Early Tuesday morning, two bombs were detonated while Israeli civilians boarded buses to school and work in Israel’s capital of Jerusalem. The terrorist attacks killed a 16-year old Canadian-Israeli boy, Aryeh Shechopek on his way to yeshiva.
Aryeh Shechopek, 16, who was killed in a bombing attack in Jerusalem on November 23, 2022 (photo credit: COURTESY OF THE FAMILY)
As a continued part of their desire to destroy Israel and kill as many Jews as possible, various radical Islamic groups hailed the attacks.
Islamic Jihad posted a statement “The operation in the occupied city of Jerusalem is a natural response to the occupation, its terrorism, and its criminal practices against the defenseless Palestinian people and its holy sites.” Tarek Ez Din, spokesperson for Islamic Jihad added “The operation says to the leaders of the Occupation [Israel] and the leaders of the settlers that none of the policies of your criminal government will protect you from the strikes of our people’s resistance.“
A spokesman for Hamas, the political-terrorist group that rules Gaza and has a majority in the Palestinian parliament said “The Zionist occupation is paying the price today for its crimes and aggression against our people and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and we have warned about this repeatedly. Our people will not remain silent in the face of this, and the outrage Al-Aqsa will explode and spread in all regions.“
Hezbollah, the terrorist group that runs Lebanon issued a statement that praised the “heroic operations carried out by the Palestinian resistance fighters against the Israeli occupation forces in Al-Quds.” The statement concluded that the race among the Palestinian youths into the jihad fronts proves the Palestinians’ awareness and determination to liberate their land and sends a message of despair to the Zionist usurpers that there is no place for the Israelis on the pure soil of Palestine.
The Palestinian Authority’s Wafa news site reported on the bombings as “two explosions that rocked the occupied city of Jerusalem.“
Fatah, Islamic Jihad, Hamas and other terrorist groups recently signed the Algiers Declaration in which they agreed to have elections within one year in which they would all participate. The United Nations celebrated the alarming declaration and inclusion of terrorist groups in the election process.
Meanwhile, as Arabs celebrated the murder of innocent Jewish civilians, the United States issued a clear call of support for Israel:
“We condemn unequivocally the acts of terror overnight in Jerusalem. The United States has offered all appropriate assistance to the Government of Israel as it investigates the attack and works to being the perpetrators to justice. We mourn the reported loss of life and wish a speedy recovery to the injured. The United States stands with the Government and people of Israel. As President Biden emphasized during his visit to Israel in July, our commitment to Israel’s security is ironclad and unbreakable.“
America’s “commitment to Israel’s security” and support for bringing “the perpetrators to justice” should include full measures against Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah, as well as defunding the Palestinian Authority as long as it continues to incite and compensate terrorists. It must call for terrorist groups to be excluded from future Palestinian elections or risk forever to be black-listed by freedom loving countries.
Kyrie Irving is a basketball star with nearly 18 million followers on Instagram and another 4.6 million on Twitter. His following gives him a very large following and influence about… what?
He’s just a basketball player. A gifted one for sure, but why should we care about anything else he says or does?
He’s just a basketball player.
So when Irving says the world is flat, why does society ask him to apologize? He’s an idiot. When he promotes antisemitic films, why can’t we put his opinions in the same basket as the rest of his inanity?
Consider Bella Hadid, a supermodel with 56.2 million Instagram followers. That’s more than the population of 210 of 235 countries and territories tracked by Worldometers. Should we care about her opinion about politics?
She’s just a model.
So when Hadid says stupid things like “Jesus was a Palestinian” or that Israel commits “ethnic cleansing” and “apartheid”, why can’t we just ignore her?
Because we’re addicted. We listen to idiots.
There are a number of reasons we take the time to listen to non-experts:
The failure of the mainstream media – both in numbers and trust – left a void
Social media’s global platform and engagement vortex
Society’s elevation of emotion and “my truths” over facts
The thrill of interacting with megastars
Mainstream Media Failure
The internet killed mainstream media. As eyeballs moved online with the benefits of immediacy and active search, the advertisement dollars followed. People could search for up-to-the-second news and information from around the world from millions of sources, so the static print reports withered.
While hundreds of newspapers closed, the remaining ones pivoted with the times. They opted for deeper analyses in stories to leverage their brands and talented staff, leaving behind the quick breaking news which could be captured from millions of other sites. That left the short attention span-public to become ever more fixated on Instagram and limited characters-Twitter accounts of pop culture stars.
On top of abdicating the short-and-sweet sector, the news lost its objectivity. To keep its readership engaged, the media opted to choose a side and not report plain and deeper truths. In doing so, the media companies forever tarnished their reputations as biased actors. Their influence narrowed to segments of society.
