New Year Reflections, Part II - A Continuing Discussion of the True Threat to Our Freedoms and Democracy

United States Representatives Adam Schiff, Andre Carson and Kathy Castor, along with Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (all Democrats) sent a letter to the president of global affairs at Meta (the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp).  

Here is part of their letter:  "Following the 2022 midterm elections, we write to urge Meta to maintain its commitment to keeping dangerous and unfounded election denial content off its platform.  To that end, we also urge Meta and its leadership to continue the suspension of former president Donald Trump's Facebook account beyond January, and to carefully monitor the spread of harmful election misinformation, including the BIG LIE about the 2020 presidential election, on Facebook..."  

When they talk about "election denial," they are only speaking of Donald Trump and his supporters.  They do not mean Hillary Clinton, who has never accepted that she lost in 2016.  Nor do they mean Stacey Abrams, Al Gore, or the many others who never accepted defeat, or those who never accepted Donald Trump as a legitimate president.  This is how the Left, the Democratic Party (recall these letter writers are all Democrats who are prominent members of Congress) tries to shut down speech with which they disagree.

Here's more from these Democratic letter writers to Meta:  "Meta's policies do not prohibit posts that make unsubstantiated claims about voter fraud...this is highly troubling, and an area where Meta must improve its oversight and enforcement."  These Congress members are telling Meta what they MUST do.  Is that how a democracy works?  Democrats using the power of the federal government to tell private business what speech is acceptable.  Is no one allowed to ever suggest there might be any voter fraud?

One of the totalitarian Left's tactics is to call opposing speech "misinformation."  Here is WH Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre:  "I want to be very clear here.  The fact is that the removal of Title 42 does not mean the border is open.  Anyone who suggests otherwise is simply doing the work of these smugglers who, again, are spreading misinformation which is very dangerous."  How to shut down conservative speech?  Call it misinformation.  Call it hate speech.  Attempt to criminalize it.  

Anyone who watches Fox News can see for themselves that the border is wide open.  Anyone who does a little reading or research knows that in the two years that Biden had been in office, nearly 5 million people have entered our country illegally.  Five million people, if placed in one location, would be the second largest city in the US, surpassed only by New York City.  And that's misinformation?  "Misinformation" is anything that disagrees with the totalitarian Left's talking points.  

This is almost unbelievable.  But it's not if you understand the influence of the Left.  Police in the UK interrogated, and then arrested, a woman standing outside an abortion clinic.  Her offense?  Standing across the street from an abortion clinic and silently praying.  Apparently, the City of Birmingham in the UK has a "Public Spaces Protection Order" in place.  That order prohibits any either pro or anti abortion protesting near any abortion clinic, by "graphic, verbal or written means, prayer or counseling."  I get it.  Abortion is legal, so the City does not want people entering an establishment that provides a legal service to be harassed or intimidated.  But silent prayer across the street?  Really?  

The totalitarian Left will not only try to change your words and thoughts, they will act against you when possible.  The paragraph above was about the UK.  But here is a story about the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Alexandria, Virginia.  Two of the schools administrators thought it was a good idea to withhold notification from students, mostly Asian, that they were deemed to be National Merit Scholars.  National Merit sends the list of students to school administrators, and allows them to notify the students.

Without that information, the students could not put on their college applications that they were National Merit Scholars.  The result is that they may have lost out on scholarships.  Said the Director of Student Services:  "We want to recognize students for who they are as individuals, not focus on their achievements."  And, apparently, these administrators did not want to hurt the feelings of those students who were not recognized as National Merit Scholars.  

We know that the Left thinks that capitalism is bad.  Consistent with that, merit is also bad.  As is the hard work it took those students to achieve such recognition.  The Director said she wanted to "recognize students for who they are as individuals..."  But part of who they are is their dedication to hard work and achievement.  But if the totalitarian Left opposes that agenda, they will deal with it accordingly.  Any harm caused to individuals is of no consequence.  

New Year Reflections, Part I - Here is the True Threat to Our Freedoms and Democracy

It's been two years since January 6, 2021.  Time to stop thinking about that as the true threat to our democracy.  The true threat is more subtle than people climbing into the Capitol.  And that threat is embedded within the Democratic Party.  It is reflected in their efforts to harm us, to make us talk a certain way, and to even make us think a certain way.

The Cambridge Dictionary, like many institutions within the Western world, has been infected with Leftism.  They now define a woman as "an adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth."  Similarly, a man is defined as "an adult who lives and identifies as male though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth."  What utter non-scientific nonsense.  Then what is "female?"  What is "male?"  What is "sex at birth?"

Another eminent institution infected by left-wing nonsense is Stanford University.  They put out a list of what they refer to as "harmful language."  Why?  Because as with ALL left-wing institutions, they want you to think and talk a certain way.  A left-wing woke, politically correct way.  What's on Stanford's list?  "American."  They prefer US citizen, because there are other countries in the Americas (in North America, Central America and South America).  So what?  Who gives a damn!  We are the United States Of America.  So I'm proud to be an American.  

Stanford says don't say handicap parking, say accessible parking.  The State of California has given me a handicap placard.  I park in handicap spaces when I can.  Nothing about that hurts my feelings.  Of course, don't say "black hat," "black mark," or "black sheep."  Although, as a white person who is a conservative, I am clearly the black sheep in my left-wing family.  And, no "beating a dead horse," or "killing two birds with one stone."  The imagery is too violent.  I love horses.  I think they are the most majestic of all the animals.  But the expression "beating a dead horse," would never cause me to beat any horse - alive or dead.  

And, don't say "homeless person."  Rather, say a "person without housing."  Allow me to explain the difference, which is not obvious.  "Homeless person" is a descriptive adjective of a person.  Bad.  A "person without housing" is not descriptive of the person, but rather of their circumstance.  

In Norway, a transgender individual described herself as a "lesbian mother."  A Norwegian filmmaker and actress took issue with that.  She posted on Facebook:  "it's just as impossible for men to become a lesbian as it is for men to become pregnant.  Men are men regardless of their sexual fetishes."  In the US, we are blessed to have the First Amendment, although many on the Left would like to see that Amendment changed to not protect this type of speech.  However, Norway does not have the same constitutional protections of speech.  So, that filmmaker is now now facing criminal hate speech charges, which carries a possible sentence of up to 3 years in prison.  Up to 3 years in prison for speech that is not woke and politically correct.  This is the totalitarian Left.

The Left is sick.  They will try to punish you for saying that men cannot get pregnant.  I thought that was a scientific fact.  Everyone needs to understand the totalitarian nature of the Left.  They are perfectly willing to threaten your "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness."  The Left is a danger to freedom and liberty everywhere.  January 6 is not.  

A transgender rights activist testified before the House Oversight and Reform Committee.  Here is part of her testimony.  "The 6 justices who overturned Roe should never know peace again.  It is our civic duty to accost them every time they are in public.  They are pariahs.  Since women don't have their rights, these justices should never have a peaceful moment in public again."  I would ask those on the Left, is that your idea of democracy?  Pay no attention to the legal issues in Roe and Dobbs.  Simply harass, maybe even get violent, towards those with whom you disagree? 

But this transgender woman is not alone.  Recall that Chuck Schumer, as then Minority Leader in the US Senate, told a cheering crowd in front of the Supreme Court, before the final decision in Dobbs issued:  "I want to tell you Gorsuch.  I want to tell you Kavanaugh.  You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price.  You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions."  But they did go forward with the decision.  Overturning Roe did not take away the right to abortion.  It left it up to the states.  Because we are a Republic of 50 states, with those states having the general police power.

But the Left doesn't give a damn about the "republic," or about the Constitution.  They just care about their causes.  Their issues.  They have no regard for how our democracy works.  Or that we have 3 branches of government.  Or that we have 50 state governments, not only a federal government.  One way or another, the totalitarian Left is determined to get what they want.  By controlling your thinking, your speech and your actions.  If you do not conform, you will face their wrath.  As the Left has taken over the Democratic Party, that Party has become the true threat to our democracy. 

Year End Reflections - Part III, The Continued Failure of the UN

It probably will not come as much of a surprise to anyone, but the Times of Israel reports that in 2022, Israel was condemned, in various UN resolutions, 15 times.  The rest of the world?  13 times all combined.  Is there a point to the UN?  Unless you believe that all the human rights abuses perpetrated by Russia, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, North Korea and other places, are insignificant compared to whatever is happening in Israel, then the only possible explanation is antisemitism.  Which means antisemitism is a worldwide problem.  This should be frightening to American Jewry.  Unfortunately, their main complaints are with Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump - two men who arguably have done more for Israel than any others.  

The latest antisemitic resolution to pass the UN General Assembly was sponsored by the Palestinians, Egypt and Jordan (two countries with whom Israel has had decades old peace agreements), as well as Yemen, Tunisia and Senegal.  The resolution commemorates the Nakba (catastrophe in Arabic), by which they mean the founding of the State of Israel.  The resolution passed 90 in favor, 30 opposed with 47 abstentions.  

Voting in favor were, among others, Bahrain and the UAE.  Those two countries were part of the Abraham Accords, establishing relations with Israel.  Voting against the resolution were, among others, the US, the UK, Israel, Canada, Australia, Austria, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy and The Netherlands.  Notwithstanding the different ways I searched on Google, I was unable to get a country by country vote.  It would appear, however, that at least some of the European countries voted in favor.

Here is what Israel's Ambassador to the UN, Gilad Erdan, said.  "This General Assembly, this body, voted to adopt Resolution 181 - the Partition Plan (partitioning the British Mandate into a Jewish state and an Arab state).  My people, the Jewish people, accepted this resolution without hesitation.  But the Arabs and Palestinians did not.  Five Arab armies, together with the Arabs living in Israel, tried to destroy and annihilate us."  

