Fred Guttenberg Calling Rashida Tlaib A ‘Cancer’ Doesn’t Fight Fascism. It Is Fascism.
Depersonalization never ends well.
I’ve previously shared this story, but it remains relevant:
Years ago, my wife and I were returning home after a trip to Italy, and we had a layover in London. Once we’d boarded, the flight was delayed for apparent mechanical issues, which I’m always in favor of resolving before we’re actually in the air. When the very posh flight attendant — think William Hanson — brought passengers a complimentary “please, just chill” drink, we inquired about the flight’s status, and he told us, perfectly deadpan, “They know what’s wrong. Now they’re just arguing over who to blame.”
A vocal segment of Democrats have determined who’s to blame for Donald Trump’s 2024 victory, and the pattern should disturb you. First, there’s the Uncommitted Movement, the protest campaign that pushed for a ceasefire in Gaza and an arms embargo on Israel. The prevailing centrist narrative is that Uncommitted alone cost Kamala Harris the election.
Gun control advocate Fred Guttenberg raged against Uncommitted this weekend during a particularly vicious rant against Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib, who’d criticized Rep. Haley Stevens for taking “corporate PAC money from the companies hurting Michiganders.” Guttenberg supports Stevens in Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary in the sense that he really loathes Dr. Abdul El-Sayed.
Guttenberg posted, “Hey, Rashida Tlaib, you are a cancer on the Democratic party and America. You and your stupid protest vote are the reason we have a 2nd Trump term. you are not a Democrat, but you certainly use the party … Like I said you are a cancer.”
Notice that Guttenberg goes full Stephen Miller against Rashida Tlaib. As acclaimed actor Kirk Lazarus might warn, you should never go full Stephen Miller.
A “cancer” is an enemy that can’t be reasoned with, only violently exterminated. I can’t believe I have to say this, but you shouldn’t refer to anyone — even a politician —as a “cancer” just because you disagree with them on policy issues, especially when literal fascists — which Tlaib is not — currently control the government. If you seriously oppose Trump’s regime, then Tlaib is an obvious ally in that fight, just as I consider non-fascist centrist Democrats similar allies in the same battle.
When journalist Medhi Hasan responded, “Nothing to see here, just a Haley Stevens supporter repeatedly calling the only Palestinian American woman in Congress a ‘cancer’,” Guttenberg stood by his dehumanizing rhetoric.
“Nothing to see here except Medhi Hasan again making shit up. I have called many a cancer in our Government to include Trump and every man and woman who enables him. Only you, in your pathetic racist mind, are trying to make this about race.
She organized the protest vote that doomed Kamala Harris in Michigan. She is a cancer.”
Guttenberg also goes full Trump when he justifies his dehumanizing language. Trump enablers will insist Trump isn’t actually racist because he crudely insults everyone. However, any objective review of Trump’s remarks reveal specific animus toward people of color, especially women.
So, yes, Guttenberg has harshly condemned the Trump administration’s appalling record on gun violence, but he’s also proven capable of rational communication with Trump — most recently after Charlie Kirk was murdered last year. Guttenberg wrote directly to Trump on social media: “I saw your confirmation that Charlie Kirk, someone who you loved, has died. During your first term, someone I loved, was murdered. My daughter Jaime was killed in the Parkland shooting. I had hoped to work with your administration then to reduce gun violence. I am sorry for your loss today. I would still love to work with you to stop the next one.”
Meanwhile, Rashida Tlaib, who Guttenberg claims is “not a Democrat,” actually has a solid record on gun violence. She’s introduced a bill that would require gun locks for all firearm purchases. She co-founded the Background Check Expansion Act. She’s consistently advocated for an assault weapons ban.
In 2024, she called out the GOP-controlled House’s refusal to even consider gun safety legislation: “We have not voted on a single gun violence prevention bill under this Republican majority,” Tlaib posted on social media. “Guns now have more rights in this country than women do. It’s sick.”
It’s revealing that Guttenberg doesn’t consider Tlaib a key congressional ally, especially considering all the glowing tributes to Lindsey Graham from Democrats who claim they found common ground with the late Republican senator, despite their considerable differences, over at least one issue. Gun safety is sort of Guttenberg’s issue, but Tlaib’s position on Israel/Gaza effectively makes her a non-person in his view. And this is almost entirely about Israel/Gaza. Yes, Tlaib is often critical of other Democrats, but moderate Democrats are also openly critical of progressive Democrats. You can’t maintain a “big tent” where only one group is allowed to speak freely.