Social Media Engagement
Pop culture transcends the biases of politics. Sports stars, models, musicians and actors become famous for their particular talents, not for their political acumen or scientific knowledge. They amass huge followings and have the ability through social media to speak directly to millions about the mundane, and sometimes, the not so trivial.
Alas, many of these stars are idiot savants, brilliant in a narrow field.
But their fans don’t care. They’re not interested in reading in depth boring analyses on weighty topics from old, dying and discredited media. They are fine with the quick blasts from venerated heroes. It helps them sort through the bazillion posts and articles online.
Bella Hadid has four times the number of followers as the 5,000-employee The New York Times. In a democratic and capitalist society, Hadid has much greater power and influence than mainstream media.
The influencers know the demographics of their followers, how to keep the eyeballs engaged, and how the platforms’ algorithms work. They have seen what trends and use social media managers to help consider how to best connect or grow certain demographics which helps feed the cash stream from endorsements.
And they know that boring doesn’t sell. Controversy pulls the eyeballs, and this is very much a business of eyeballs, not brains. Pics and blasts win attention, not careful consideration.
Kyrie Irving taking questions about his post of an anti-Semitic movie on October 30, 2022
When Kyrie spoke about his post featuring an anti-Semitic film, he said “All I do is post things for my people in my community and those that it’s actually going to impact. Anybody else that has criticism, it obviously wasn’t meant for them…. I’m not going to stand down on anything that I believe in. I’m only going to get stronger because I’m not alone. I have a whole army around me.” He seemingly believes that the core of his audience is Black people and hadn’t considered – or really cared about – local Brooklyn Jews who also buy his jersey.
Either way, his Black followers love him taking on the “establishment”, to the extent that anyone could consider the most persecuted people as privileged.
“My Truth” Malarkey
As broadcasting became democratized away from large conglomerates to individuals, the major platforms tried to catch up. They gave platforms to a range of talking heads on shows like ‘The View’ who share perspectives which might be embraced by swaths of the population, whether they are certain minority groups or say, high school dropouts. These new Hollywood stars offer a chance to share their ‘lived experiences’ and echo heretofore silent voices as it relates to various topics.
These voices reach those targeted audiences over mainstream media, and the rest of America hears it as well, much like Kyrie’s tweet designed for his Black “community” was also picked up by others.
The broader range of opinions have been dressed as “my truths.” That a noun like “truth” should have adjectives appended says much about today’s environment. We don’t have “objective truth” but opinions shielded from outside reality which ends discussion regardless of the preposterous ideas floated.
And polite society has asked the listeners to stay mum and contemplate what they are hearing. The once repressed voices now have a soapbox and it is a time to listen, not to respond. To correct “my truths” would be “mansplaining” or “touting one’s privilege”. It would surpass rude to admonish others’ “lived realities.”
As various segments of society get more representation in entertainment, government and board rooms, we have witnessed the promotion of bartenders, local teachers and high school dropouts to positions of influence and power. While there may be nothing wrong with that in principle, one needs to consider whether society is simply promoting locals who are eloquent but have no expertise.
Which is precisely the progressive idea. Experience has been marked as ensconcing privilege. America is seeking more diversity in views and opinions everywhere. And we’re getting them, and being directed to quietly listen.
Interacting With Megastars
The power of social media platforms is that it gives the masses the impression that they have a meaningful connection with stars rather than just a direct connection. The famous send messages right onto their personal phones! And they get to respond, with likes, comments and re-tweets. They can even become their “friend.”
In the e-world, a star who may not stop to sign an autograph for you, and might even hate everything you are, is carried all day in your pocket. An ever-present voice to keep you company along with the pantheon of other celebrities and influencers who keep you away from friends, family and work.
Technology has given megaphones to the entire planet, and the loudest ones have gone to pop cultural icons. Unfortunately, many have nothing worthwhile to say but the masses drink it in anyway. So the stars publish more to keep their audiences sated, and start to believe their “truths” because their fans shower them with adulation.
The rock band Moody Blues knew that they had catchy tunes but didn’t think they had the authority to opine on important matters as they sang “if you want the wind of change to blow about you, and you’re the only other person to know, don’t tell me. I’m just a singer in a rock and roll band.” Regrettably, they are in the minority, as the power of influencing millions of people is too addictive for most stars to ignore.
Idiot Audiences
You cannot blame these rich and powerful influencers for using their platforms. The problem is the audience. The followers are, for the most part, just like the pop cultural icon, minus the fame, success and narrow talent.
Reread the Kyrie Irving quote above. He was speaking to “my people in my community”, meaning principally Black men. His tweet on a global platform wasn’t intended for the millions of other people, the “anybody else… it obviously wasn’t meant for them.” He wanted Black men to know the problem of Jews stealing their heritage as the true “chosen people.” He wasn’t deliberately calling Jews lying and stealing scoundrels to their faces; that was a byproduct of the tweet.
