I agree. Trash districts will elect trash representatives to represent them. That’s the system. The problem isn’t Omar, it’s the people that vote for her.

I don’t mean this as a joke. I think we should go back to James Madison’s 50,000 constituents rule for the House. That would put us at about 6,600 Representatives in the House now. With technology, no need for them to assemble in D.C. Give them a small budget to maintain a small staff and store front in their district and pay for an Internet connection so they can attend Zoom calls.

It takes a lot more money to buy 3,301 Representatives than it does to buy 218. Fewer constituents and continual proximity among them will lead to much more sincere representation.

And get rid of the despicable practice of gerrymandering.

(This would explain quite a lot, including why the military is being hollowed out…)

Can he defeat Ilhan Nur Omar? Maybe. But voters in Minneapolis won’t ever hear about what she said in the speech. The Star-Tribune might report it as a “Republicans seize on . . .” The TV stations won’t cover it at all.
t

As to the rhetoric about the U.S. government doing what Somalians say…it’s just that…rhetoric. Hyperbolic, sure; but she’s a politician puffing up her importance and influence for a sympathetic crowd.”

“I am indeed generously giving her the benefit of the doubt. We always should be cautious with video clips going viral before a broader context is known.”

I agree that it’s always a good idea to look into the context of viral videos, as well as the full speech, because that’s the opposite of what the media does.

However, although your generosity does you credit, in this case:
(a) Loyalty to America DOES figure into the context of “about Somalia’s relations with neighboring countries” because our interests may not coincide with those of the Somalis to whom she is speaking, although I don’t claim to have a clue what our interests are other than to stop Somali pirates by any means necessary, and I have less of a clue what Biden Inc. thinks their interests are — we may not even have any, but Omar is duty-sworn to prioritize US interests over ex-pat-Somali interests.
(b) You know it’s rhetoric, I know it’s rhetoric, but do the Somalis know it’s rhetoric? There are plenty of examples about how immigrants to America have no idea how our government is supposed to function, and are filtering her speech through their experience of Somali government, in which case it IS possible that a small faction (they have no idea HOW small I bet) can control the actions of the official leadership, and probably don’t realize how small Omar’s “importance and influence” is IF she strays off the Leftist agenda of BLM+DIE to moonlight for her Somalian constituents (IIRC her district is not solely immigrants, but they are a large faction, if not the largest).

So, yeah, Omar and Bush are making Santos look good.

Also IIRC there were warnings about booting him, because that would open the closet doors of a lot of people with skeletons of their own.
Santos was just more blatant than most of the Congressional Corruptocrats, and now Omar and Bush are the next level to face scrutiny.

Addendum for obligatory Trump connection: isn’t using hyperbole to puff up his importance and influence one of the things the anti-Trumpers are always complaining about?
Then why excuse it in the Democrats?

2) Omar is a horrible person because of all the things she has said and all the things she hasn’t said. There is nothing new that we have recently learned about her.

3) I generally like DeSantis. But the country is full of horrible people who say horrible things, and this speech should be legal and not the basis for revoking citizenship.