Year End Reflections, Part V (More Politics)

First, some interesting information.  Where did people move from 2022 to 2023?  Texas ranked first with 473,000 more people.  And, no surprise, Florida was second with 365,000 more people.  The California minimum wage goes up to $16 per hour as of January 1.  Unfortunately, the ADL (Anti-Defamation League) reported an increase in antisemitic incidents from 465 in 2022 to 2031 in 2023.

Fox reported that a 10th grade Seattle High School had a class on "Ethnic Studies World History."  The class was given an exam of True-False and multiple choice questions.  Here was one question:  All men have penises.  True or False?  Here was another:  Only women can get pregnant.  True or False?  A student who answered True to these questions was told those answers were incorrect.  Does anyone really need any further proof of the sickness of leftwing ideology?  MEN CANNOT GET PREGNANT!  MEN, AND ONLY MEN, HAVE PENISES!  But the truth is not a value for the left.  All lies in support of their agenda are deemed worthy.

Los Angeles County District Attorney, far left George Gascon, recently appointed one of the assistant DAs to be his chief of staff.  Nothing unusual there.  Until we find out that this woman, following the death of George Floyd, called the LAPD "barbarians."  And she referred to them as "an occupying army."  No surprise that she called for defunding the police.  And it was reported that she has a T-shirt that reads "the police are trained to kill us."  Exactly how is the DA's office supposed to work with the police to prosecute criminals, given those attitudes?  Oh, that's right.  Gascon is one of those DAs who does not believe in prosecuting criminals.

Boston Mayor, Michelle Wu, decided to have a holiday party for the members of the City Council.  But not all the members were supposed to be invited.  However, her assistant inadvertently sent the invitation out to the entire Council.  The invitation read:  "Electeds of Color Holiday Party."  Said Wu, in defending this nonsense:  "It is not at all divisive, it is creating spaces for people and communities and identities with shared experiences to come together."  This is yet another example of the evil of "identity politics."  But if that is deemed to be acceptable, then I would not object to an "Electeds White People Holiday Party."  

Of course, I object to all of it.  I believe, as MLK said, that people are to be judged based on the content of their character.  Why is skin color important?  Another way to look at it is what Dennis Prager often says.  The world is divided into only two groups - the decent and the indecent.  

On the good news front...California enacted a law banning concealed carry in 26 different public places, making it all but impossible to actually carry a gun outside of the home.  No, that's not the good news.  The good news, as reported by the AP, is that a Federal Judge blocked enforcement of that law.  As the AP reported it, the Judge felt "that would have banned carrying firearms in most public places, ruling that it violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and deprives people of their ability to defend themselves and their loved ones."

As readers know, I always like to read the "Letters to the Editor" in the newspapers.  One letter in the 12/20/23 New York Times was by a Jewish man described by the paper as a "distinguished emeritus professor of anthropology at the State University of New York."  The writer says he is "a Jew by culture and ancestry, albeit a secular one."  He tells us he "abhors contemporary violence by both Hamas and Israel."  Typical leftwing view that all violence is the same and is bad.  Violence in the defeat of evil is not bad.  It may be unfortunately necessary, but it is definitely not bad.  

The letter writer continued and said his father bought Israel bonds for him and his siblings when they were younger.  But, "in the late 1960's and early '70's, when I had my own children and when Israel had become an expansionist power, I asked him to stop."  More leftwing lies; this time lies of omission.  Israel was able to gain more territory by defending themselves in war and winning.  That does not make them an expansionist power.  Good to know that a "distinguished emeritus professor" lacks all common sense and reason.  Which is what happens when leftwing ideology defines your world view.  Or, as I like to say, letting your beliefs dictate your reality.   

Year End Reflections, Part IV (Back To Politics)

(Note.  I'm sure my readers are well aware that since the attack on Israel on October7, virtually all my posts have been about that and the increasing antisemitism.  The atrocities of October 7, followed by the increasing Jew hatred, have really gotten to me in a way that few stories have.  Obviously 9/11 is another example.  Let's pray for no more 9/11's or 10/7's.)

The Colorado Supreme Court decided that Donald Trump should not be on their state's primary ballot  because he is guilty of insurrection, as defined in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.  This post will not go into a detailed legal analysis of that Amendment.  But the case was brought by a group of never Trumpers against the Colorado Secretary of State, alleging that the Secretary must not allow Trump to be on the ballot because of insurrection.

The trial court found that Trump was guilty of insurrection, but that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment did not apply to the office of President.  Therefore, he could be on the ballot.  The Colorado Supreme Court disagreed, by a 4 to 3 vote.  The Majority:  "President Trump incited and encouraged the use of violence and lawless action to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power."  And this:  "President Trump's speech on January 6 was not protected by the First Amendment."  

I admit to not having read this lengthy decision.  However, I am very curious to know exactly what words in the speech were deemed by the Court to not be protected speech; what words were deemed to create an imminent threat of violence or lawless action.  I also thought it was interesting that the Court found Trump guilty of insurrection without him being a party to the case.  I guess I should not be surprised, as the second House impeachment vote on Trump was conducted with no Judiciary Committee hearings first.  No evidence was presented prior to that vote.  

So I decided to ask another attorney, very leftwing, exactly how the decision would play out.  After all, other states have similar cases pending.  Do we now have a situation where each of the 50 states gets to decide who can be on the ballot?  Obviously, there would not be uniformity among all 50 states.  What if Trump were to win a sufficient number of electoral votes where he was on the ballot.  Would he only be the president over those states?  Would those states where Trump was disqualified from the ballot have a different president?