While Kyrie’s featured movie may quote the notorious forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Adolf Hitler, and promote many anti-Semitic lies, it clearly spoke to him. He wanted his “people” and his “community” to take in the message that White Jews stole the Hebrew Bible from Black people (much like White Jews are stealing the Holy Land from Black and Brown people).
And yes, many Black men from Louis Farrakhan to Marc Lamont Hill to Keith Ellison believe and say as much. But Farrakhan’s been banned from social media, and Hill and Ellison only have 360,000 and 350,000 followers, respectively.
Kyrie reaches millions more and he wanted to spread this new anti-Semitic gospel.
Stepping Over The Line
Kanye West/ Ye has a few more followers than Kyrie Irving (18.4 million to 17.8 million). Ye’s tweet that he is going “death con 3 on Jewish people” was a call to violence. He didn’t simply insult, but committed an offense that should be punished in criminal court.
It was in that bilestorm that Kyrie added his tweet, another Black bomb on the Jews.
But Kyrie’s was a stink bomb. Offensive and gross but not jail-able.
The movie promotes a gross falsehood that many people actually believe. It has company amongst lots of racist media which is embraced by millions around the world. Kyrie fanned the flames with his enormous podium, he didn’t create the fiction. He’s ingested the poison just as the people in his community have.
The powers of the NBA sought to tamp down on today’s rampant anti-Semitism by suspending Kyrie for a few games and then made him apologize in a number of ways. It was painful for him to do so, as he insisted “I’m not going to stand down on anything that I believe in.” It took several weeks for him to say “I don’t have hate in my heart for the Jewish people or anyone that identifies as a Jew. The difficult aspect is just processing all this, understanding the power of my voice, the influence I have. I am no one’s idol, but I am a human being that wants to make (an) impact and change.”
The statement was a careful balancing act: not denouncing the movie or its message that he seemingly believes and wants millions of other Black people to watch, while also stating that he’s not an anti-Semite. He clarified that he didn’t hate Jews, hopefully ending his suspension and the saga.
There Is No End
It would be nice to say that this story of fanning hate is over and society can move on but that is not possible. Not because Kyrie / Ye / Hadid apologized / clarified / took their “punishment” or got off free.
It’s because societal dynamics dictate that it will definitely repeat.
The masses now have global unfiltered megaphones to speak to the masses at any time of day, and they all prefer short shots of emotion and “my truths” over considered meaningful analyses of objective truths.
Regrettably, it’s much easier to destroy than to build; to blurt an absurdity than investigate truth; to get all information from friends and members of your clan rather than scour dozens of source documents; to declare one’s opinions as truths rather than challenge old assumptions; to demand that others are to blame and should change rather than improve oneself; and to join the masses rather than stand apart.
The fictional idiot savant Forest Gump was fond of saying “stupid is as stupid does,” and he has become our champion. We do not consider his words as a warning but have embraced them as our national motto.
America has replaced “In God We Trust” with “In Influencers We Trust.”
Make no mistake, the idiots are winning and are likely to continue to do so.
The world population just passed 8 billion according to the United Nations. It took just twelve years to add the last one billion people, the fastest pace ever. Due to the lower fertility rates among western countries, the U.N. projects it will take 15 years to reach the 9 billion level.
With such milestone, it is an opportune time to address a question which arises in various situations: How many Jews?
Global Jewry
The Jewish population figure depends on many factors. Jews are a people as much as followers of a faith. Some Jews do not consider themselves of any faith or Jewish, even while other Jews might still consider these atheists and agnostics to be Jewish by ancestry. Further, Jews historically tracked their faith through their mothers, but some denominations have taken to using patrilineal descent as well, inflating the total.
According to the Jewish Agency for Israel, as of 2022, the total Jewish population stood at 15.3 million. That comes to roughly 0.2% of the global population.
country
Jewish population
Israel
7,080,000
United States
6,000,000
France
442,000
Canada
394,000
United Kingdom
292,000
Argentina
173,000
Russia
145,000
Australia
118,200
Germany
118,000
Brazil
91,000
South Africa
51,000
Hungary
46,500
Ukraine
40,000
Mexico
40,000
Netherlands
29,700
Belgium
28,000
Italy
27,000
Switzerland
18,800
Uruguay
16,300
Chile
15,800
Sweden
14,900
Turkey
14,300
Spain
12,900
Austria
10,300
Panama
10,000
Top 25 countries with Jews. The 17 countries with over 25,000 Jews is half of the 34 countries with that total in 1948, at the founding of Israel.
