

Wow those PC liberal language police are really scraping the bottom of the barrel to gin up the latest meaningless outrage...

They aren't calling her a bigot. They're just upset that she saw AIPAC as a hostile crowd, when AIPAC and the Clintons are supposed to be friendly.

Nothing to do with "PC police."

Sadie

Sat, Oct 08 2016, 2:49 pm

Fox wrote:

Why assume that I meant it as a patronizing insult that people wouldn't understand 4chan slang? I consider those terms those pretty obscure. My parents are politically savvy and I wouldn't expect them, or even most of my hip Democrat friends my age to know what those terms mean.

I expect that in the next couple of weeks the terms will continue to be reported on in the mainstream media, and more people will hear about them. I consider that a good thing that it's getting attention. I hope that people realize that those who are calling us Skypes to avoid getting in trouble for online antisemitic harassment are trump's base, and that the majority will decide not to hang out in the same basket with them.