When it comes to civil discourse, there’s no choice between dogs and humans
Those who were appalled by Rep. Randy Fine saying he preferred canines to Muslims were right, even if what he was responding to was also appalling.
By Jonathan S. Tobin
JNS
Feb 20, 2026
In a gentler era of American politics, politicians generally didn’t say awful things and get away with it. But, as most of us may have noticed over the last decade or more, we no longer live in such a time.
And that is the context for the latest kerfuffle in which a social-media post has generated outrage and calls for punishment for the offender. The perpetrator is Rep. Randy Fine (R-Fla.), who is no stranger to controversy. He was responding to a post on X by Nerdeen Kiswani, founder of the Within Our Lifetime anti-Israel group and a prominent ally of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
An open antisemite
Kiswani first came to the public’s attention by giving a commencement speech replete with antisemitism at the graduation ceremony for the City University of New York’s Law School. Her genocidal goal is the destruction of the State of Israel, a position that has led her to share platforms with Mamdani. She frequently proclaims that the objective of eradicating Israel must be achieved “by any means necessary.”
The rallies that Nerdeen Kiswani has organized have supported the actions of terror groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis, not to mention Iran’s missile attacks on Israel. She frequently proclaims that the objective of eradicating Israel must be achieved “by any means necessary.”
Unlike Mamdani, who supports the dismantling of the Jewish state but claims to oppose violence, Kiswani isn’t shy about backing terrorism against Israelis and Jews, including lauding the Hamas-led terrorist attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. The rallies she has organized have supported the actions of terror groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis, not to mention Iran’s missile attacks on Israel.
She also appears to be an advocate of imposing Sharia, or Muslim religious law, in America, especially with respect to the treatment of dogs. That seemed to be the point of a Feb. 12 post, which she later claimed was satire. In it, she complained about dog owners not picking up after their pets in the aftermath of a large snowfall in New York City: “Finally, NYC is coming to Islam. Dogs definitely have a place in society, just not as indoor pets. Like we’ve said all along, they are unclean.”
At that point, Fine, who is Jewish and, like a lot of prominent people, seems to spend far too much time on social media, responded: “If they force us to choose, the choice between dogs and Muslims is not a difficult one.”
And that is why virtually the entire Democratic Party congressional caucus, backed by many prominent Jews, is calling for Fine to be censured for what they believe is brazen Islamophobia.
The dogs’ champion
Fine is, predictably, unembarrassed by the brouhaha. To the contrary, he has gloried in the attention it has brought him. His X feed is now a nonstop deluge of pictures and caricatures of dogs who are protesting Muslim anti-canine sentiments and intentions. To each post criticizing him, he responds with a cartoon image of a dog over the Revolutionary War slogan of “Don’t Tread on Me..
Rep. Fine has responded to his critics by posting modified libertarian Gadsden flags featuring puppies rather than the traditional snake
His barb aimed at Kiswani has seemed to make him the hero not only of some dog lovers but also of many others who are angry about the way people like Kiswani have helped normalize antisemitism in American political discourse. More than that, the vast majority of what radical groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) claim is Islamophobia is, in fact, usually an effort to take note of and criticize Muslim antisemitism that has become commonplace, especially since Oct. 7.
In the eyes of his supporters, Fine is merely fighting fire with fire, and if Muslims are offended, so be it.
In part, this is just another chapter in the story of the coarsening of American political discourse. Fault for this is usually attributed to President Donald Trump. He does deserve a good deal of the blame because of many statements, especially on social media, in which he trolls his opponents in a manner that is often as humorous as it is hyperbolic. But they are also sometimes vulgar and misogynistic, or even—as with a recent post in which he depicted former President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, as gorillas—arguably racist.
A zero-sum game
He is far from alone in being an offender in this respect. Where the president has really broken new ground is how he is utterly indifferent to criticism or shame for what would have been widely deprecated as bad behavior. Part of this is because his supporters are delighted, rather than outraged, by his skewering of liberal foes, even when it is unfair or wrongheaded. That’s because they view his barbs as just desserts for arrogant credentialed elites who look down on their fellow citizens and have imposed their own arbitrary standards of behavior that often involve canceling anyone who disagrees with them.