Ambassador Erdan went on to discuss the hundreds of thousand of Jews displaced from Iran and the Arab world in the 1940's and 1050's.  Of course, the UN does not care about that.  Ambassador Erdan:  "Their only crime was being Jewish.  This is the true Nakba."  But how often throughout history has the only crime of my people been "being Jewish."  

On November 29, the UN celebrated the "International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People."  I honestly do not know if all these countries think they are helping the cause of the peace, or just don't give a damn as long as they can appease the Palestinians.  Because, like it or not, only Donald Trump seemed to understand that the way forward was to make Israel welcomed within the Greater Middle East, and to ignore the Palestinians until they agreed to stop killing Jews.  

Year End Reflections - Part II, More on the Pernicious Effects of Left-Wing "Culture"

As I understand it, the American Girl Dolls have been very popular.  But now, the company put out a book titled "Smart Girl's Guide:  Body Image Book."  Here is some nonsense from the book, as reported by Fox.  "If you haven't gone through puberty yet, the doctor might offer medicine to delay your body's changes, giving you more time to think about your gender identity...If you don't have an adult you trust, there are organizations across the country that can help." 

Here is part of a preferred paragraph, as discussed by Jill Simonian, in a Fox Op-Ed.  "If you haven't gone through puberty yet, understand that it can be a confusing experience...but most everything you will feel is likely normal for this time in your life.  Always turn to an adult in your life who you feel comfortable with, for any questions you have...Being a girl can sometimes be complicated and confusing, but it's awesome." 

Let me be clear here.  Most boys feel like boys.  Most girls feel like girls.  And I have complete sympathy for those who feel otherwise.  But what is the message from American Girl?  That it's not okay to be a girl?  That it's not okay to become a woman?

Here is a stunning paragraph.  "Parts of your body may make you feel uncomfortable and you may want to change the way you look...that's totally okay."  Given our society's focus on looks, given the way female models and female entertainers look, and given all the magazine covers, it is hard enough for young girls to develop a positive body image.  It is hard for many women.  That does not mean they need to change their "gender."  I'm sure I will get some flack on this, but this is just sick. 

Actor and producer Kirk Cameron wanted to have a children's hour at various libraries in order to discuss/read his new book, "As You Grow."  (Let me admit here that I have not yet read this book.  But, Cameron says it is about things like faith, family and America.)  Over 50 public libraries have rejected his request to have an hour with their students.  Here is a typical reply, this one from a school district in Providence, Rhode Island.  "...we will pass on having you run a program in our space.  We are a very queer-friendly library.  Our messaging does not align."

What if his messaging does align with 90% of the students and their parents?  That's just too bad.  The Left will make sure your kids get "Drag Queen Story Hour," "The 1619 Project," and other woke, unwholesome and anti-American "lessons."  Traditional American ideas?  Not in public schools. 

The destructive influence of the Left is not confined to the US,  In what is described as an elite French University, Sciences Po, a dance instructor there was reprimanded.  She had the audacity to refer to her students as men and women.  She was told she must refer to her students as "leader" and "follower."  She refused.  So she quit.  Good for her!  It was back on July 20, 2014, that I wrote the post "My Ex-Wife."  On October 19, 2014, I wrote "My Ex-Son and Ex-Daughters."  I wrote those posts because the terms "husband," "wife," "son" and "daughter" were to be banned from our language.  Maybe some readers thought that would never happen.  Anyone still think that?

Allow me to reiterate.  I have complete sympathy for anyone who feels those descriptive terms do not apply to them.  But the Left has no sympathy for the overwhelmingly majority of people who do fit into those categories.  And, as the Left controls our schools, colleges, universities, mainstream media and the White House, it is just too bad for the vast majority of students.

And, permit me to reiterate a point made at the end of Part I: for those unclear as to the source of this sick, anti-boy, anti-girl, anti-men, and anti-women outlook on the world, that would be the Democrats.  Because the Left not only inhabits the Democratic Party - they now control it.

Year End Reflections - Part I, The Pernicious Effects of Gender and Race on America

I have never been a fan of "identity politics."  No one should be.  Identity politics prevents many from assessing what is truly important - character.  And the result of this misplaced emphasis results in a serious lack of common sense and moral clarity.

Example number one.  In a story out of the Randolph Union High School in Vermont, a 14 year old girl complained to some friends that she felt uncomfortable having to change clothes in the girls locker room, with a male student present.  Presumably, the biologically male student identified as a female. Someone ended up reporting this girl's discomfort to the school principal.  Incredibly, she was then disciplined for harassment and bullying.  

Her punishment included suspension, writing a "reflective essay," and participating in a "restorative justice circle."  Thankfully, she was able to get representation from the Alliance Defending Freedom, which sued the principal and the Orange Southwest School District.  After the filing of the lawsuit, the superintendent decided to rescind the punishments.  But just how sick has society become, when a young girl is not even permitted to say that she feels uncomfortable having a male in the locker room where has has to undress and change clothes.  

Example number two.  The "Lion King" is playing on Broadway in New York.  The cast is mostly black.  An American Sign Language interpreter, who is white, claims that he was fired based on his race.  He asserts that he received an email telling him that (as told on Fox) although "he was an amazing ASL performer, he is not a black person and therefore should not be representing the Lion King as the majority of characters are black actors and the content takes place in Africa."

I see.  Just as I am no fan of "identity politics," I am also no fan of the idea of "cultural appropriation," although I am not sure if that was at play here.  But I am curious.  If a white ASL interpreter is inappropriate in a play with mostly black characters, how was it permissible for a black actor to portray George Washington in the play "Hamilton," which I saw in Los Angeles?  How dare they!  By all historical accounts, Washington was white.  Having a black actor portray Washington is a historical inaccuracy.  Having a talented, and white, ASL interpreter, regardless of the race of the cast, should just be common sense.  

Example number 3.  After the LA Mayoral race final results were announced, my wife and I were watching the local 11pm news on NBC.  The anchors were celebrating the victory of Democrat Karen Bass, a black woman.  They cheerfully told us that, once Bass is sworn in, the mayors of America's three largest cities (New York, Los Angeles and Chicago) would all be black.  Because, after all, what else matters?  Not competency.  Not the fact that all three cities are suffering from excessive rates of violent crime and property crimes and homelessness.  

I would like to see one of the local NBC reporters speak to a black family member whose black loved one had just been murdered.  After asking how they are coping, the reporter should ask this:  "But doesn't it make you feel better now that LA has a black mayor?"  Ridiculous?  Of course.  Inappropriate?  You bet.  And that should be a clue as to the nonsense regarding race.  

A final point, for those unclear as to the source of this dangerous focus on race and gender above all else.  That would be the Democrats.

The Aftermath of the Israeli Election and the Dismay of the American Jewish Left - Part II

 Thomas Friedman is a regular Op-Ed writer for the New York Times.  He authored a recent piece titled "The Israel We Knew Is Gone."  Like Myers and Sokatch, Friedman is extremely unhappy with the recent election results in Israel.  Based on the rise of the religious right-wing parties, and the likelihood (now a reality) of members of those parties serving in the Netanyahu government, Friedman asks this question:  "...a fundamental question will roil synagogues in America and across the globe:  'Do I support this Israel or not support it?'"  

As a Jew, I will never understand that question.  Of course I support Israel.  My support is not contingent upon whoever may be in control of the government.  That is no different from my support for, and love of the USA, regardless of which party is in power.  Friedman acknowledges being told by an Israeli columnist that "there has been a dramatic upsurge in violence - stabbings, shootings, gang warfare and organized crime - by Israeli Arabs against other Israeli Arabs, and Israeli Arab gangs and organized crime against Israeli Jews, particularly in mixed communities."  

The November 19 edition of the New York Times had a news article with this title:  "Ruinous Electoral Failure Has Israel's Left Groping for a Vision and a Future."  Says the author:  "The waning of the left began in the 2000s, when a wave of Palestinian violence was interpreted by many Israelis as a rejection of efforts to peacefully resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."  What the author does not say is that in the year 2000, Yasser Arafat started the "Second Intifada," sending waves of suicide (homicide) bombers into Israel in order to blow up Jews (civilians) on buses, in malls and restaurants, and even at a Passover Seder.  What the author does not say is that many Israelis saw that as one of many rejections of efforts at peace.  

Israel continues to face enormous threats - from Hamas, from Hezbollah, from Syria and from Iran.  And sadly, from terrorists within.  But, all of these threats notwithstanding, Israel remains a thriving democracy.  Elections are free.  People may protest the government's policies, as they often do.  And, contrary to the Myers and Sokatch piece, the LGBTQ community in Israel is alive and well.  Of course, none of these things can be said about many of the surrounding Arab countries, or about life in Gaza under Hamas, or life in the Palestinian controlled areas of the West Bank under Abbas.  But none of that is ever the concern of the Left.  

The author spoke with an Israeli woman, who is described as a senior member of the management team of an Israeli kibbutz.  After saying that she "...held out hope for the creation of a Palestinian state side by side with a Jewish one - obviating the need to dilute Israel's Jewish character," the article quotes the woman as follows:  "If that's no longer possible, 10 years from now, it'll be better to have a democratic state than a Jewish state."  At the risk of upsetting some of my readers, I could not disagree more with that woman.

Israel must remain a Jewish state - a safe haven for the Jewish people, and historic home of the Jews.  Would I like to see the Arabs living in peace with the Jews?  Of course.  Who wouldn't?  But this effort to destroy the one Jewish state in the world has been going on for 76 years.  On black Friday I purchased the book "Bibi, My Story," an autobiography by Benjamin Netanyahu. In it, he quotes his brother Yoni, who fought in the Six Day War of 1967.  Yoni:  "I want peace very much.  I don't like to live by the sword, a life of killing and trying not to be killed."

Then Yoni wrote this:  "I see with sorrow how a part of our people still clings to unrealistic hopes for peace.  Common sense tells them that the Arabs haven't abandoned their basic aim of destroying the state.  But the self-delusion that has always plagued the Jews is at work again.  They want to believe, so they believe.  They want not to see, so they distort (reality).  It would be comic if it wasn't so tragic."  (Book by Threshold Editions, an Imprint of Simon & Schuster, Inc., 2022.)  

