Going Down Like The Titanic? Why Do Jews Continue To Contribute To Alma Maters That Hate Them? More.

winterparkrepublicanwomen

Joe Biden = the American Nero.

"Look at the way he's weaponized federal agencies. It all plays into this idea of him mobilizing government against people he doesn't like... He's gonna continue to do it." —
@rondesantisfl

+++++++++++++++

 I suspect the Democrat Party is going down like the Titanic.  If Biden's destruction of the nation and everything he touches doesn't create a lay up for Republicans and they fail to slam dunk then , perhaps, this republic is no longer worth saving or worse, is beyond saving..

+++

The Biggest Midterm Election Issue Is Chaos

Biden turned left, so Democratic candidates now own the social disruption their policies cause.

By Daniel Henninger 

Wonder Land: Biden turned left, so Democratic candidates now own the social disruption of their policies. 

What’s happening to the stock market? Will Vladimir Putin go nuclear? What personal pronoun am I? Mystification has become a permanent state of life, and for the next three weeks the big mystery is: Who’s going to win the midterm elections?

Answer: The Republicans. It’s going to be a red wave.

Republicans Gain Momentum as November Nears

If this prediction proves wrong, I’ll join the crow-eating fest the morning after. An October surprise could change everything, but how bad could any surprise get after President Biden himself already prophesied the possibility of Armageddon? No event is likely to move the needle decisively for Democratic Senate candidates in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona or Nevada.

Admittedly, the likelihood of a Republican victory is becoming conventional wisdom. A grudging New York Times headline noted this week, “NYT/Siena Poll Is Latest to Show Republican Gains.” At least three other recent polls concluded the election is looking good for elephants.

What, exactly, are these midterm elections about? The 500-pound bear in the room is inflation. Still, I don’t recall another recent midterm when so many discrete issues were filtering through voters’ minds. Crime, abortion, recession, energy prices, the border, schools, Ukraine and, not least, Joe Biden.

We live in chaotic times. The RealClearPolitics polling average has the country’s right-direction number bouncing along the bottom at 26.7%.

The plausible default theory of the election is that inflation running above 8%—raising consumer prices and eroding wage gains—pushes everything else into second-tier voting concerns.

Perhaps, but midterms under a new president are inevitably a Rorschach blot on the nation’s life during his first two years. While Mr. Biden’s approval rating has ticked up in recent polls, it has been awful, falling below 40%. My view is that some portion of his bad approval is discomfort over Mr. Biden’s mental state. But people aren’t going to vote for Ohio Senate candidate J.D. Vance or anyone else because of Mr. Biden’s teleprompter gaffes.

I keep wondering what voters make today of the 2020 presidential election. Not the contested result. Mr. Biden won. But one reason Mr. Biden narrowly won is that he pulled over independents and disaffected Republicans by running as a moderate alternative to his party’s progressives—Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

Mr. Biden’s moderate, “normal” presidency didn’t last past Inauguration Day. His switcheroo to progressive standard-bearer for the Sanders-Warren-Pelosi policy goals was startling. A lot of voters who decide close elections have to be wondering about the difference between what they wanted and what they got.

 Voters know they ended up with inflation not experienced in most of their adult lives. Mr. Biden not only denies that some $4 trillion in federal spending during his term has anything to do with inflation but actually argues that his legislated subsidies, transfer payments and Medicare prices negotiated for 2026 will “reduce” inflation. This is tooth-fairy economics.

The remaining bulk of the Democrats’ claimed achievements is tax credits for 2030 climate goals, though virtually no one is running on climate because it rates so low in election concerns.

What’s left? Abortion was hot after the Supreme Court’s June 24 Dobbs decision but looks to have moved off the front burner. I’m hard put to see any toss-up election being decided by playing the Trump/MAGA card, though Mr. Trump could still produce a Halloween surprise for GOP candidates.

As for Mr. Biden, by attaching his presidency so wholeheartedly to his party’s political left, he has elevated the midterm importance of issues like crime and the border.