Back to that leftwing attorney.  Having no answer for the possible chaos created by the Colorado decision, he simply said the US Supreme Court will decide.  Then, as often happens, he reverted to Trump is bad, and therefore should not be on the ballot.  Explaining how that would work with 50 states was of no apparent concern to him.    

Is this how the Court is protecting our democracy?  Trump has never been convicted of "insurrection."  Trump was not involved in the Colorado case.  Four unelected judges decided to remove from the ballot the main opponent to the sitting President, and not let the voting public decide.  And, again, thinking forward, might we end up with a country having one president for some of the states, and another president for the rest of the states?  Is this what the Democrats call protecting our democracy?  Because none of it looks the least bit democratic to me.

The Court Majority:  "We do not reach these conclusions lightly.  We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions before us."  I don't think so.  The office of the President of the United States is the one and only office that the entire country votes on.  (The VP is essentially a tag along.)  So I would ask the Court just how mindful they were of creating different qualifications for being on the ballot, qualifications that surely will not be required in many of the other states.

Let's think back to the 2016 election.  There were dire predictions about what would happen if Trump won.  The most serious was that Trump would start a nuclear war.  None of the awful predictions came about.  And Trump won.  So we had the Russian collusion hoax.  That didn't succeed in getting Trump out of office.  We had the first impeachment over a telephone call with Ukraine.  That didn't work.  We had the second impeachment.  None of these actions taken by the Democrats succeeded in removing Trump from office.  In 4 years in office Trump started no wars.  No one lost any rights.  

Biden won in 2020, but looks to be easily beatable in 2024.  So now we have 4 different politically motivated prosecutions.  But they don't seem to be working either, as Trump's poll numbers keep going up.  So here is the next idea - keep Trump off the ballot.  I honestly do not know how it could be any clearer - the Democrats do not believe in our democracy.  Or in any democracy.  

 (Afterword.  I have my own issues with Trump.  The silly name calling.  The unnecessary commenting on everything.  Costing the Republicans the 2 Georgia Senate seats.  Having a meal with antisemites like Nick Fuentes and Kanye West.  And personally calling state and local officials about the 2020 election results.  But don't tell me the Colorado Court cared about democracy.)

Year End Reflections - Part III (Is This The True Face Of Islam In America?)

We already know that the group "Students for Justice in Palestine" celebrated the atrocities of October 7, by calling it "a historic win for Palestinian resistance."  But the "Council on American-Islamic Relations" (CAIR)  bills itself as a moderate group, reflecting the interests of Muslims in America.  Therefore, it may surprise some to learn (although it shouldn't) what the executive director of CAIR, Nihad Awad, was found to have said.  As reported in an editorial in the 12/9-12/10/23 weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal, Mr. Awad claimed that his comments were selectively chosen to, essentially, make him look bad.

But The Journal said they were able to get a copy of Awad's speech before it was taken off line.  Here are some of his comments as reported by The Journal.  "The people of Gaza only decided to break the siege, the walls of the concentration camp, on October 7.  And yes, I was happy to see people breaking the siege and throwing down the shackles of their own land, and walk free into their land, that they were not allowed to walk in.  And yes, the people of Gaza have the right to self-defense, have the right to defend themselves.  And yes, Israel as an occupying power, does not have that right to self-defense."    

Clearly, there was no concern for the men, women, children and even babies who were brutally murdered by Hamas.  Awad said that Israel does not have the right to self-defense because he clearly does not believe that Israel has the right to exist at all.  He made that clear when he referred to the people of Gaza "walk(ing) free into their land."  What they did was break into land that is considered part of the territory of Israel.  By referring to that land as "their (the people of Gaza's) land," Awad is telling us that Israel should not exist.  This is no different from the chant "from the river to the sea Palestine will be free."  It would appear that the only rights that Jews have are to either be killed or leave Israel.    

Then, Awad attacks AIPAC (the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee) and "corrupt members of Congress."  Awad:  "We have to free so many people from the shackles of AIPAC and its affiliates who have sold the soul of America."  In an apparent attack on Biden's support for Israel, Awad goes on:  "For how much?  It is for how much AIPAC and its affiliates have been controlling the U.S. Congress...Unless we free Congress, we will not be able to free Palestine."

This is not much different from one of Ilhan Omar's many antisemitic comments, when she said "it's all about the Benjamins."  It couldn't be that Congress and the American people support Israel because of shared values, with Israel being the only democracy, and Western style country, in the Middle East.  

Awad:  "When we say 'if there is no cease-fire, there will be no votes for you in 2024 elections, we started to see the tone changing - and the position changing."  Also speaking with Awad was the director of American Muslims for Palestine, Osama Abuirshaid.  The Journal reports that at a rally on December 1, Abuirshaid said this:  "What they alleged that happened on October 7 turned out to be a lie.  Most of the (Israeli) civilians were killed by their own army."  Talk about a lie - disgusting!

And, proving that these people remain quite adept at propaganda, Awad said this:  "I ask young people:  be wise.  You are not in Palestine.  You are not in Gaza.  The language there doesn't work here."  It is the kind of language that we hear from the Muslim members of Congress.  They speak of the "human rights" of Palestinians, not of the atrocities committed against the Jews.  And, of course, they never say that it is Hamas that violates the human rights of the people of Gaza.  (Although, recent polling suggests that as much as 75% of the people of Gaza supported the atrocities committed by Hamas.)