He has also come to understand that he—or anyone who shares his conservative views—will be damned by his critics, no matter what they do or say. And he has concluded that apologizing, even when wrong, merely strengthens one’s opponents. Since he and others on the right believe that liberals are not held to the same standards, there’s no point in ever backing down, even when you are obviously out of line.
So, by doubling down on his supposed championing of dogs at the expense of Muslims, Fine is merely following the same pattern that Trump has established.
Many on the right, most of whom might never themselves speak or post in such an outrageous manner, think this is just fine. That’s because they see political combat, even when it is conducted in this sort of juvenile manner, as part of an existential civilizational conflict in which the stakes are incredibly high.
It’s the same sort of thinking that inspired Michael Anton, an academic who served in the George W. Bush administration, to write the famous essay, “The Flight 93 Election,” in the Claremont Review of Books in 2016 under a Latin pseudonym. In it, he argued that electing someone who might truly overturn norms like Trump was necessary if the nation was to be saved from the left. Anton, who served in both the president’s first and second administrations, was not arguing in favor of social-media posts that were either vulgar or clearly prejudiced against faith or ethnic groups, such as Fine’s anti-Muslim riposte. But the point is, once you see all political arguments or discourse as a zero-sum game, anything goes.
More than that, those who subscribe to this thesis—as the many people who posted their support for Fine’s position—believe that not giving an inch to the other side is not merely defensible but laudable.
This may make sense in an exchange of insults on X. But is it good for the country, or consistent with traditional Western ideas of ethics or Jewish values? Clearly, that is not the case.
It must be pointed out that even in a time in which political discourse has been coarsened, and politics is a zero-sum game, there are still some things decent people simply shouldn’t say. And among them are statements that express direct religious bias.
Fine’s defenders may assert, with some justice, that antisemites like Kiswani don’t have the same scruples about insulting their opponents that the congressman’s critics expect of him. While it may be a double standard, shouldn’t we expect a member of Congress to behave with more manners than the leader of a pro-genocide group whose name states its goal of destroying the Jewish state within the lifetimes of its members?
Animals or humans?
I share the sentiments of those who are disgusted by Kiswani’s prejudice against dogs and deeply offended by her suggestion, whether in jest or not, that Americans adopt Muslim taboos about living with humanity’s best friends.
But Fine’s quip about preferring dogs to Muslims is not consistent with the values of his faith. Fine wears a kippah on the floor of the House, in part, he says, to demonstrate solidarity with Jews who are faced with intimidation and violence by Israel-bashers and Jew-haters like Kiswani. But while Judaism forbids cruelty to animals, it is equally clear that it requires us to prioritize human life over them. As prominent Jewish writer and talk-show host Dennis Prager teaches, the fact that so many contemporary Americans openly admit that they think that the lives of their pets are of equal or greater value to them than those of human beings who are strangers is part of the price we are paying for the decline of religious faith.
People of faith, especially those steeped in the Judeo-Christian tradition, believe that human beings are created, as the Torah teaches, in the image of God. We may love our pets, and they may love us. But their rights are not more important than those of human beings, even those with whom we have profound political, religious and ethical disagreements, such as Muslims who may agree with Kiswani.
So, to state, as Fine has done, that dogs should be chosen over Muslims isn’t just offensive or politically incorrect. It’s profoundly wrong. Seen in that light, it should be considered, along with the many instances of left-wing members of Congress like Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) of antisemitism, worthy of censure.
Instead of taking sides in this scrum, thoughtful Americans, including those who are angry about the stands that Kiswani and her allies, like Mamdani, take about Jews and Israel, need to refuse to go down the rabbit hole of mutual delegitimization.
The point is, in a free country not governed by Sharia law, we don’t have to choose between having dogs and tolerating fellow Americans who are Muslims—some of whom, like Kiswani, believe in and say awful things. Indeed, our faith in the values of Western civilization, of which Judaism helps form the foundation, compels us to value their lives and to protect their rights.
Nor do we have to choose between opposing Kiswani’s brand of Jew-hatred and the sort of civil discourse that is necessary to ensure that the American constitutional republic survives and thrives. Trump has taught conservatives that if they are to defeat the toxic Marxist left, they must be as tough and as unashamed to engage in political combat as their opponents. But that doesn’t excuse comments that are prejudiced.
No comments:
Post a Comment