Jews in Israel / Palestine
Roughly 46.2% of global Jewry resides in Israel today, now that Israel has an open policy for admitting Jews. It was not always that way.
Palestinian Arabs sought to limit the number of Jews entering the region after the San Remo Agreement of 1920 which codified the 1917 Balfour Declaration. Several Arab pogroms slaughtered Jews in the 1920’s, with the British administrators using extreme measures against the Jewish victims. In 1929, the British expelled all of the Jews from Hebron after the Arabs slaughtered 69 Jews. A few years later during the multi-year 1936-9 Arab riots, the British capped Jewish immigration to the region at 75,000 people over five years, just as the European Holocaust was beginning. It enabled the deaths of over 100,000 European Jews.
During the Arab-Israeli War of 1948-9, the Transjordanian army ethnically cleansed all of the Jews from Judea and Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem. It destroyed the synagogues and then gave Jordanian citizenship to everyone in the illegally seized lands, as long as they weren’t Jews.
Today’s Palestinian Arabs similarly demand a country free of Jews. In the Palestinian Authority territories of Gaza and Areas A and B, there isn’t a single Jewish resident. There are roughly 490,000 Jews living in the Israeli territory of Area C and another 330,000 living in “eastern Jerusalem,” all of whom are considered to be doing so illegally according to the anti-Semitic United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334. Area C now has about nine towns with over 10,000 Jews, seventeen with over 5,000, and 75 with 1,000 or more. The United Nations keeps count of all Jews in the West Bank and issues monthly reports. Like their Palestinian wards, the U.N. knows how many is the right number of Jews. Zero.
Jews in the Holocaust
No one mentions the Holocaust without mentioning the number of Jews who were murdered. The commonly used round figure is 6 million, of which roughly 1 million were children.
Anti-Semites don’t like that number. Some haters like David Irving question whether the Holocaust happened, while others like Richard Verrall say that the number of Jews killed was far lower than the 6 million. Many Holocaust deniers face jail time as countries like Germany understand virulent anti-Semitism and where it leads. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance was a working definition of anti-Semitism which has been adopted by many countries, which includes denying the scope of the Holocaust as one of it criteria. Trivializing the number and event can be considered a hate crime.
Jews in Power
People like to count Jews in positions of power. The refrain that Jews run the entertainment industry and media runs from the mouths of many people, most recently, comedian Dave Chappelle who said “I’ve been to Hollywood and this was just what I saw. It’s a lot of Jews. Like, a lot.“
The myth of Jewish power sometimes escapes numbers. If there are few Jews in congress or the State Department, anti-Semites argue that Jews control the government through money or extortion. CNN’s Christiane Amanpour said that U.S. politicians have “to profess sort of fealty, or at least pay homage, to AIPAC“, the pro-Israel lobbying organization. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) said that “Israel has hypnotized the world,” while her colleague Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) told fellow radical anti-Semitic progressives that Jews are the power behind “the curtain… who make money off of racism.”
Too Many Jewish Neighbors
Some countries and communities don’t need an actual count of Jews. They know that any is too many.
For centuries, European countries and cities penned their Jews into ghettoes. Russia banned Jews from living in 75% of the country and hemmed them into an area called the Pale of Settlement.
“Street of the Jews” in the Old Town of Strasbourg, France
Some countries expelled all Jews including England in 1290, Spain in 1492, and Portugal in 1497. Muslim countries including Morocco, Tunisia, Iraq and Egypt made life impossible for Jews after Israel’s founding, forcing one million Jews to flee – almost the entirety of the Jews in the Arab world. Today, there are more Jews in tiny anti-Semitic Belgium than in the entire Muslim and Arab world.
Summary of Anti-Semitic Jew Counters
Anti-Semites can be grouped into two categories: “Counting Anti-Semites”, who see Jews everywhere as taking over neighborhoods and industries unfairly; and “Curtain Anti-Semites”, who cannot count many Jews but assume they are controlling the world as evil puppet masters.
The Counting Anti-Semites don’t want to see Jews Judaizing communities, whether in Jersey City, Mahwah or Jerusalem. Curtain Anti-Semites, like Rep. Louis Farrakhan, rouse the masses with fictitious blood libels and wild conspiracy theories against society.
All anti-Semites hate Jews and count them. If the haters determine that there are many Jews, those Counting Anti-Semites riot and seek laws and resolutions to curb where the overt Jews can live and work. If anti-Semites cannot count many Jews, those Curtain Anti-Semites spew hateful manifestos, citing forgeries like The Protocols of the Elders Of Zion and Hitler’s Mein Kampf about covert Jews. Some – like the Palestinian political-terrorist group Hamas – are grand wizards of both Counting and Curtain Anti-Semites, but leave the lobbying work to the “moderate” Palestinian group Fatah.