Progressive criminal-justice theories are running side by side with a crime surge in cities and suburbs. Virtually no new-generation prosecutor has been willing to make a midcourse correction. Democrats own it.

Pennsylvania’s GOP Senate candidate, Mehmet Oz, is closing in on Democrat John Fetterman because Mr. Fetterman won’t budge on progressive justice theories that produce violent mayhem in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

The massive flow of migrants across the collapsed southern border is a long-sought goal of the Democratic left, which shows no concern for what this has done to moderate Senate Democrats such as Mark Kelly in Arizona or Nevada’s Catherine Cortez Masto.

Sen. Raphael Warnock, Georgia’s Democratic incumbent, is a man of the left, just as gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams is a hero of the party’s left. But in his debate with GOP candidate Herschel Walker, Sen. Warnock was clearly struggling to square his progressive beliefs with those of Georgians who narrowly gave the 2020 election to the “moderate” Joe Biden. For months, Ms. Abrams hasn’t closed a 5-point gap with incumbent GOP Gov. Brian Kemp.

Chaos is bad for the party in power. Inflation is a form of social chaos, as are the unchecked border and violent crime. They didn’t fall from the sky. The first two are attributable to policy decisions by Mr. Biden and the Beltway Democrats, the latter to elected Democrats across the country.

Most voters, especially the independents trending rightward, don’t like chaos. To ride it out, voters can choose between a red wave or a blue wave. The blue wave crested two years ago. It’s not going to return for Democrats in three weeks.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I would argue Jews need to rethink why they continue to pour money into Alma Maters that hate them.

+++

If Stanford Owes You an Apology, Get in Line

Jews could make a list, starting with confiscatory tuition, anti-Israel fixation and racial preferences.

By Elliot Kaufman

Isaac Bashevis Singer, the Nobel Prize-winning Yiddish writer, once described his fellow Jews as “a people who can’t sleep and won’t let anybody else sleep, either.” But of all the speculations, complaints and laments rifling through my yiddishe kop, I confess that one p

“Who asked for it?” another Jewish alum remarked to me. If Jewish parents were to compile their top 20 issues with U.S. colleges, the lack of apologies for old quotas wouldn’t make the list. First would be the same issue everyone has: outrageous tuition, for which college presidents and administrators might feel ashamed if they weren’t so convinced of their moral superiority.

Next on the list would come the treatment of Israel. Why is the dissemination of Soviet-vintage anti-Zionist propaganda the perennial preoccupation of student activists, egged on by radical professors? In my freshman year, the Students of Color Coalition, the dominant campus political machine, organized a broad coalition of student groups in favor of divestment from Israel. Alongside the old calumnies, it hyped to Hispanic students that U.S. Border Patrol uses some Israeli technology. To black students it played up minor training sessions that some U.S. police receive in “apartheid Israel,” as if that’s why we have police shootings. It’s called intersectionality: Each group is given its own reason to blame the Jews.

Nineteen student groups were arrayed against Israel, and only Jews and conservatives defended it. Liberal Jews, throughout their time at Stanford, were pressured to choose: Turn your back on Israel and the Jewish people, or lose your standing as progressives. Jewish parents worry about that dynamic.

Wokeness itself is often a concern because of its structural antagonism to the Jews. If group disparities are evidence of racism, and merit is a fraudulent concept used by the powerful to perpetuate their domination, then how to explain disproportionate Jewish success? In their 1997 book, “Beyond All Reason,” law professors Daniel Farber and Suzanna Sherry conclude that the “radical theories inescapably imply that Jews and Asians enjoy an unfair share of wealth and status.” They exceed their quotas.

Without appeal to merit, the achievements of these small minorities can’t be explained other than by bigoted reference to their scheming or exploiting, or at least their collaboration with the power elite and assent to white supremacy. That’s why Asians get called “white adjacent” and Jews are treated as worse than white, itself used as an insult.