May Israel always remain the home of the Jewish people.  The people of Israel live!  Am Yisrael Chai!

The Aftermath of the Israeli Election and the Dismay of the American Jewish Left - Part I

(Note.  A post on the recent election in Israel (Israel Votes - And The Issues Are Similar To Here In The US) was written on November 6.  As discussed in that post, the conservative religious parties fared well in the election.)

In the November 4, 2022, Los Angeles Times was an Op-Ed co-written by David Myers (described as a professor of Jewish history at UCLA and president of the New Israel Fund) and Daniel Sokatch (CEO of the New Israel Fund).  I should preface my remarks by noting that I have previously had an email exchange with Professor Myers.  I also make mention of some of Professor Myers' opinions in my posts of 6/13/10 and 2/12/17.

Myers and Sokatch bemoan the rightward tilt of Israel's Jewish population.  They say that about 62% identify as right-wing, up from 46% in 2019.  "Especially depressing" to them is that 70% of young Israeli Jews identify as right-wing.  

But this one paragraph tells us all we need to know about Myers and Sokatch, and many left-wing American Jews:  "Israel has maintained an illegal and immoral occupation of Palestinian land since 1967.  And it has never reconciled its self-definition as a Jewish state with its professed desire to offer full equality to all its citizens, especially its large Arab minority, which makes up a fifth of the population."  The writers are particularly concerned about the likelihood (now a reality) of Itamar Ben-Gvir ("the avowed disciple of the hate-filled racist Meir Kahane") and Bezalel Smotrich ("a rabidly anti-LGBTQ rabble rouser") becoming part of the Netanyahu government.

But let's start with the idea of "Palestinian land."  What land is that?  In 1947, the UN General Assembly voted to partition the land of the British Mandate into a Jewish State and an Arab state.  The Jews agreed, but the Arabs never did.  When the Arabs attacked the new Jewish state, in a war lasting from 11/30/47 through 7/20/49, they did not succeed in destroying Israel.  When the war ended there was no peace treaty outlining the boundaries of two states.  Rather, there was an "armistice," a cease fire, the boundaries of which came to be known as the 1967 borders.  

During the "Six Day War" of 1967, the Arabs again failed to destroy the Jewish state.  Israel, on the other hand, won control of all of Jerusalem, the West Bank (Judea and Samaria), Gaza and the Golan Heights.  At the time of the armistice in 1949, Egypt controlled Gaza, Syria controlled the Golan Heights and Jordan controlled the West Bank and the Old City of Jerusalem.  But those Arab countries lost the 1967 war.  In other words, Arab countries controlled the land people like Myers and Sokatch call "Palestinian land."  Only after Israel controlled that territory did it become "Palestinian" land.    

Israel is the Jewish homeland.  I cannot tell if Myers and Sokatch have a problem with that.  One would never know from their piece that Arabs are in the Knesset, in the judiciary and were members of the outgoing government.  One might not know that in Israel Arabs are doctors and lawyers and in other professions.  But it's also true that after last year's fighting between Israel and Hamas (the current rulers of Gaza), Israeli Arabs attacked Israeli Jews in various cities throughout Israel.  Whatever justification that these Israeli Arabs may have felt, it is clear that many Jews no longer felt safe from their neighbors.  It should have surprised no one that the left-wing government gave way to a conservative government.  That would be a natural reaction when one's safety and security is at risk.  

It is no longer a surprise to me that people like Myers and Sokatch do not acknowledge the countless times that the Arabs have, in fact, been offered a state, and have rejected it each and every time.  The first rejection, again, was in 1947.  So this rejectionist attitude has been going on for 76 years.  Myers and Sokatch do not mention the non-stop terrorist attacks on Jewish Israeli civilians, nor the thousands of rockets launched from Hamas.  I would ask Myers and Sokatch if 22 Arab countries is fine with them, but a single Jewish country is not.   

What Red Wave? Part II

It certainly was not a total blowout for Republicans.  Fox reported that governors who either opposed Covid lockdowns, or reopened their states quickly, did very well.  Ron DeSantis in Florida won reelection by 19.4 percentage points.  DeSantis had his state on lockdown for only one month, with schools closed for under 3 months.  Kristi Noem of South Dakota won reelection by 26.8 points.  She did not lock her state down, and only closed schools for less than 3 months.  

Kim Reynolds of Iowa won reelection by 18.6 points.  Again, Governor Reynolds only closed the schools for a few months.  Jared Polis of Colorado won by 18.1 points, having a one month shutdown only.  And Brian Kemp of Georgia again beat Stacey Abrams, this time by 7.6 points.  We'll see if Ms. Abrams again becomes an election denier.  

As Kimberly Strassel, of the Wall Street Journal, noted, DeSantis carried Hispanics, women, white men, older voters, independents and married voters.  ABC reported that DeSantis carried Hispanics by 57% to 42%.  He carried Cubans 68% to 31%, likely because Cuban voters understand freedom better than most.  In Ohio, Governor Mike DeWine won by 25 points, and helped to increase Republican majorities in the legislature.  In Iowa, not only did Governor Reynolds win, and Senator Grassley win, both by double digits or more, but Republicans held all of the State's House and Senate seats.  Republicans also gained a super majority in the state Senate, and increased their majority in the state House.

In Texas, in addition to Governor Abbott winning, the Republicans increased their majorities in the state legislature.  Governor Abbott:  "Tonight, Texans sent a message that they want to keep Texas the beacon of opportunity that we provided over the past eight years."  Hard to argue with that, given the supporting facts.  In the decade from 2010 to 2020, Texas added about 4 million people.  Meanwhile, California lost people and lost a US House seat as a result.  700,000 Californians during that decade moved from California to Texas.  And, as recently as in 2021 alone, 62 businesses moved from California to Texas.  

Of course, the Democrats had their own wins - in addition to staving off a red wave in the House and the Senate.  In 4 states that had split governments before the election, the Democrats post election are now in complete control.  In Michigan, Minnesota, Maryland and Massachusetts, the Democrats control the governor's house as well as both branches of the state legislature.

Is there a takeaway from these state elections?  Daniel Henninger, of the Wall Street Journal, thinks so.  Referring to Governors DeSantis, Kemp, Abbott, DeWine and Chris Sununu of New Hampshire, Henninger concluded:  "Each of these Republican governors ran on policy successes that elevated their state's economies, schools and indeed personal freedom.  Abortion didn't defeat them."    

Could the Republicans have done better in this divided country?  Maybe.  But, clearly all is not doom and gloom either.    

What Red Wave? Part I

There have been many explanations for why the Republicans did not do better in the 2022 midterm elections.  Abortion, with the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade (Dobbs case).  One commentator suggested that many people thought the decision actually outlawed abortion nationwide.  Which, of course, it did not.  (Perhaps "government" is no longer taught in the schools.)  The threat to democracy.  Weak Republican candidates.  Young people, who vote overwhelmingly Democrat, voted in large numbers.  Biden, an unpopular president, mostly avoided the campaign trail, akin to hiding in the basement in 2020. 

I think that the outcome in the Senate gives us a pretty good clue as to what happened.  Of the 35 Senate seats up for election, the Democrats were at risk for 14 - and won all 14.  The Republicans were at risk for 21 - and so far have won 20, with Georgia to be decided by a runoff vote on December 6.  Regardless of who wins (if Walker wins the Senate remains at 50-50, and if Warnock wins it will be 51-49 in favor of the Democrats), the message seems to be that the country remains very evenly divided.  As I write this, the GOP has the lead in the House, barely, 212 seats to 204, with 19 seats still to be decided.  Again, very evenly divided.  So, the question I have is this - with such an evenly divided country, should we have even expected a red wave?

Were other factors at play?  Probably.  But, again, the question I have is - were those factors simply supporting the evenly divided outcome in our evenly divided country?  For example, the Democrats, who always excel at their unified messaging, talked non-stop about the threat to democracy by MAGA Republicans, by which they meant all Republicans.  It was not just Biden's speech (see the 9/4/22 post).  It was virtually all the Democrat candidates, along with their allies in the mainstream media.  And the messaging was non-stop.  Did that messaging prevent more Republicans from winning, when inflation is at a 40 year high, crime and homelessness are out of control, the border is unprotected (with over 5 million people crossing illegally since Biden took office), lack of energy independence (with high gas prices), and a feckless foreign policy.  Inflation, alone, should have resulted in a red wave, no?  

It is worth pointing out that the Democrats played dirty.  In a surprising, but successful move, the Democrats spent tens of millions of dollars in support of weak Republican candidates in the primaries.  Yes, they supported many "MAGA Republicans" in the primaries, expecting that they would be easier to defeat in the general election.  Their bet paid off, as those candidates did, indeed, lose.  But the very idea that the Democrats would support candidates in any election that they viewed as a threat to democracy, was called "cynical" by the Wall Street Journal.  One could also call it hypocritical.  I call it corrupt.  

Chuck Schumer had some interesting comments, after realizing that he would remain Senate Majority leader.  Schumer:  (the) "American people...rejected the anti-democratic, extremist MAGA Republicans."  And this:  (Americans are) "not happy with Republican leaders who condoned and even supported this nasty, poisonous rhetoric."  Schumer is a piece of work.  As Majority Leader, he stood outside the Supreme Court of the United States and threatened Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, if they did not agree with him on abortion.  As we know, there was subsequently an effort made to assassinate Justice Kavanaugh.  Schumer is a hypocritical liar.