Six Turkish civilians were killed by a terrorist on Sunday. The labeling of the killer and her murderous mission was made clear in news reports, as were the names of the innocent victims.
The same cannot be said of Israeli Jews slaughtered by a Palestinian Arab terrorist the next day.
New York Times calls out Kurdish terrorism and Turkish victims of attack, as well as relays US sympathies
Terrorist Designation
The New York Times wrote about “the Kurdish Workers’ Party, or P.K.K., a Kurdish group that has been fighting a war with the Turkish state for decades. Turkey, the United States and the European Union all consider the P.K.K. a terrorist group.” The paper would only write six paragraphs later that “the P.K.K. denied any involvement in the bombing,” but the reader already knew the score – the P.K.K. are terrorists fighting Turkey and they seemingly committed the terrorist attack.
The next day, when a Palestinian Arab associated with the terrorist group Palestinian Islamic Jihad killed three Israeli civilians, there was no such accounting by the Times. Instead, the paper wrote that a “Palestinian assailant stabbed several civilians…. Three Israelis were killed and several more were severely injured.” The lone attacker was not associated with any terrorist group. The Times only offered at the very end of the article that “No Palestinian organization immediately took responsibility for the attack, but a spokesman for Islamic Jihad in the West Bank, Tarek Izz al-Din, told an Islamic Jihad-linked television channel that his organization welcomed what he called the ‘heroic attack.’ He said that it came as a response to the Israeli election results and to Israeli politicians’ calls to take firmer action against the Palestinians, Kan radio reported.” Palestinian Islamic Jihad is considered a terrorist group by Israel, the United States and the European Union, much like the reference to the P.K.K., but the Times did not mention the terrorist designation for Palestinians.
The Times also did not quote the spokesman for Hamas, another designated terrorist group that “the operation demonstrates the ability of the Palestinian people to continue their revolution and defend the Al-Aqsa Mosque from daily incursions,” supporting the murder of Jews because Jews visit their holiest site, the Jewish Temple Mount in Jerusalem.
American Sympathies
After the Times labeled the P.K.K. a terrorist group, it mentioned American sympathies for the Turkish victims. “The U.S. embassy in Turkey wrote on Twitter on Sunday that it was ‘deeply saddened’ by the bombing. ‘We extend our deepest condolences to the families of those who lost their lives and wish a speedy recovery for the injured’ it said.“
The Times said nothing about the U.S.’s sympathies for the Israeli victims of terror. Not surprisingly, as it took the Biden administration some time to post a response… that equated the Jewish victims of terror with the murderer. The press release on the U.S. Embassy in Israel’s site stated “The United States is deeply concerned by the increased violence in the West Bank. We convey profound condolences to the families and loved ones of the Israeli and Palestinian civilians, including children, who have been killed in the past 48 hours. We strongly condemn today’s terrorist attack, which killed three Israelis and wounded three others. The recent period has seen a sharp and alarming increase in Palestinian and Israeli deaths and injuries, including numerous children. It is vital that the parties take urgent action to prevent further loss of life.” The U.S. would not take sides.
Humanizing the Victims
The Times devoted the final five paragraphs of the article to the Turkish victims. Names and ages were given. Pains of anguish were echoed in quotes from the grieving parents “‘She is my baby,’ she said. ‘I want a piece of her hair.’“
Nothing was said by The Times about the Israeli victims. They were: 50-year-old Tamir Avihai, a father of six from the settlement of Kiryat Netafim; 36-year-old Michael Ledigin, a father of two who moved to Israel with his family five years ago and lived in Bat Yam; and 59-year-old Mordechai Ashkenazi, also from Bat Yam.
Rationalizing Terror
The Times sought to give context to the Palestinian violence. It wrote that “Israel is to swear in a new Parliament later on Tuesday, after the Nov. 1 election, and the prime minister-designate, Benjamin Netanyahu, has been working to put together a right-wing and religious coalition government with the help of far-right parties that have pledged to act more aggressively to protect Israelis. The attack also occurred on the anniversary of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s symbolic proclamation from exile in 1988 of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, territories captured by Israel in the Arab-Israeli War of 1967. That state has never materialized.” The Times essentially defended the terrorism and saying that it was a protest against a new “far-right” Israeli government, and in marking the anniversary of the P.L.O. declaring an independent state.
The Times incorrectly stated that the PLO’s declaration of independence only sought a state “in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, territories captured by Israel in the Arab-Israeli War of 1967.” The declaration was for the entirety of “Palestine”, including all of Jerusalem and all of Israel. It essentially rationalized the terrorism as an act of fighting for independence.
In contrast, the P.K.K., which is also seeking an independent Kurdish state, was only described as a terrorist group by the Times, without mentioning its desire for independence and sovereignty. It was thereby cast as a violent aggressor, while the Palestinian Arabs were painted as freedom fighters.
