Several news reporters are working hard this week to rescue the Democratic Party from its spectacular failure to hold Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., accountable for her frequent anti-Semitic outbursts.

It’s a dirty job, but someone’s got to do it.

Omar’s incessant anti-Semitism pitched her party into chaos. Her off-hand comments framing pro-Israel Jews as secret power-brokers and dual loyalists who have bought support in Congress got so bad, in fact, that Democratic leadership appeared ready to censure her. But then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and others lost their nerve, caved, and instead produced a meaningless show resolution this week calling for lawmakers to oppose all forms of hate, not just anti-Jewish bigotry.

In other words, Democrats pulled an “ all lives matter” in response to a story that begins with one of their members claiming Israel has “hypnotized the world” to cause “evil.” It’s just as shameful as it sounds.

Twenty-three Republicans voted against the House resolution this week, many of them noting correctly that the sham proposal has been watered down to the point that it defeated its original purpose. By the time the final draft came around, it did nothing to hold Omar accountable.

This is where certain reporters stepped in to rescue the Democrats, spinning hard to argue that the real scandal is that a few members of the GOP caucus voted against an “anti-hate” resolution.

“So far FOURTEEN House Republicans have voted against a bill condemning Anti-Semitism, Anti-Muslim and Other Hatred. Wow. This is going to be hard to explain,” said the New York Times’ Michael Barbaro. Of course, it wouldn't be, if people like him explained it honestly to their reading and listening audiences.

Politico’s Jake Sherman tweeted, “House Democrats have been under pressure for a week on anti-semitism but House Republicans have bailed them out. … An embarrassing moment for house gop.” Again, it's as embarrassing as Sherman decides to make that the story, instead of what really happened.

“23 REPUBLICANS vote against anti-hate resolution, taking the heat off Ds after a very tough week. GOP handed Dems a political gift much to ponder,” he added.

The Associated Press’ Nick Riccardi added elsewhere, “The story went from how Dems were in disarray over anti-Semitism to only votes against a banal anti-racism resolution being GOP, with King notably abstaining.”

The Times’ Alex Burns even pulled a “both sides,” calling the eventual House vote a “bipartisan saga of overthinking it.”

To be clear, the House resolution exists only because Omar claimed, among other things, that Israel has " hypnotized the world" to its “evil,” that wealthy Jews dictate congressional Republicans' support for Israel and that Congress and American Jews have divided loyalties. But rather than censuring the Minnesota congresswoman outright, Democrats instead put together a wish-list resolution that reads in part:



W]hite supremacists in the United States have exploited and continue to exploit bigotry and weaponize hate for political gain, targeting traditionally persecuted peoples, including African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other people of color, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, the LGBTQ community, immigrants, and others with verbal attacks, incitement, and violence.



That Jews come in seventh place on that list is a nice touch. But let's not forget that the hate that inspired this resolution did not even originate with white supremacists. It originated with a sitting U.S. congresswoman.

The Democratic proposal was an exercise in mealy-mouthed cowardice. It’s an abdication of leadership, and its existence is an insult to the intelligence of those who read it. Yet, Republicans are the ones who’ve supposedly bungled this week, according to our very smart news media.

Here’s a parting thought: When the House voted in January to censure Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, for embracing white nationalism, Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., voted against the motion, claiming at the time that it “ did not go far enough.”

Not a single one of the reporters mentioned above saw Rush's vote as an “embarrassing moment” or as something that would “be hard to explain.” That sort of chin-stroking was reserved for Thursday’s vote.

Ask yourself why. Much to ponder indeed.