And I'm sick of hearing about the "anti-democratic, extremist MAGA Republicans."  Democrats, who will not support US sovereignty, with their open border policy; who favored state courts rulings against state laws that placed limits on the time for voting; who support prosecutors who ignore state laws in order to effect "equity" in the criminal justice system, thereby ignoring the victims and protecting the criminals.  Tell me how ignoring enacted legislation supports democracy.  And who is extremist?  All the Democrats who claimed election fraud over the last decade or more, with some still in Congress? The Democrats who support socialism?  The Democrats who want to defund the police?  How about the antisemites in Congress who are part of the Democrat Party?  Why isn't antisemitism considered "extreme?"  Oh, that's right.  It is only considered extreme when the Democrats believe they can pin the "antisemite" label on a Republican.   

Did the consistent "anti-democratic MAGA extremists" propaganda play a role in the outcome?  To the extent that it may have affected the votes of independents, I would say it did.  Again, the Democrats have the near universal support of the mainstream media.  And the message was repeated day after day after day.  We have a mainstream media that no longer bothers to even give any pretense of being objective.  In fact, quite a few so-called "journalists" have justified their one-sided reporting (lying) on behalf of Democrats.  

When I refer to the mainstream media, it is not just most newspapers, it is also NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC.  It is also many TV shows and movies, because the writers are usually left-wing.  In a recent episode of "The Good Fight" on Paramount+ (I have never watched it), Ron DeSantis was accused by a gay character of sexual harassment, and of forcing this character to have oral sex.  Of course, the story is fictional, but it raises two questions.  Why even have such a story, unless the intent is to damage the likely leading Republican in the country, hoping that many people will assume the claim to be true.  Secondly, given Joe Biden's actual history of inappropriately touching women and even young girls, why wasn't he the target of the accusation of sexual harassment?  Well, we know why.  He's a Democrat.

Was it a total defeat for the Republicans?  See Part II.   

The Attack On Paul Pelosi

The attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, was horrific.  Pelosi is an 82 year old man, and was viciously assaulted by someone who was in the country illegally.  Someone who clearly has mental health issues.  The perpetrator was supposedly yelling "where's Nancy?"  Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle have appropriately condemned the attack and wished Pelosi a complete and speedy recovery.

Rand Paul Tweeted this:  "No one deserves to be assaulted.  Unlike Nancy Pelosi's daughter who celebrated my assault, I condemn this attack and wish Mr Pelosi a speedy recovery."  Recall that Rand Paul was himself viciously attacked by his neighbor in 2017.  He suffered six broken ribs.  One of his lungs was also damaged, and in 2019 part of his lung had to be surgically removed.  But the Pelosi's daughter Tweeted at the time that Rand Paul's neighbor "was right."  Sick.

But the Left always objects to being called out for their hypocrisy.  They don't want to hear about it.  Sometimes, they will make the accusation of "whataboutism."  Here was a comment by independent journalist Aaron Rupar:  "That Rand Paul can't bring himself to either just say nothing or condemn the assault without resorting to whataboutism speaks volumes about him."  

After the assault on Rand Paul, Kasie Hunt, of MSNBC, said:  "New details today on the incident that left Senator Rand Paul with six broken ribs.  This might be one of my favorite stories..."  More recently, Democrat Senate candidate in Iowa, Mike Franken, Tweeted last year:  "Wasn't Rand's neighbor more than a little in the right?"  

What about the mainstream media?  Here was the Washington Post:  "Attack on Nancy Pelosi's husband follows years of GOP demonizing her."  The New York Times had this headline:  "Years of efforts to vilify Pelosi preceded brutal attack in home."  Here was Hillary Clinton:  "The Republican Party and its mouthpieces now regularly spread hate and deranged conspiracy theories.  It is shocking, but not surprising, that violence is the result."  

That's it, make Republicans responsible.  So who was responsible for the shooting at the Republican baseball game in 2017, which nearly killed Congressman Steve Scalise.  The shooter was a Bernie Sanders supporter, and follower of Rachel Maddow.  Were they responsible for the shooting?  Were all Democrats responsible?  

Who is responsible for the beatdown of  someone who was canvassing for Republican Senator Marco Rubio?  That person was wearing a Rubio T-shirt and a DeSantis hat, and suffered internal bleeding and a broken jaw.  But one of the attackers allegedly said:  "you can't pass by here, this is my neighborhood."  Very likely that was a Democrat.  Are the Democrats at fault?

Pat Harrigan is a Republican candidate for Congress in North Carolina.  Just recently, his parent's home was shot at, while his children were sleeping upstairs.  While he has been on the campaign trail, Harrigan's children, ages 3 and 5, have been sleeping at his parents.  The bullet entered the first floor of the home, directly under the room where the children were sleeping.  A random attack?  Maybe.  But maybe a targeted attack.  A number of news articles describe Harrigan as "a firearms manufacturer and U.S. Army Special Forces Veteran."  

And, of course, we have the attempted assassination of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.  In that case, a young man from California was said to be angry over the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas (who wasn't) and over the leaked draft of the Supreme Court opinion that overturned Roe vs Wade.  Very likely that man is a Democrat.  So, yes, I want to discuss "whataboutism."  I want to point out the hypocrisy of the Democrats and the Left, who lie about political violence all being one-sided.   They lie when they say all political violence is encouraged or instigated by Republicans.  And, yes, I'm sick of their lies and hypocrisy, and the support given to those lies and that hypocrisy by the mainstream media. 

The 2022 Midterm Election

Last week, President Biden gave a major speech regarding the upcoming midterms.  He started out talking about the attack on Paul Pelosi, then switching to January 6, of course.  He next discussed voter intimidation (is that a big issue?), and followed up with threats against election officials.  After glossing over the real issues of the economy, crime and the like, he got to the substance and focus of his speech:  "But there's something else at stake, democracy itself."  The implication is clear:  if Republicans win, it is the end of our democracy.  

Biden:  "We the people must decide whether we will have fair and free elections, and every vote counts."  Yet, later on in his speech, Biden tells us:  "Once again we're seeing record turnout all over the country."  So, which is it?  Voter suppression or record voter turnout?  Georgia has reported record early voter turnout.  The same Georgia that passed a voting law to insure integrity of elections, the one that Biden called Jim Crow 2.0, somehow still resulted in early record turnout.  That's because Biden's attack, as well as the attacks of others on the Left, were nothing but lies.  Recall that Major League Baseball moved their All Star game from Atlanta to Denver over those lies.  Any apologies by Biden?  No, he continues to double down.

Biden:  "We the people must decide whether the rule of law will prevail..."  I know I'm not alone in wishing the rule of law applied when leftist groups such as Antifa and BLM were causing $2 billion worth of damage across the country.  I wish the rule of law applied in our cities, instead of criminals not being prosecuted by left-wing district attorneys.  I wish the rule of law was applied evenly in this country.  Recently, Steve Bannon was sentenced to 4 months in prison for contempt of Congress.  Obama's Attorney General, Eric Holder, was also held in contempt of Congress.  His prison sentence?  Please, he was not even prosecuted.

Biden:  "The great irony about the 2020 election is that it's the most attacked election in our history."  There's a whopper of a lie!  Hillary Clinton said the 2016 election was stolen from her.  Many Democrats said that Trump was an illegitimate President.  There was talk of impeaching Trump from the day he assumed office.  Then they made up the Russian collusion story, which was used as a vehicle for non-stop harassment of Trump during his entire term.  I cannot recall, at least not during my lifetime, of another president being so hounded during his entire term in office.  I was disappointed when Trump did not attend Biden's inauguration.  But just two days prior to Trump's inauguration, 55 Congressional Democrats had already announced that they would not attend.  

Biden's speech was non-stop about the threat to democracy if the people do not vote as he wants.  Ironically, Democrat candidates are claiming that Republicans are engaging in fear-mongering by talking about the rise in crime.  But Biden and the Democrats are trying to scare people into believing a Republican victory in the midterms means the end of democracy.  Didn't Biden promise to be the great unifier in his inaugural address?  Just another lie.    

Israel Votes - And The Issues Are Similar To Here In The US

First, the results.  Recall that Israel has a parliamentary system.  The people vote for a party, not for individuals.  The Knesset, the parliament, has 120 seats.  Any future government needs to put together a coalition of the many parties to total at least 61 seats - a majority.  After four rather indecisive elections, the Israeli public chose a conservative path.  

Benjamin Netanyahu, already Israel's longest serving prime minister, won.  More accurately, his party, Likud, won; and he is the leader of that party.  Likud got 32 seats in the Knesset.  The religious parties did well also.  The Religious Zionist party got 14 seats, Shas got 11 seats and United Torah Judaism got 7 seats.  It is expected that Israeli President Isaac Hertzog will shortly give Netanyahu the authority to form a government, if he can.  Bibi (Netanyahu) is a shrewd politician, and I am confident he will be able to put together a ruling coalition, with himself as prime minister.  And Meretz, a far left party, got zero seats.  Labor, a left-wing party, and the ruling party for many years after Israel's reestablishment in 1948, got only 4 seats.

Caroline Glick is one of the best commentators on Israeli affairs and the Middle East.  She had a very interesting article prior to the election, discussing the issues that voters should be focused on.  As you read some of the quotes from her article, you will see that it is amazingly similar to our issues in the U.S.  But maybe not that amazing, because the Left everywhere is the same.

Glick wrote that under Netanyahu Israel's economy grew.  And that "Israel was at the pinnacle of its regional power and global stature."  But under the current government there has been a backsliding.  Australia announced that it was rescinding its recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital.  And under the recent governments (of Bennett, Lapid and Gantz) "Israel surrendered its operational independence."  Glick points out that there have fewer attacks of sabotage on Iranian nuclear facilities.  

And, as Biden did in his recent speech (see the next post), Glick also discusses "democracy" as an issue in their election.  She says that the Left's version of democracy is "substantive democracy...where unelected. 'enlightened' members of the judiciary and the permanent bureaucracy decide Israel's course."  (Akin to our deep state.)  And Glick says that under Gantz Israel's boundaries (borders) were loosened because he allowed illegal construction of Palestinian homes in parts of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank).  The result is the creation of a de facto Palestinian state.  (Akin to Biden's and the Left's open borders here.)