Celebrating Terror
While some media outlets like the Jerusalem Post noted that “In some parts of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Palestinians were documented celebrating the attack by handing out sweets to passersby and drivers,” which is a common occurrence in both Gaza and the West Bank after the murder of Jews, the Times decided to not report on it.
Maybe that fact was too much for its readers to handle.
The media repeatedly rationalizes and defends Palestinian Arab terrorism against Jewish civilians. Perhaps one should be content that the anti-Zionist media is not also celebrating the murder of Jews. At least, not yet.
After doing an analysis of the voting and spending trends of the 2022 congressional races in New York, another factor seemed worth commenting regarding which party won certain districts: the percentage of White voters.
In the districts which were 76.0% White people over 18 years old (there were five of them), Republicans won every race. In districts which had fewer than 52.0% White voters (ten of them), Democrats won each race. The remaining eleven districts which had between 52.0% and 76.0% White voters, were split, with five for Democrats and six for Republicans.
The sharp break in blue, red and purple districts does NOT correlate in a similar fashion for median income levels. Many of the districts with the highest percentage of White voters (like NY-21, NY-22 and NY-23) have median incomes below solidly Democratic districts.
Democrats and Republicans will likely battle very intensively for the House in 2024, and spend even more than the $92 million they spent in New York in 2022. The most contested battles will likely be in those districts with between 52.0% and 76.0% White voters.
The New York Congressional races were impacted by the reduction of a seat in congress (to 26 from 27) and redistricting this year. Many pundits were surprised by this year’s election results which saw Republicans win 11 seats and Democrats secure 15, in a heavily Democratic state. People considered whether the new district contours hurt Democrats or whether “outside money” influenced races.
Democrats won 56% of the total vote count and won 58% of the House seats, which closely align. Arguably, that shows that new contours served the goal of not seeing a disconnect of one party using gerrymandering to push out the other. Additionally, the Democrats outspent the Republicans by 2-to-1 (over $62 million compared to $30 million for Republicans).
The New York City-oriented media suggested that the more rural parts of the state had low voter-turnout and therefore did not really reflect the will of most people. In fact, it was the opposite. NYC voters barely turned out in the general election, with an average of 155,241 in the city’s eleven districts. That compares to an average voter turnout of 266,329 in non-New York City districts, and and average of 219,330 overall.
The New York City low voter turnout was rational. Indeed, going to the ballot box had virtually no meaning as the districts were blowouts. Six races had a winning spread of over 60% and another three were over 40%. The two races that more closely resembled the rest of the state with over 200,000 votes and closer races were NY-11, which was won by a Republican, and NY-16 (with just shy of 200,000 votes) which actually only has a small nub of the Bronx and is mostly Westchester County,
The money spent on the races was extremely uneven and yielded varied results.
While Democrats spent twice as much as Republicans, much of the money was spent in just a few districts. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14) blew away all fund-raisers ($9.9 million) and easily beat her Republican challenger. Elise Stefanik (NY-21) was the biggest Republican spender ($8.3 million) and also won her seat.
Consider that AOC alone spent about one-third of the total amount that all 26 Republicans spent in the race.
Some Democrats seemed to spend without reason. Dan Goldman (NY-10) spent $6.9 million even though his opponent barely had a dime and won virtually no votes. Similarly for Hakeem Jeffries (NY-8) spending of $5.1 million.
Three Democrats vastly outspent their Republican rivals and still lost. Sean Patrick Maloney (NY-17) outspent Republican Mike Lawler by 5.6 times ($5.3 million to $900,000) and still lost. Francis Console (NY-22) outspent Republican Brandon Williams by 4.2 times and lost, while Democrat Bridget Fleming (NY-1) outspent Republican Nick LaLota by two times and lost.
Meanwhile Democrat Pat Ryan’s (NY-18) huge 2.1 times spending of Republican rival paid off, eking out a slim victory of 2 points. Republican Nicole Malliotakis (NY-11) UNDERSPENT her rival on a dollar-per-vote basis, and won comfortably.
Overall, Democrats spent $19.54 per vote while Republicans spent $12.05, a 38% difference. Democrats spent over $10 per vote in 19 races compared to just eight for Republicans. They spent over $20 per vote in six districts, compared to three for Republicans.
In total, Democrats lost seven races in which they spent more per vote than the Republicans. The Republicans did not lose a single district where they spent more per vote than the Democrats.
Of the 26 congressional races, seven had a spread of less than 10 points. NY-17, NY-18, NY-19 and NY-22 all had spreads of one or two points, while NY-3, NY-4 and NY-25 had a bit more. Republicans won five of these seven tight races. Two of them, NY-17 and NY-22, saw Democrats pour millions of dollars into the races which ended up keeping them tight but still were won by Republicans.