Many Jewish parents also worry, privately, that admissions officers will treat their kids the same way the activists do. As whites, they’ll be disfavored—not because of ’50s-style de facto quotas, but because of today’s. Stanford proudly uses racial preferences as “one part of the individualized review of student applications for admission.” Whatever that means, race and ethnicity are again being used to engineer student populations. Yet no apologies are forthcoming this time. At every opportunity, Stanford submits friend-of-the-court briefs in defense of the practice, lately rallying behind Harvard. Probably it is easier to apologize to dead Jews than to treat living Asians fairly.

It wasn’t uncommon at Stanford for non-Asian students to remark, in quiet moments of candor, that they were glad affirmative action kept down the number of Asian students, even if they couldn’t justify it in acceptable terms. Otherwise, “Stanford wouldn’t be Stanford.” It would be too competitive, less social and a worse experience all around if the Asian student population got too big. In years past, many WASPs said the same about the Jews.

By the way, Jews did change those schools, just as Asians may change them now. So what?

I was first alerted to Stanford’s apology by a campus Jewish center: “On behalf of Hillel at Stanford, I want to lift up President [Marc] Tessier-Lavigne’s apology as a notable example of institutional teshuvah—an acknowledgment of past wrongdoing and clear and specific commitment to ensure a supportive and bias-free experience at Stanford.”

Usually, you do teshuvah for your own sins. That’s why it’s so difficult. In this case, the Stanford president is repenting for actions of his long-dead predecessors. That’s why it’s so easy, pushed in press releases that whisper: We’re better than those who came before us. They mistreated those poor, old Jews, and we own up to it.

Yet I wouldn’t call that generation of American Jews victims. They were blessed to live in the U.S., not Europe. And while many were kept out of elite bastions to which they had earned entry, their brains and drive helped them leave the stuffy elites in the dust. Looking back at this period in 1970, Nathan Glazer and Daniel Patrick Moynihan concluded: “The Jews were everywhere, doing everything. In New York . . . they simply outclassed their competition, which was Protestant in business, professional, and intellectual circles, and Catholic in the political ones.”

Hard as it is for academics steeped in the ideology of affirmative action to understand, Jews made it without Stanford and Harvard. Some think we’d be wise to do so again.

Mr. Kaufman is the Journal’s letters editor.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

Democrat's claim regarding Jim Crow Georgia has been proven to be for the birds.

+++

Georgia Exposes the ‘Jim Crow 2.0’ Lie

Democrats insisted that the state made it hard to vote. Nobody told the voters.

By Kimberley A. Strassel 

Early voting began in Georgia this week, and the birthplace of “Jim Crow 2.0” is smashing turnout records. Democrats, the media and corporate America can address their letters of apology to the GOP-controlled statehouse.

By Tuesday evening, the end of Georgia’s second day of early voting, more than 291,700 people had voted either in person or absentee. That marked a 75.3% increase over the same moment in the 2018 midterm and a 3.3% rise from the second day of early voting in the 2020 presidential election. Midterms rarely match the enthusiasm of presidential contests.

President Biden told voters in Atlanta in January that Georgia’s election rules would “suppress your vote, to subvert our elections.” The state’s “Jim Crow 2.0” law was “insidious,” he said, urging his followers to “hate evil.” The solution, which congressional Democrats were then proposing, was a federal takeover of elections, which he said would be a victory of “democracy over autocracy, light over shadow, justice over injustice.”

It was among his more reckless speeches—a high bar—though only one part of the hysterical overreaction to Georgia’s modest changes. Major League Baseball stripped Georgia of the All-Star Game; the CEOs of Atlanta-headquartered Delta Air Lines and Coca-Cola stumbled in with moral condemnations; the Justice Department filed a lawsuit; the media lost its wig. Georgia Republicans patiently explained that their reforms were designed to increase both ballot access and security. They were right, and lucky for Georgia voters, they stood firm.

The good news isn’t confined to the Peach State. The numbers everywhere are humiliating outfits like the liberal Brennan Center, which spent the past two years wailing about states that passed laws “that will make it harder for Americans to vote.” That claim was already undercut by 2021 elections and 2022 primaries that featured high turnout.