Glick:  "In place of Jewish and Zionist education (the Education Minister) has introduced gender studies and other progressive nostrums, beginning in pre-school."  (That definitely sounds familiar.)  Glick also takes issue with the prior governing coalition on the fundamental nature of the country:  "Lapid and Gantz have both expressed their desire to gut Israel's basic law, which defines Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people."  It is amazing to me that this should even be an issue.  When the UN voted partition of Mandatory Palestine in 1947, they did it expressly to create a Jewish state and an Arab state,  The land is the Jewish homeland, with centuries - millenniums actually - of Jewish history.

Glick ends with this very astute observation (which, again, can easily apply to the US):  "Do we believe in our nation state and wish to preserve and defend it, or do we reject our national identity and national rights, and aspire to replace both with a globalist, progressive identity, devoid of Zionism and of Jewish sovereignty?"  (Do we wish to preserve our national identity of a constitutional republic of 50 states?  That post about our upcoming midterms is next.)

  

The Left Wishes To Fundamentally Transform America - Part II

In today's New York Times is an Op-Ed by regular columnist Jamelle Bouie, titled "The Constitution Is in Tension With Democracy."  When things are not going the way the Left wants, all the rules of the game need to change.  Even the fundamental rules in the Constitution.  Yet, they told us it was Trump who was the dictator, who didn't care about the rules.  

So what are the threats to democracy?  The election deniers, of course.  But only the Republican election deniers.  Not Gore, not Clinton, not Abrams, and not the many others in the Democratic Party.  The other threat to our democracy is the Constitution itself, the very structure of our government.  First, Bouie tells us about the "democratic backsliding of the past six years;" although she is only referring to the Trump years.  Why?  Aside from the fact that the Left hated Trump, there is the assertion that "Donald Trump was selected constitutionally, not elected democratically."  

I get it.  Clinton got nearly 3 million more popular votes than did Trump, but Trump won the electoral college vote and therefore became president.  Many people are unhappy with the fact that we are a republic of 50 states, and not a pure democracy.  I suspect there are some who are even unhappy with our representative form of government in the House.  Those people would like to see the people vote on everything.  

Why do we need an electoral college anyway?  Shouldn't every person's vote count equally?  There are fair arguments to make.  But the other argument is that we are a republic of 50 states.  It would be ridiculous to assert that all 50 states have the same or even similar interests.  How are the interests of those different 50 states best taken into account?  By both the electoral college and the Senate, where each state is represented equally regardless of population.  

Bouie tells us that we have "a system the basic structure of which fuels dysfunction and undermines American democracy, from how it enables minority rule to how it helps inculcate a certain kind of political chauvinism among some of the voters who benefit from lopsided representation in the Senate and the Electoral College."  Well, yes, there is lopsided representation in the Senate and the Electoral College by the smaller states.  

But I cannot help but wonder if that lopsided representation would be of any concern to the Left if it always favored Democrats.  The Left does not ask if our country is best served by a popular vote, which would likely result in the two coasts dictating the outcomes.  Tell me, are the big cities in those coastal states doing so well that we should allow them to set the agenda for the rest of the country?   

Our Constitution has been in effect since 1789.  Of course, some say that is the problem - it is old and outdated.  I hear the same thing said about the Bible.  Our Constitution has the distinction of being the oldest and most enduring governing document on earth.  It has survived a civil war, and numerous other societal challenges.  And it has been amended to meet the needs and the mores of the times.  

But the change that the Left seeks is one that they hope will insure their hold on political power for as long as is possible.  The Constitution, as written, does not do that.  And that is the problem.   

The Left Wishes To Fundamentally Transform America - Part I

You need not take my word for it.  Barack Obama told us back on October 30, 2008, that "we are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America."  The Left applauded.  The mainstream media was all in.  Then we had the Trump years.  With the Democrats out of power, it was necessary to change the structure of government.  Get rid of the electoral college.  Add states that would be reliably Democratic, in order to increase the number of Democrats in the Senate.  Or, get rid of the Senate altogether.  Pack the Supreme Court.  Term limits for the Justices.  Reduce the Court's jurisdiction.  

Fast forward to now.  The first Monday in October starts a new session of the Supreme Court.  The day prior, on Sunday, October 2, the New York Times had a long editorial titled "The Supreme Court Has A Crisis Of Trust."  We all know why this so-called crisis has suddenly arisen - the Court's decision in Dobbs at the end of the last term, which overturned Roe v. Wade.  If trust in the Court has fallen, it is because papers like the Times and many others in the mainstream media and on the Left have done their best to discredit and malign the Court.

Says the Times:  "The actual cause of its (the Courts) historic unpopularity is no secret.  Over the past several years, the court has been transformed into a judicial arm of the Republican Party...Within four years, the court had a 6-to-3 right-wing supermajority..."  In other words, Trump got to appoint 3 justices to the Court, and the Left cannot tolerate that.  When the Court had 6-to-3 left-wing supermajorities?  No problem.  

At no time does the paper concern itself with whether Roe was decided on solid Constitutional grounds, even though some liberal scholars acknowledged that it was not.  At no time does the paper concern itself with what powers belong to the federal government versus state governments.  The reason, of course, is that the ends justify the means for the Left.  Actual legal and constitutional issues are of no consequence to the Left.   

Here is more from the Times:  "Election deniers in the Republican Party are undermining the integrity of the American electoral system."  If you tell them that Hillary Clinton continues to claim that the 2016 election was stolen from her, that's different.  The same for Stacey Abrams claiming the Georgia gubernatorial election was stolen from her.  Then, of course, we had the entire 4 years of the Trump Administration with a large segment of the Democratic Party not only claiming that he was an "illegitimate" president, but trying to remove him from office with their phony Russian collusion story.

The Times:  "Right-wing political violence is a present and growing threat."  Who shot up a Republican Congressional baseball game and nearly killed Rep. Steve Scalise?  That would be a left-wing political activist.  What about the threat on the life of Justice Kavanaugh?  And, how about the approximate $2 billion in property damage caused by various left-wing protesters and groups, in the summer of 2020.  Apparently, the Times is not concerned with political violence by Antifa or BLM or other left-wing groups.  

The Times quotes Justice Elena Kagan from a speech given in September at the Northwestern University School of Law:  "When courts become extensions of the political process, when people see them as extensions of the political process, when people see them as trying just to impose personal preferences on a society irrespective of the law, that's when there's a problem - and that's when there ought to be a problem."  Shame on Justice Kagan.  Here we have a sitting Justice of the highest court in the land, trying to undermine the legitimacy of that court, for the sole reason that the Dobbs decision did not go as she wanted.  

When Chief Justice John Roberts joined the 4 liberal justices in the initial decision upholding the Constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), he did so by calling the individual mandate a "tax," which it clearly was not.  The then four liberal justices, including Kagan, made it clear that they  would have upheld the ACA under any legal theory.  In other words, they were willing to act as an "extension of the political process," and support Obama's signature piece of legislation no matter what. 

To this day, I am both amazed and dismayed that so many on the Left simply accept at face value what they read in the New York Times or LA Times or other mainstream papers.       

The Democrats' Attacks on Republicans Continue

Big News!  48 illegal immigrants were flown to the island of Martha's Vineyard, which has a population of about 17,000 people, and is part-time home to many of the rich and famous.  California Governor, Gavin Newsom, was just beside himself.  Although, these immigrants were not sent to the French Laundry, so what's his problem?  Anyway, Newsom decided to send a letter to the DOJ, because, as is obvious, he wants to run for president in 2024.

Newsom wrote:  "Several of the individuals who were transported to Martha's Vineyard have alleged that a recruiter induced them to accept the offer of travel based on false representations that they would be transported to Boston and would receive expedited access to work authorization...I urge US DOJ to investigate whether the alleged fraudulent inducement would support charges of kidnapping under relevant state laws."  Hmm.  Is Newsom the governor of Massachusetts?  How is this his business?  Oh, that's right, he's running for president.  

"Charges of kidnapping under relevant state laws."  Why would the US DOJ be involved in enforcing state laws?  Who "induced" these illegal immigrants to travel to the United States in the first place?  That would be Joe Biden, giving an assist to the cartels involved in human smuggling.  Newsom is just another left-wing Democrat who is more than happy to see the criminalization of politics - as long as it is always directed against Republicans.  I would love to see a poll showing how many Democrats would approve of Governors Abbott, DeSantis and Ducey being locked up with President Trump.  Let's be honest.  Today's Democrats have no interest in the two party system that has been the source of great stability in our country.  No, these people prefer a one party system, no different from the former USSR or Communist China.  

Newsom need not worry.  The Guardian reports that 30 of the 48 illegal immigrants are already represented by counsel.  The firm's name is Lawyers for Civil Rights, and is based in Boston.  How coincidental that 30 of these illegal immigrants have counsel.  And, no surprise, these attorneys are seeking a criminal investigation of Governors Abbott and DeSantis.  Here was Dick Durbin, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee:  "It is pathetic that these governors are taking advantage of these helpless people." 

Helpless people?  Just more elitist nonsense.  Many of these "helpless" people managed to travel the approximate 2,700 miles from Venezuela to Texas.  But they can't manage an additional 100 miles to Boston?  Sometimes, CNN has the funniest online headlines.  Here's one:  "'They enriched us.'  Migrants' 44-hour visit leave indelible mark on Martha's Vineyard."  44 hours.  I'm impressed.  How many were thinking:  "We were able to get rid of the riff-raff in under two days."  That's right.  These "migrants" were shipped off to Joint Base Cape Cod.  CNN asserted:  "The migrants sent to Martha's Vineyard have been voluntarily taken to a military base for support, officials say."  Voluntarily taken to a military base?  I thought they expected to go to Boston.  CNN also told us that these migrants "cheered" when told of the move.   