Looking at it geographically, Democrats won 10 of 11 New York City Districts, while Republicans won 10 of 15 non-NYC districts.
Republicans will need to significantly boost their fundraising over the next election cycle and win the trust of their constituents if they want to continue to hold the five seats in the close races. It is likely that Democrat Mondaire Jones, a popular progressive who used to live in Rockland County (NY-17), will return to run against Mike Lawler in two years, after Jones’ failed run in the NY-10 primaries.
In summary, the new district contours seemed to work in New York State. The Democratic money machine poured tens of millions into races, with far left progressive AOC leading her party. If Republicans spend more intelligently in the state in the next cycle, they could keep and maybe expand upon their 2022 showing.
In New York’s 17th congressional district, Democratic incumbent Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney lost his seat to a Republican challenger, Mike Lawler. The pundits – and Maloney himself – offered their opinions as to why the five-term incumbent who spent 5.6 times more than his opponent, lost.
Their conclusion is disheartening, as it further underscores how liberals simply refuse to acknowledge the rampant anti-Semitism and attacks against Jews in society.
The New York Times asked the question directly in its headline “A Powerful N.Y. Democrat Was a Shoo-In for Re-election. What happened?” It offered some ideas including that Maloney opted for running in the wrong district after his historic contours were redrawn. The article wrote that it may have appeared like a safe choice in “diverse, left-leaning places like Peekskill and Ossining,” it neglected to consider the “significant population of right-leaning ultra-Orthodox Jews.“
Jews were the only ethnic group mentioned in the article. Not Hispanics, Blacks, Asians nor any others. Jews were the thorn in the side which helped lead to this congressman’s demise, and possibly Democratic control of the House of Representatives.
In another Times’ article, Maloney was asked why some of his constituents voted against him. He blamed media fear-mongering.
Maloney said that people in the suburbs of New York City are fed lies by conservative media about crime. “New York is home to the fiercest outlet in the News Corporation fear machine. In fairness to the governor, she and the rest of us have to contend with the hysteria of The New York Post and of Fox News… you have these suburban voters who are experiencingthose messages coming out of New York City outlets, which were heavily focused on crime.”
The outgoing congressman said that the media cooked up “messages” about crime to manufacture “fear” and “hysteria.” The issue for this New York politician who’s been serving in congress for ten years was media spin, not actual crime.
Hate crimes against Jews – particularly in New York – is not a fiction concocted to make Democrats look weak on crime. It is an alarming reality, and the scourge is reported by all media outlets, whether CBSNews, CNN or Reuters.
Jews are being harassed, assaulted and murdered with increasing frequency and rather than acknowledge the serious problem, liberals are treating it like false news.
And if that’s not bad enough, they are now blaming Orthodox Jews for flipping congress and thereby hurting the Democratic agenda in the entire country. A little more fuel for liberal Jew hatred for the coming years.
For many years, the United Nations berated the Jewish State that it was using ‘disproportionate’ force against Palestinian Arabs. As the global body now attacks Israelis for proportionate responses to Arab terror, it is clear that the UN’s problem is really about Israel defending itself at all.
Consider the events of May 2021 when Gazans fired thousands of missiles into Israeli towns. The United Nations said “Owing to the vast asymmetry of power, the victims of this conflict are disproportionately Palestinians in Gaza, of whom over 74,000 have been forcibly displaced and made homeless, mostly women and children.“
After Israel responded to missile attacks in 2018, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution that “deplores the use of any excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate force by the Israeli forces against Palestinian civilians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and particularly in the Gaza Strip, including the use of live ammunition against civilian protesters, including children, as well as medical personnel and journalists, and expresses its grave concern at the loss of innocent lives.“
Similarly in July 2014, the UN Human Rights Council published an opinion that Israel’s “disproportionate use of force amounts to war crimes and must be brought to justice as it seriously violates international humanitarian law.“
The examples are numerous, that despite Israel acting in a defensive manner against terrorists, the UN seemingly wanted Israel to fire thousands of crude missiles into Gaza (a proportionate response to the Gazan actions), rather than using its limited sophisticated weaponry which was designed to target the evil actors. Of course, the damage Israel would have caused using thousands such crude missiles would have been much worse as the Arabs do not possess Israel’s Iron Dome defensive shield.
The issue in those past conflicts was not really about disproportionate force but disproportionate defenses. However, since there was no legal way of investigating and censoring Israel for disproportionate defenses, the United Nations attacked Israel for “asymmetry of power.”
The farce of UN anti-Israel prejudice continues today with the notion of “settler violence” in the West Bank.