Now we move to November. The University of Florida’s U.S. Elections Project reports that, as of Thursday, some five million people have already voted in the 2022 general election. In a story earlier in the week, when the numbers were lower, project director and University of Florida political scientist Michael McDonald told ABC News that turnout was higher than usual. “It’s clear that we are above the 2018 midterm at the same point in time in states where we have comparable data,” he said. He suggested a high-turnout election like 2018, which was “the highest midterm turnout rate since 1914.”

Leading the pack—accounting for about one-fifth of all early votes cast so far—is Florida. The Sunshine State passed its own 2021 voting reform, which Democratic gubernatorial nominee Charlie Crist called “pathetic,” the Brennan Center labeled “sweeping voter suppression,” and liberal activists (unsuccessfully) sued to stop. Then there’s Ohio. Axios reported on a study tagging it as “one of the hardest states to vote in.” But the Ohio secretary of state is already reporting sharp increases in early voting over 2018. Early votes are also accumulating in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and other swing states.

About the only thing that matches the impressive turnout is the left’s impressive memory-holing of their accusations. The press is running a loop of stories extolling Georgia’s early numbers, while failing entirely to explain how this fits with their prior insistence that Georgians were living in a new era of voter lockdown. An MSNBC video segment this week failed to mention the voting law at all, instead adopting a new Georgia meme: “Record breaking early voter turnout could be a wake-up call for Republicans.”

The numbers more broadly highlight a growing political reality: Democrats erred last year in choosing to craft their midterm message around claims of GOP extremism. The end of abortion rights. Insurrection. Racism. Voter suppression. Mr. Biden in his January speech nuttily suggested the choice was between his party and Republicans who were the equivalent of “Bull Connor” or “Jefferson Davis.”

It isn’t only that polls show these issues are completely disconnected from American voters’ priorities. It’s that these wild claims were always obviously false. Americans are realizing that abortion rights aren’t going away. They understand that neither party has a monopoly on crazies. And they know access to the ballot is alive and well—since they are exercising it.

What is real to voters is soaring inflation and energy prices, unsettling levels of crime and an unchecked border. Democrats don’t have any answer for those problems. And if the early-voting numbers suggest anything, a lot of voters may be coming out to register their disapproval.

++++++++++++++

America has finally reached a Goolag Justice System and the Democrats are gleeful.

+++++++++++++++++

Decoding the sentencing of S Bannon and the subpoena to Trump

By Rajan Laad, AM THINKER

Just yesterday, former Trump adviser and campaign strategist Steve Bannon was sentenced to four months in jail following his conviction on two counts of criminal contempt of Congress. Bannon was ordered to pay a fine of $6,500.

Bannon was subpoenaed by the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 incident for records and testimony in September of last year.

However, Bannon defied a subpoena and refused to comply with the House committee.

Biden’s Justice Department recommended that Bannon serve six months behind bars and pay a $200,000 fine.

Federal district court Judge Carl Nichols who rendered his judgment, said Bannon had shown “no remorse for his actions” and “has yet to demonstrate he has any intention of complying with the subpoena.”

However, Judge Nichols also said that Bannon did have ample grounds for appeal. Hence Bannon was released while any appeal to the sentence is resolved.

Bannon said he respected the judge’s decision but rightly denied any criminal wrongdoing. Bannon’s attorney confirmed he would be filing a notice of appeal.

Hours after Bannon was sentenced, President Trump was formally issued a subpoena from the January 6 panel, ordering him to testify before lawmakers about the Capitol riot.

Liberals reacted the way they always do, with obscene glee.

+++

There were Twitter trends such as #TrumpIsGoingToJail and #BannonIsATraitor

Defying congressional subpoenas is nothing new, Obama officials have done it before and have suffered no consequences whatsoever.

We look at two specific cases.

Back in 2012, the House voted to hold Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress over his failure to hand over documents related to the Fast and Furious arms trafficking scandal.

In 2010, two of the weapons linked to the Fast and Furious program were discovered at the murder site of slain Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in Arizona.