President Biden threatened to sue the Republican governors.  Biden:  "Republicans are playing politics with human beings, using them as props.  What they're doing is simply wrong, it's un-American, it's reckless."  Actually, what it's doing is bringing attention to a border crisis that Biden and Harris have ignored for nearly two years.  And outrageous that Biden says Republicans are playing politics with human beings, when he is the one that invited millions of immigrants to come here illegally.  Besides, why aren't sanctuary cities and states asking to receive all the illegal immigrants flooding into Texas?  

Many of us remember how, on 9/11, US airspace was closed to all but military aircraft.  We remember how the small town of Gander in Newfoundland, Canada, welcomed 38 airplanes, with approximately 6600 to 6700 people, into their town of about 10,000 people.  Many of those people were stranded in Gander for five days or more.  Yet, the tiny town fed and housed their unexpected guests.  Martha's Vineyard managed to deal with 48 illegal immigrants for 44 hours.  Very impressive.

G-d bless the people of Gander; and credit to Governors Abbott, DeSantis and Ducey, for bringing attention to a problem that can no longer be ignored.

Time To Catch Up On Some News

(First, an apology, and a correction.  Obviously, I always want to be factually accurate in the blog.  The opinions are, of course, mine.  But I made a huge error in the August 28, 2022 post, "Growing Up In 2001 - Part II."  I incorrectly stated that 2996 people were murdered on 9/11.  In fact, 2977 people were murdered.  The additional 19 were the rat bastard terrorist a-holes who died.  My apologies for that error, and shame on me for relying on a mainstream media source for the numbers.)  

On 9/11 this year I picked up a copy of the New York Times.  As I searched through the news pages for a story about the 21st anniversary of the terrorist attacks, I did not find anything.  There was clearly nothing on the front page.  On the assumption that I must have overlooked it, I went through the news pages a second time.  Nothing.  On 9/11/01, 2753 people were murdered in and around the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center.  In New York City.  And many more have since died, from 9/11 related illnesses.  Yet, the so-called "paper of record," whose motto is "All the News That's Fit to Print," could not bother remembering those souls who were lost that day in their city.  They could not be bothered honoring the memory of the 343 members of the FDNY who died that day.  That could not be bothered honoring the memory of the 71 NYPD and other law enforcement officers who died that day.  

But, they did manage a front page anti-Trump story.  In the Opinion section was an Op-Ed titled "'America's Mayor' Finds Himself Alone."  Other than a few sentences of admiration for Rudy Giuliani's leadership on that fateful day, the rest of the Op-Ed was essentially a hit piece attacking Giuliani.  It is hardly a surprise that the New York Times has proven, yet again, to be such a big disappointment.  For those on the West Coast, the editors at the Los Angeles Times could not trouble themselves to write about the anniversary of 9/11 either.   

Remember how every word out of the mouths of every person in the Trump Administration, especially the White House Press Secretary, was fact-checked?  Not so for the lucky Karine Jean-Pierre, Press Secretary to Biden.  Fox News reported that there was no fact-checking by "Factcheck.org, Reuters, The Associated Press, The Washington Post's Glenn Kessler, and CNN's Daniel Dale."  The same report says that Snopes fact-checked her one time regarding a prior comment, and Politifact fact-checked her twice.

Maybe you believe that Jean-Pierre just does not lie.  Or, maybe you understand that the mainstream media is all in on Biden's behalf, and has no interest in disputing anything out of the Biden White House.  After all, she did say people are not just walking across the border.  If you do not watch Fox, then you probably think she is correct, because you've never seen the thousands of people walking into our country across the southern border.  Jean-Pierre asserted that Biden has done more to secure the border than Trump did.  Can you see me laughing?  

Here is a good one from Karine Jean-Pierre:  "From day one, when the Supreme Court made this extreme decision to take away a constitutional right (overturning Roe v. Wade), it was an unconstitutional action by them."  Oh, really?  And notice how every action of which they disapprove is to be deemed "extreme."  

According to a group known as The Bowery Mission, there are now 80,000 homeless people in New York City.  Another group, The Coalition for the Homeless, says that "Homelessness in New York City has reached the highest levels since the Great Depression of the 1930s."  There are parts of Los Angeles that look like the streets of a third world country, or worse.   

Recently, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-NY) gave an interview to GQ.  She spoke of little girls telling her that they want her to be president.  But AOC opined that "...my experience here has given me a front-row seat to how deeply and unconsciously, as well as consciously, so many people in this country hate women."   I recall hearing similar nonsense from people on the left in 2008, when Obama was running for the first time.  He could never win.  Too many people are racist and hate blacks.  Except, Obama won.  Twice.  As for women, in 2016 Hillary Clinton received 65,853,514 votes compared to Trump's 62,984,828.  

Both the 2008 and 2016 elections proved that people do not hate blacks or women.  What AOC's comment about women (and the comments by leftists about Obama in 2008), does demonstrate is the utter disregard that these leftists have for their fellow Americans.  It is not just Hillary's basket of deplorables, when referring to Republicans.  It's pretty much how they think of all Americans - racists, sexists, etc. etc. 

Biden's "Let's Forget About That Whole Unity Thing" Speech

It was a prime time TV address to the nation, which the White House press secretary assured us would not be political.  Except, it was totally political.  And what was up with that dark red background?  And why were two Marines standing behind Biden, flanking him on either side.  It is not completely unprecedented to have a military presence at a presidential address, but it is quite rare when it is not a military related speech.  Recall how the Dems and the media were apoplectic when the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs appeared with Trump in Lafayette Park.  

Notwithstanding the dozen or more times Biden mentioned "unity" and "together" in his inaugural address, this speech was the antithesis of his inaugural speech.  But it should not have been surprising to anyone.  The Democrats have been making an all out assault on the Republican Party this year.  First, we have the made for TV prime time January 6 committee hearings.  Second, we had the raid on Mar-a-lago.  Third, we had the Dems spending 44 million dollars to support Republican candidates in various primaries.  That's right, they are supporting MAGA Republicans, in the hope that they can be easily defeated.  It would be rather ironic if their cynical and unprecedented ploy backfired on them, and they helped elect candidates they believe are a threat to the country.  Fourth, we now have Biden's anti-Republican speech.  All of these things have been coordinated with one end in mind - keeping the Democrats in power.  

I don't care that Biden said that the majority of Republicans are not MAGA Republicans, because the overall tenor of the speech was to tell the country how bad all Republicans are.  Biden did not define who the MAGA Republicans are.  However, as one example, he mentioned abortion rights early on, and said the MAGA Republicans wanted to take our country backwards.  But all those Republicans who voted for Trump in 2016, and helped him get elected, meant they also helped get three conservative Justices appointed to the Supreme Court.  And those Justices were instrumental in overturning Roe v. Wade.  So, to make my point, Biden was certainly implying that all Republicans who voted for Trump (tens of millions of Americans) are responsible for overturning Roe.   

There were many times, and many ways, that Biden made it clear just how dangerous he thinks Republicans are to democracy and to the country.  In other words, "keep us Democrats in power because we are the good guys."  He said the MAGA Republicans are "extreme," and "embrace anger," and "thrive on chaos," and "are destroying American democracy."  Here are a couple of my favorites.  The MAGA Republicans "do not believe in the rule of law," and "they refuse to accept the results of a free election."  I could write pages in rebuttal to all this nonsense.  But I'll focus on the last two quotes.

MAGA Republicans do not believe in the rule of law?  Do we not have laws regarding our territorial sovereignty?  President Trump did everything in his power to protect our borders.  And, upon taking office, President Biden did all that he could to reverse Trump's policies.  He decided that America could easily deal with another couple million people.  He said so during the campaign.  But he doesn't make the laws.  Congress does.  His job is to enforce those laws.  By intentionally ignoring the border issue, Biden has so far allowed nearly five million people to enter the country since he assumed office.  Biden decided he would forgive a certain amount of student debt, which will cost the country hundreds of billions of dollars.  Why isn't that a decision for Congress to make?  

Who doesn't respect the rule of law?  Remember when Speaker Pelosi referred to federal agents protecting federal buildings in Portland as "stormtroopers."  It was so outrageous that Attorney General Barr said it was putting FBI agents at risk.  The rule of law?  Remember when Senator Schumer threatened Supreme Court Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.  Chief Justice Roberts felt it necessary to make a rare rebuke of a politician, by calling Schumer's "threatening statements inappropriate," and added "they are dangerous."  The rule of law?  How about Maxine Waters saying "I will go and take Trump out tonight."  The rule of law?  Here is the Democrats' 2016 VP candidate, Tim Kaine, saying that "we've got to...fight in the streets."  And where were the Dems during the rioting and looting and destruction in the summer of 2020?  Apparently they did not care that much about the loss of life, the injuries and the two billion dollars in property damage, as the Dems stayed mostly silent.  The rule of law was obviously not an issue for them.   

Now let's focus on MAGA Republicans not accepting election results.  Biden said this:  "Democracy cannot survive when one side believes there are only two outcomes to an election - either they win or they were cheated."  Hillary Clinton never accepted that she lost the 2016 election.  She called Trump an "illegitimate president."  John Lewis called Trump an "illegitimate president."  Nancy Pelosi said "our election was hijacked.  There is no question."  Over 60 House Democrats refused to attend Trump's inauguration because, you know, he was not a legitimate president.  

Clinton, not accepting that she lost, said this:  "I don't know that we'll ever know what happened," and then referred to the "many varying tactics they used, from voter suppression and voter purging to hacking to the false stories..."  So many possibilities.  Except for one - that she actually lost the election.  What was that Biden said:  "either they win or they were cheated."  The Democrats never, and I mean never, accepted Trump as the President.  Not simply by their words, but by the 2 1/2 years of the phony Russian collusion story, and the four years of non-stop harassment of a sitting president.  And, at least one site reported that, while at a campaign stop, one woman said to Biden that Trump was an "illegitimate president in my mind."  Biden was reported to have replied to the many things this woman said about Trump:  "I absolutely agree."   

