Politicians love to talk.
It's a big part of the job. You speak in legislatures. You speak on committees. You talk to voters. You talk to journalists. If you're lucky, you'll be asked to speak on television, radio, or other popular platforms.
Politicians crave attention. It is validating. It means you are important. You are someone with important things to say. You notice. People listen.
Politicians know that the bigger their job, the more careful they must be when speaking to an audience, no matter how small or large. This is especially true if you are a cabinet minister or “leader.” Talking too much without a script can be dangerous.
So, more often than not, what politicians say while speaking is forgettable or, worse, meaningless. They have to stick to their talking points. They love the cliché.
Still, there are times when politicians get too comfortable. They become complacent. They slip up and say something sincere and revealing about who they are and what they really think and believe.
Fortunately, two politicians opted for refreshing bursts of honesty instead of the usual rhetorical mush last week. One is Canadian. The other is American. You probably don't know the first politician. The second is quite well known.
Both were talking, indirectly, about what is happening in Gaza.
The first politician's name is Selina Robinson. At the time of this writing, she is the minister of post-secondary education in the “socialist” provincial government of British Columbia, Canada.
On Jan. 30, Robinson was speaking on Zoom as part of a panel of Jewish politicians organized by a pro-Israel advocacy group. He was among “friends,” talking to and with “friends.”
In a notable coup, Robinson not only rewrote history, but trafficked in a familiar racist trope. Before the artificial birth of Israel, he said, Palestine was “a piece of shit land with nothing on top of it.”
“There were several hundred thousand people, but other than that, it didn't produce an economy… it couldn't grow things. “It didn't have anything written down, and that it was the displaced people who came and the people who had been living there for generations and together they worked hard,” the minister said.
Translation: 700,000 idle Muslim and Christian Palestinians had, for generations, wasted the opportunity to make the desert flourish. Fortunately, it flourished following the arrival of “displaced” Israelis and workers who were “offered” the “shitty piece of land.”
Since saying what he said, Robinson has stopped speaking, at least in public. Instead, the minister has had to watch and listen to many other people talking about how and why she should resign.
Even the pro-Israel group that invited Robinson to speak has more or less abandoned her, reportedly telling a CBC journalist that: “The comments made by Minister Robinson… do not reflect the views of our organization.”
You know you've talked too much when your once-close “friends” left you adrift.
So, Robinson did what politicians have to do when they give effusive voice to what they think and believe: he humiliatedly apologized for X.
robinson wrote that his “frivolous” and “disrespectful” comments had “caused pain.”
“I regret what I said and I apologize unreservedly.”
Few are convinced by Robinson's belated and performative act of contrition, including two of his “socialist” colleagues in Ottawa. A female parliamentarian (MP) is demanding a “re-evaluation” of her place in the cabinet. Another MP criticized Robinson for “an appalling disregard for the horrific violence being inflicted on Palestinians.”
Robinson's boss, the premier of British Columbia, is also speaking. He said the minister's statements were “incorrect.” Instead of dismissing her, the Prime Minister is giving Robinson a good talking to. In fact, he told her to keep talking.
“She has work to do to go out to the community and address the harm her comments have caused,” he said.
In other curious words, the Prime Minister wants Robinson to convince her and the government to get out of a thorny bind.
Good. You should do that.
The second talkative politician is the former speaker of the United States House of Representatives and grande dame of the Democrats in Congress, Nancy Pelosi. She gave her problematic talk in the always pleasant studios of CNN's Washington bureau on January 29.
The influential “spokesperson emeritus” was asked to comment on those pesky, mostly young protesters who have been heckling President Joe Biden with chants of “Genocide Joe” at campaign rallies and to address whether she was “concerned about “that they could stay home” in the rapidly approaching presidential elections.
A condescending Pelosi quickly played the victim card, saying, “I've gotten, let's say, their exuberance in this regard… they're in front of my house all the time.”
Poor, spoiled Pelosi.
The “speaker emeritus” compounded her, shall we say, disdain with a sermon, stating that, unlike the “exuberant” rabble, she and other serious types on Capitol Hill needed to “think” about “how to try to stop the suffering in Gaza.” .
Poor and misunderstood Pelosi.
Apparently, she “thinks” that a “ceasefire” would not “stop the suffering in Gaza,” as that is what Russian President Vladimir Putin “would like to see.”
Pelosi's McCarthyite and slanderous logic is disgusting and strange. What, other than a ceasefire, will “stop the suffering in Gaza,” with or without Putin's blessing?
Silly and exuberant, but I can't “think” of anything other than a “ceasefire” that “stops the suffering in Gaza.”
Pelosi should have stopped talking. Fortunately, he didn't.
He then demonstrated that behind every emeritus speaker who wears a pin with the American flag, there is an Alex Jones-type conspiracy theorist who is convinced that the country is inundated with fifth columnists disguised as citizens exercising their constitutional rights to challenge a sitting president.
“I think some of these protesters are spontaneous, organic and sincere,” Pelosi said. “I think some are connected to Russia.”
Once again, Pelosi should have stopped talking.
Fortunately, he didn't.
Still calling out millions of her colleagues, albeit “exuberant,” Americans of Arab, Muslim and Palestinian descent as useful tools of Putin, she confirmed that she is as willing and eager as her nemesis, Donald Trump, to criticize the FBI. perceived enemies.
“Some funding needs to be investigated and I want to ask the FBI to look into it,” Pelosi said.
Calling J Edgar Hoover. Calling J Edgar Hoover.
I'm glad Pelosi kept talking.
I'm glad because it has exposed the Democratic Party for the “progressive” and “inclusive” farce that it is.
The Democratic Party has never been and will never be “home” to Arab, Muslim, and Palestinian Americans. They will always be treated with suspicion and contempt by a party establishment that confuses dissent with disloyalty and regards Palestinians as disposable material.
You see, sometimes when politicians talk, it's clarifying.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera.