Tlaib has consistently voted for Democratic causes and against MAGA. Yes, she didn’t support Biden during the 2024 primary, but that still makes her a Democrat. (It’s not really much of a Democratic primary if you can only vote for one candidate.)
Democrats online have defended Guttenberg’s “cancer” smear and his claim that Tlaib/Uncommitted cost Kamala Harris Michigan. This is a bizarre argument from the start: If you genuinely believe someone’s existence in the party is an overall negative, you can’t simultaneously demand that they support the party. It’s an electoral variation of Schrodinger's Leftist: An embarrassing liability to the party but also critical to the party’s success.
Of course, elected Democrat would swiftly condemn any prominent liberal activist who called a Trump-supporting Republican a “cancer.” They’re still apologizing for Hillary Clinton’s “deplorable” dig.
However, facts still matter: “Tlaib helped Trump win Michigan” is an outright lie. Kamala Harris did better among self-described liberals than Joe Biden. She lost ground with moderates and conservatives. She lost Latino voters outright by more than 20 points.
The 2024 election was about inflation, immigration, and overall global anti-incumbency backlash post-Covid. True, many pro-Palestinian liberals will also argue that Gaza was a determining factor in Harris’s loss, but the data doesn’t bear this out. Yes, Gaza is cited as the number one issue for Biden 2020 voters who didn’t show up in 2024, but according to exit polls, the overall percentage of self-described liberals remained consistent at 25 percent. Even you want to blame Tlaib and Uncommitted for suppressing the left-wing vote, people not voting for Harris because of Gaza is still less damaging than people voting for Trump. The number of self-described moderates increased from 2020 to 2024 and Trump improved his margins among them.
What’s alarming about the “Blame Uncommitted” narrative is that it pairs with the “blame trans people” narrative that far too many Democrats have embraced. Donald Trump didn’t win because of those “Kamala is for they/them” ads or because a trans student played sports somewhere. It was the price of eggs. Yet, prominent mainstream Democrats believe the lesson from 2024 is that they absolutely must find common cause with anti-trans bigots. It’s an interesting contrast with Uncommitted, as the same Democrats don’t seem to think they should alter their position on Israel/Gaza, even if it helps them win progressive votes.
This is because those Democrats are only interested in promoting a “stab in the back” myth about the 2024 election. They want to blame “Uncommitted” and trans people for Trump’s second reign of terror. It’s frankly repulsive that a supposed “multiracial” political party would set up vulnerable groups as scapegoats for their own failures. Pro-Israel Democrats like Fred Guttenberg might protest bitterly at the fascist comparison, but you’ll never defeat fascism by embracing its tactics.
Yeah, it was the price of eggs, which the hopeless MSM kept harping on over and over, plus Biden's age, and when he dropped out, Harris' race and gender, that put trump back in power. I was annoyed with Tlaib and others and the other Uncommitted voters, but understood why they felt that way. Perhaps it was all that they could do to get their message out, perhaps there was something else that they could do to more effectively to get their message out, I do not know.
Back to the reasons voters either sat out the election of 2024, or voted for trump - too many Americans engaged in magical thinking, rather than critical thinking. To think that a guy, who clearly has never cared for anyone but himself in his life would give a damn about ordinary Americans, is an example of magical thinking. Add to that - he had already been president, and botched the response to a pandemic, which led to more people dying than needed to die, and before that, his policies were a disaster, although, thanks to having a few people in his first administration who aren't morons and are more loyal to the Constitution than to him, it wasn't nearly as bad as this one is. Oh, and J6 should have been the deal breaker, no matter how much a dozen eggs cost! Biden and Harris ain't perfect, but only magical thinking people (especially misogynist racists in Harris' case), would think that trump would be a better choice.
So, no, it's not Tlaib's fault, nor any of the Uncommitteds' fault that trump is back in power, destroying the nation and embarrassing us daily. I am disappointed in Guttenberg.
This 'you are either with us or against us' binary is harmful to our democracy and insulting to voters. I want affordable prices, wages and health care. I also want to stop the genocide in Gaza and to make sure trans people get the support and dignity they deserve. So by Guttenberg's logic, does that make me, the voter, a cancer on the party?