I cannot imagine that anyone still believes that Biden is a unifier.  Was Trump divisive?  I said so in the blog.  But, Biden has now become the divider in chief.  The difference is, Biden promised to be a unifier.  But that was just one of the many lies that have been told by Biden throughout his political career.

MAGA Mike     

Growing Up In 2001 - Part II

It was the morning hours on September 11, 2001, when my brother called and asked if I was at home.  After telling him that I was, he told me to turn on the TV.  It was almost impossible to believe what I was seeing.  At 8:46am, a plane hit the North Tower of the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan.  Seventeen minutes later a plane flew into the South Tower.  At 9:59am the South Tower came down.  At 10:28am the North Tower fell.  I was unable to hold back my tears.  As my wife and I were watching in disbelief, I turned to her and said that it was inevitable that I would know someone who had just been killed.

It was inevitable because I grew up not very far away, across the Hudson River, in New Jersey.  I later found out that someone who attended all of public school with me, as well as Jewish summer camp, was, in fact, killed that day.  He worked at Cantor Fitzgerald, which occupied the 101st through the 105th floors of the North Tower.  As the plane hit below their offices, cutting off stairwell access, they had no chance of getting out.  658 of their 960 employees in New York were murdered that day. 

As we all later learned, 19 terrorists, with 15 from Saudi Arabia, and under the direction of Al Qaeda, flew a total of four planes, with three hitting their mark.  The third plane flew into the Pentagon.  And the fourth, believed to be aiming for Washington, D.C., was brought down by passengers.  After learning of the other attacks, some of the passengers were determined not to let another plane reach its target.  No one can forget - nor should anyone ever forget - the words of passenger Todd Beamer to some of the other passengers:  "Let's roll."  It was the beginning of the United States fighting back.  

Their bravery stopped the terrorists who had taken control of the plane.  Tragically, the plane crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.  A total of 2996 people were murdered that day.  It was the worst attack on American soil since the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.  

It took nine years for the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center to be built.  From 1966 to 1975.  As a student at Rutgers in New Brunswick, New Jersey, two years in a row I lived on the sixth floor in the same dorm and in the same room (1970-1971 school year, and 1971-1972 school year).   On a clear day, I was able to see the 28 miles into lower Manhattan as the Towers were rising.  What took nine years to build came down in a matter of minutes.  But building is much more difficult than the cowardly act of destroying.  

I will never forget then New York City Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, refusing a gift of $10 million from a Saudi Prince, to help rebuild New York.  The Prince asserted that the U.S. "must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack."  And, the Prince added that the U.S. "should re-examine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stand toward the Palestinian cause...our Palestinian brethren continue to be slaughtered at the hands of Israelis while the world turns the other cheek."  

America's Mayor would have none of it.  "I entirely reject that statement.  There is no moral equivalent for this (terrorist) act.  There is no justification for it...To suggest that there's a justification for (the terrorist attacks) only invites this happening in the future...It is highly irresponsible and very, very dangerous."

On September 14, standing at what came to be known as "ground zero," then President George W. Bush told America and the world:  "I can hear you.  The rest of the world hears you.  And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon."  America was at war.  And America was united.  Flags could be seen flying from homes across the country.  And in large numbers, Americans enlisted in the military, and signed up for service in the FBI and CIA.  Patriotism abounded.

I recall that 21 years ago I found it difficult to speak about 9/11 with friends in California.  Yes, they understood that America was attacked.  But it seemed as if they lacked the same emotional involvement that the  people in New York and New Jersey had.  I had many a conversation with my friends in New Jersey at that time.  A single generation later, it is sad that the unity, the patriotism, has been so diminished.  But it was clear to me who the enemies of America were.  And they seemed to be aligned with the enemies of Israel.  After 2000, I would resolutely stand with Israel.  And after 9/11/2001, I had no patience for those who would not stand with America.  I was firmly in the conservative camp.

Growing Up In 2001 - Part I

(There are only two stories in this post.  One from 2000.  And one from 2001.  I'll start in 2000.)

In 2000, Bill Clinton was still the President.  It was the year that he held the Camp David Summit with then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and then Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat.  It has been reported that Barak offered Arafat a Palestinian state on 97% of the territory encompassed by the West Bank.  Proving once again that the Palestinians had no interest in the establishment of a state, as long as Israel still existed, Arafat made no counter offer.  Instead, Arafat walked out on the President of the United States, and returned to Ramallah.

From Ramallah, Arafat began the second intifada (Arabic for uprising or rebellion).  The first intifada lasted from late 1987 through September, 1993.  Many of you may recall that during the second intifada, Arafat sent so-called suicide bombers (I call them homicide bombers, because they were sent to murder civilians) to kill Israelis.  These murderers made no distinction between young and old, men or women, Israelis who may have been sympathetic to their cause or not.  They blew up Israelis on buses, in cafes and in malls.  They did the same at a Passover Seder.  Over 1000 Israelis were killed, with many more injured.

That was the year that I started to watch Fox News.  Why?  Because Fox actually let their audience know what was happening, often in disturbingly graphic detail.  And I could not believe it.  It felt like in the year 2000, I was watching yet another evil group of people seeking to annihilate the Jewish people.  I was sad, of course.  But I was also angry.  And I had no patience for my fellow Jews in America, who reacted as if what was happening did not affect all of us, as if it was happening in a "foreign" country.  No, these were not foreigners - they were my fellow Jews.  

So that was the year I realized that I did not know enough about the history of the Middle East.  I started reading up on it.  I had to.  Because I was determined to defend Israel, and my fellow Jews there, against all the hypercritical, hypocritical and hateful anti-Semitic attacks.  Obviously, this was not the first time in history that Jews were being targeted for being Jews.  It has happened countless times throughout history.  But this was the year 2000.  

Publicly, Bill Clinton said:  "I regret that in 2000 Arafat missed the opportunity to bring that nation (a Palestinian state) into being and I pray for the day when the dreams of the Palestinian people for a state and a better life will be realized in a just and lasting peace."  Privately, Clinton was said to be furious with Arafat.  

As a reminder, at the end of World War I, with the defeat of the Ottoman Empire (the Turks), the British had control of the territory now encompassing Jordan, Israel, Gaza and the West Bank.  The area was called Palestine, and under British control, it was referred to as the British Mandate or Mandatory Palestine.  When the Jews were eventually given a parcel of that land for their state, they called their country the State of Israel.  The Arabs were also given a parcel of the land at the same time, when the United Nations voted to partition the land into a Jewish state and an Arab state.  But the Arabs would not tolerate the existence of a Jewish state, and made war on the tiny new country of Israel from May 15, 1948 through March 10,1949.  

It was on May 14, 1948 that the Jewish people of Palestine announced the independence of the new State of Israel.  And it was on May 15, 1948 that the Arab world attacked, in the first effort of many to wipe Israel off the map.  But, as many readers know, the Jews had to defend themselves against the Arabs before Israel became a country.  The Haganah (the precursor to the Israeli Defense Forces, or IDF), has been described as a paramilitary force that operated in Mandatory Palestine well before the establishment of the State of Israel.  The Haganah had to defend the Jewish people of Palestine in the 1920's and the 1930's against Arab attacks.  After the UN voted partition of the land in 1947, the Haganah again defended the Jewish people of Palestine from Arab attacks.   

Dennis Ross was the United States' Middle East envoy under President Clinton.  After the failure of the Camp David Summit, Ross said that Arafat wanted a "one-state solution.  Not independent, adjacent Israeli and Palestinian states, but a single Arab state, encompassing all of Historic Palestine." 

 One thing was certain.  There could no longer be any doubt - I could not stand with any on the left who sided with the Palestinians against the Israelis.  And I was greatly disturbed by my fellow Jews in America who did not feel the same way that I did.  If by 1991 I was no longer a man of the left, it was clear to me that I was now a conservative.  I was grateful to all those who supported Israel, many of whom were Republicans and conservatives.  And yes, one of the biggest supporters of Israel has consistently been Sean Hannity of Fox News.       

Biden's "Accomplishments" - Part II

I asked myself this question:  "Why is Biden so intent on reinstating the awful Iran nuclear deal?'  Besides, doesn't Iran already have enough enriched uranium to make nuclear weapons?  What's the point?  I came up with this answer.  The mainstream media is already helping Biden sell all the lies about the "Inflation Reduction Act."  I bet Biden is thinking if he can lock up a foreign policy "success," no matter how spurious, the mainstream media will help him sell that as well, and just maybe the Democrats will be able to hold onto the Congress in the midterms.

With the 2015 Iran nuke deal under the Obama-Biden team, Iran received $150 billion, which, of course, all went to helping the Iranian people.  Nope.  Iran continued its support of the Houthis, Hezbollah ,Hamas and other terrorist organizations.  My suspicion of Iran being able to produce nuclear weapons was borne out, according to Caroline Glick.  She reports that "last month Iran announced it has already crossed the nuclear threshold and can develop bombs at will."  

Glick opines that the post-war ideal of nuclear non-proliferation is over.  Although, one could argue that with North Korea, India and Pakistan all having the bomb, that era had already ended.  But this seems different.  If Iran has nukes, surely Saudi Arabia will want to get nukes.  Which means Turkey will also want them.  Who's next?  Egypt?  The smaller Gulf states?  The Middle East has already been the location and source of numerous conflicts over the decades.  Do we need to add the risk of nuclear war?  And we should never forget that Iran refers to the US as the "Great Satan."  

What about the planned assassination attempts by Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, on the lives of John Bolton, former National Security Adviser, Mike Pompeo, former Secretary of State, and others?  Shouldn't that give pause to any deal with Iran?  Glick reports that Iran is demanding that the US do nothing to retaliate, and that Biden is apparently agreeable.  

And where is the outcry from Jews and Jewish organizations, who openly opposed the original deal?  Glick's answer is that they "have been sidelined in the Democratic Party, and have no appetite for further arguments with the party that is not only abandoning them, but empowering lawmakers like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib who demonize them."   