Terry’s murder exposed the botched Fast and Furious operation to allow the transport of guns to Mexico’s notorious cartels as a means of raising fury that would lead to calls for gun control..

Operation Fast and Furious was launched in 2009 by DOJ officials, in collaboration with the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Agency, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) under Obama.

Between 2009 and 2011, ATF agents allowed more than 2,000 firearms to be sold to criminal elements and allowed them to move across the border.

Federal agents claimed they were hoping to track these guns to Mexican drug cartel leaders and eventually conduct arrests. They lost track of them instead. None of these claims made any sense; given that the guns went on to arm the cartels and led to many deaths, surely there were better and safer ways to fight Mexican drug cartels.

It is ironic that Obama officials were indirectly arming dangerous gangsters while attempting to seize or regulate guns from law-abiding citizens.

In the end, as many as 1,700 of those weapons went missing, and more than 100 have been found at bloody crime scenes both in the US and Mex

However, despite the death toll and the serious dereliction of duty on the part of Holder, federal judge Amy Berman Jackson declined a House committee’s bid to have Holder held in contempt of court and perhaps even jailed. Instead, Judge Jackson termed the House contempt motion “entirely unnecessary

Judge Jackson was in the same position as Judge Nichols who sentenced Bannon.

Jackson is an Obama appointee entrusted to adjudicate if an Obama official was contempt of a GOP majority Congress.

Nichols is a Trump appointee entrusted to adjudicate if a former Trump official was contempt of a Democrat majority Congress.

The Democrat appointee had no compunction acting in a partisan fashion while the Republican felt the need to baselessly punish another Republican just to prove his ‘fairness.’

Nichols probably feared that if he let Bannon go, Democrat thugs would have demonstrated outside his house, much like they did outside the homes of conservative Supreme Court Justices when Roe v. Wade was eventually overturned. Perhaps there would have been violence, too.

Nichol is probably expecting generous blandishments from Democrats for sentencing a powerful pro-Trump individual, despite being a Trump appointee.

But that is unlikely to happen.

They will instead focus on the fact that Nichols sentenced Bannon to 4 months in jail in defiance of Biden’s DOJ request of 6 months and the difference between the fine amount that the DOJ recommended and what was actually ordered. They will also lament that the judge didn’t order that Bannon be immediately sent to jail and gave him enough time to appeal.

Holder’s wasn’t the only Obama official who defined a congressional subpoena.

Back in 2014, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee subpoenaed Obama’s political director and adviser David Simas to testify before Congress.

The Committee was probing whether Obama’s White House has used staffers for partisan campaign activities, which are prohibited under the Hatch Act.

Simas defined the subpoena and refused to testify before the committee.

Obama’s White House said that Simas was “immune from congressional compulsion to testify on matters relating to his official duties” because doing so would threaten “longstanding interests of the Executive Branch in preserving the president’s independence and autonomy.”

But none of these privileges apply to Trump or his former advisers.

Make no mistake, the sentencing of Bannon and the subpoena to Trump are purposefully done weeks before the midterms to excite the Democrat base. They are sending a message – ‘give us power and we will outlaw all political opposition and send Trump and his supporters to jail.’

But another message has inadvertently also been dispatched across the country regarding Democrats’ unprecedented criminalization of the political opposition. It sends a warning message to all, including fair-minded old-school Democrats, that challenging the Democrat D.C. establishment will have serious consequences.

The voters will ponder that if they did it to Bannon for defying subpoenas, could they do it to far smaller fry for complaining about inflation or crime or the fentanyl crisis caused due to Democrat misgovernance?

This will certainly encourage voters to vote against Democrats.

In a functioning democracy, the prevalence of the rule of law is paramount. All law enforcement agencies must be objective and apolitical. The law must be enforced strictly based on the nature of the crime and emphatically not the political proclivities of the culprit.

Legal egalitarianism is a fundamental tenet of civilized society.

When that essential principle begins to falter and the law is selectively applied, democracy ceases to prevail.

This is more proof that the U.S. is drifting away from the representative democratic values on which it was founded.

Will undo this mess when they take back the House?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++