In March of this year, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer spoke of the problems with the original deal, but claimed the current negotiations to resurrect the deal are "good."  Good how?  Good by demonstrating just how weak Biden is?  Good because appeasing a tyrannical, terrorist supporting regime is supposed to do what?  Demonstrate strength?  

I do not expect any of my fellow Jews who are Democrats to care much about this, because...Trump...January 6...Trump...January 6...Trump...January 6...But the world did not end on January 6, 2021, and the threats from China, Russia and now Iran are growing all the time.  But Trump... 

Biden's "Accomplishments" - Part I

It's hard to argue with success.  After all, Biden and the Dems have managed to pass $3.8 trillion in spending since Biden took office.  Although, in fairness, the infrastructure bill was passed on a bipartisan basis.  But now we have the reduced version of "Build Back Better," aka the "Inflation Reduction Act (I.R.A.)"  But will it really reduce inflation?  Not according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).  The CBO states that the legislation will have "a negligible effect" on inflation this year, and may reduce inflation by 0.1% next year.  Or may raise inflation by 0.1%.

This huge piece of legislation passed on a single party vote.  It was 50-50 in the Senate, so the VP was able to break the tie.  It passed 220-213 in the House.  All the Dems were in favor and all the Repubs opposed.  Was anyone on the left outraged by the bill being called the Inflation Reduction Act, when it will do no such thing?  Of course not.  Only Trump lies, not Biden.  Maybe it was just a cute name.  And does it concern anyone that major pieces of legislation are passed on single party votes?  I thought Biden was going to be the great unifier.    

The IRS, the most hated federal agency, is getting a huge amount of money with this law - $80 billion.  That is enough, some say, to hire 87,000 new agents.  $45.6 billion is marked for "enforcement."  Newsweek reported that the IRS had originally posted listings for new job applicants that said they must "be willing to use deadly force."  That requirement was removed.  Recall that historically tax compliance was always considered voluntary.  Sure, there were cheats, and there were audits, but the vast majority of filings were accepted at face value.  My guess is those days are over.  

The Wall Street Journal claims that, contrary to the Democrats' assertions, "the main targets (for audits) will by necessity be the middle and upper-middle class because that's where the money is."  As the paper reports:  "the super wealthy employ lawyers and accountants who make litigation time-consuming and risky."  There is a new 15% corporate tax, which the Democrats never seem to acknowledge will affect all consumers, as corporations pass on their costs to all of us.   

According to the Dems, $369 billion will go towards investments in "Energy Security and Climate Change."  So what about climate change?  According to climate scientist Bjorn Lomborg, "the new US climate bill will do almost nothing to reduce global temperature."  His estimate?  Anywhere from .0009 degrees Fahrenheit to .028 degrees Fahrenheit.  It is easy to forget that China and India combined have over 1/3 of the world's population, and are perfectly willing to use fossil fuels when necessary to bolster their economic output.  

In fairness, the law reinstates "the largest oil and gas lease in U.S. history," according to Fox.  Specifically, Lease Sale 257 covers over 80 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico.  Unless, the Dems and environmental groups find some loophole to defeat this provision.  The law does provide for a tax credit of $7,500 for the purchased of new electric vehicles.  I guess people will need that given the cost of electricity that has been discussed on the social media app "Next Door."  One homeowner complained of getting a bill for $1464.99, while another said her bill was $1800.  

The bill does allow Medicare to negotiate the negotiate the price of some high cost drugs.  Which causes me to question if the drug companies (derogatorily called Big Pharma by the left) will do less research and development, and therefore produce less life-saving drugs.  

 I would like to spend some time discussing Biden's other accomplishments.  The record 2 million illegal entries into the US.  The resultant human trafficking and drug smuggling when the border is not adequately protected.  The record number of fentanyl deaths.  The unknown number of terrorists who may have been able to sneak into the country.  I'd like to discuss the real rate of inflation.  The out of control crime.  The homeless crisis.  The reduction in our military readiness.  Biden's bending toward the woke left, and helping to undermine respect for this country, at home and abroad.  I'd like to discuss Biden's foreign policy failures.  But time and space do not permit a discussion of these issues.  Although, I will make an exception for one foreign policy disaster, for which you will need to see Part II.  

Growing Up In 1991

The tide was turning for me.  1991 saw the end of the Soviet Union, the end of the cold war, and a new group of independent countries - the former Soviet Socialist Republics.  There was a renewed hope for peace.  And it was yet another victory for Ronald Reagan.  His military buildup was done at a pace that the USSR was unable to match.  Reagan's idea of "peace through strength" was yet another success of his.  Again, it was hard not to notice.

March 3, 1991 saw the brutal beating of Rodney King by police officers.  As a defender of the police, I remember saying that if the police had given him a dozen whacks, given the danger he put them and the public in, I think people would understand.  But over 50 times?  I predicted that some of the officers would lose their jobs and go to prison.  But after a Simi Valley jury acquitted 4 of the officers, the city of Los Angeles was devastated by 6 days of rioting and looting.  Businesses that had nothing to do with the police or Rodney King were destroyed.  I was disgusted by it.  Property damage was estimated to be over one billion dollars.  I recall Korean shop owners, armed and ready to defend their businesses and their livelihoods.  Ultimately, the National Guard was deployed.  Tanks were on the streets.

Over 50 people were killed and more than 2000 were injured.  Some were shot and killed by the police and the National Guard.  Then there was the case of Reginald Denny, an innocent truck driver who was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.  With traffic blocked in the streets, Denny was pulled out of his truck and had his skull smashed.  He was a white man viciously attacked by a group of blacks.  Where was LAPD during this chaos?  Mostly standing by and doing nothing.   

Yet, I still loved cop shows, because there the good guys would get the bad guys.  But in 1990, one of my favorite cop shows had ended.  Miami Vice.  I am not "cool" and never have been; nor have I ever cared about "cool."  But Miami Vice was cool.  It was different.  The music was cool, and early on the music often substituted for dialogue.  The cars were cool.  The clothes were cool.  And the women were hot.  

Sonny Crockett (Don Johnson) wore a tee shirt with a white sports coat.  Yes, he was cool, but he was intense, and no one was more determined to get the bad guys than Crockett.  Not that many years ago, my then adult daughters were clothes shopping with me.  They have much better taste in clothes than do I.  As I walked into the men's store, the very first rack had white sport coats.  As I started to reach for one, I heard my older daughter yell "No!"  I asked "what do you mean?"  In her direct fashion (the only way she knows to be) she said:  "This is not the 1980's and you are not Don Johnson."  I replied:  "Then I'll come back when you are not here and buy it."  Her retort:  "And I'll return it!"  No, I didn't get the coat.  

When I was a kid, the Westerns were the shows where the good guys won.  But the Westerns were replaced by police dramas.  Two years after 1991, "Walker, Texas Ranger" began.  I loved the show and the theme music.  In 1993 our kids were only nine, six and six.  But when episodes were shown at 11pm on a Saturday night, we let them stay up to watch.  And we all sang the theme song.

I am not obsessed with cop shows; I am obsessed about seeing good prevail over evil.  However, my wife and I have watched a few other cop shows over the years.  In no particular order:  Hawaii 5-0, Law and Order, Law and Order SVU, Law and Order Criminal Intent, Southland, NYPD Blue, Chicago PD, Blue Bloods, Flashpoint, Rookie Blue, The Rookie, CSI Miami, NCIS, NCIS L.A., NCIS Hawaii, NCIS New Orleans, FBI, FBI International, and FBI Most Wanted.  There are probably others.  

In 1992 Bill Clinton ran for President for the first time.  I voted for him.  Once.  In 1993, Michael Woo was a liberal Democrat running for the office of Mayor of Los Angeles, against businessman Richard Riordan.  But this was no longer 1971 or even 1981, when I would have automatically voted for the Democrat.  My recollection is that I was hearing "identity politics" talk from Woo, and that is an idea that I found to be deeply offensive.  Plus, Riordan just made more sense to me.  So, I voted for Riordan.  

In 1991, a dozen eggs could be had for 99 cents.  A gallon of milk cost $1.05.  And gasoline?  $1.14 a gallon.  Imagine that.  1990 saw the launch of the Hubble telescope.  It was very exciting, as I have always had an interest in astronomy.  With the Hubble, we could look deep into space and far back in time.  Looking up at the night sky with my telescope and binoculars, I was able to see the wonders of other planets.  I could see Saturn's rings, and even about 10 of Jupiter's moons, including the 4 inner Galilean moons.  With my backyard telescope, those moons only were visible as tiny specks of light.  But if I watched long enough, I was able to see the 4 Galilean moons traverse across the much larger body of the planet.  Star clusters were absolutely fascinating.  It was impossible for me to look at the wonders and vastness of the universe without thinking that this could not have happened without the hand of G-d.

After 9 years of walking with a cane, I had my first hip replacement in October of 1992.  The other hip was 6 months later, in April, 1993.  These 2 surgeries were quite the ordeal, as my doctor did not use cement to keep the implants in place.  Instead, the idea was to let the bone grow around the implant.  For two months I could not sit comfortably, as I had to make sure my hip was higher than my knee, in order to avoid a possible dislocation.  I could not drive.  Getting in and out of bed was a challenge.  And the only wat to take a shower was by sitting on a shower chair.  Of course, I was not allowed to put any weight on the operated hip.  Therefore I had to use crutches, or hop with a walker.  And I had to wear the compression stockings around the clock.  But I could not bend my leg to put them on.  Once again, my bride was there to take care of me every step along the way.  (Yes, pun intended.)  By the end of 1993 I was able to walk without a cane.  One's perspective is certainly affected when the simple act of walking is not something that can be taken for granted.   

One other thing was certain.  At this time, I may not have yet considered myself to be a conservative; but I was clearly no longer a man of the left either.