According to the UN’s own biased accounting, West Bank Arabs commit more attacks than Israeli Jews living in Israeli territory of Area C every month. The “settlers” mostly use stones, just like the Palestinian Arabs. However, the UN only comes down harshly on the Israelis.
In March 2022, Tor Wennesland, on behalf of the UN Secretary General, addressed the UN Security Council about activities over the three months December 2021 to early February 2022. He noted that “Israeli settlers or other civilians perpetrated 144 attacks against Palestinians, resulting in 47 injuries and/or damage to Palestinian property,” while adding that “One Israeli civilian was killed by Palestinians, and 100 Israelis, including five women and one child, were injured by Palestinians in clashes, the throwing of Molotov cocktails, attacks and other incidents. In total, Palestinians perpetrated 277 attacks against Israeli civilians, resulting in injuries and/or damage to Israeli property.” By his own math, Palestinians committed twice a many attacks and injured twice as many civilians, including killing someone.
No matter. His report would disproportionately target Israelis.
“we deplore continuing attacks by Israeli settlers on ordinary Palestinians“
“Settler-related violence remains significant across the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem“
“repeated raids by Israeli settlers on Burqa led to clashes between Palestinians and Israeli security forces“
“Israeli settlers drove a convoy to Huwwara, near Nablus, throwing stones at Palestinians and their property“
“I remain deeply concerned about the level of settler-related violence in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem“
There was no such detailed concern about Palestinian Arabs attacking Israeli civilians, despite engaging in violence more frequently.
When the Israeli military protects Israeli civilians against Palestinian terrorists, the world rebukes the Jewish State for “disproportionate force” so it can defend punishing the Jews in court. When Israeli civilians defend themselves with proportionate means, the anti-Semites drop the pretense of proportionality being the concern, and accuse the Jews of living in their homes illegally. The Arabs are cast as victims of Jewish aggression in all cases, despite instigating the violence and committing more attacks.
The United Nations has fostered the Arab-Israeli Conflict for decades, with disproportionate focus on perceived Israeli crimes and absolution of Arab terrorism. It is well past time for the global body to examine itself with the scrutiny it reserves for the Jewish State.
The past election cycles have witnessed an explosion of radicals entering congress. They have almost all been coming from the left-wing.
According to the non-partisan group GovTrack, the number of extremists (scoring in the most extreme 0.10 ideology scoring) among Republicans was cut in half – from 22 to 11 – from 2018 to 2020. Many of the most extreme conservatives left the House of Representatives including Jeff Sessions who became U.S. Attorney General, Mark Meadows who became the president’s Chief of Staff, and Kevin Cramer who moved to the Senate.
Meanwhile, the number of liberal extremists jumped from 4 to 14. Seven of those radicals were newly elected to Congress.
While Republicans typically elect one to three radicals into its freshman class each election cycle, Democrats historically had only voted for new moderates. That changed dramatically in the 2018 elections.
The Democratic leadership warmly embraced the freshmen extremists and rewarded them with plum committee assignments, including in financial services and foreign affairs. Every left-wing extremists got two or three committees. In total, the freshmen radicals accounted for 18 committee seats, while the Republican radical freshmen had five.
Several of these freshmen radicals voted against providing Israel with funding to replenish the Iron Dome system it had used to defend itself against the barrage of missiles that the US-designated terrorist group Hamas launched into Israeli cities. The no votes included Representatives Garcia, Pressley, Tlaib and Omar. Ocasio-Cortez voted ‘present’.
The alt-left wing Democratic Socialists of America is continuing to back several of these extremists, include Rep. Tlaib and Ocasio-Cortez. They are also backing many candidates in statewide races. Many of the DSA’s endorsed candidates fortunately lost to more moderate voices in the primaries. Hopefully, that is a harbinger for the general vote on November 8.
You have not imagined it: far-left extremists have been winning a frightening number of seats in congress. Everyone must go out to vote and support their opponents, and urge party leaders to strip the radicals of committee positions.
The American calendar has a holiday that is sadly often overlooked. Every September, there is Constitution Day, which marks the signing of the U.S. Constitution on September 17, 1787 by the founding fathers. It established three branches of government to protect the rights of every citizen.
The three branches are the executive, legislative and judicial which are run by the president, congress and the Supreme Court, respectively. The legislative branch writes laws, while the executive and judicial branches enforce and interpret the laws. The system of checks and balances were meant to prevent tyranny, from which the early Americans were fleeing in an English monarchy thousands of miles away.
Alas, the threat of tyranny has grown in the 21st century, and it is local.
The Supreme Court, which should be above politics, has become a weapon of politicians. Republicans wrongfully blocked the approval of Merrick Garland towards the end of Democratic President Obama’s final term. It allowed Republican President Trump to appoint another judge, and the highest court now sits at 6-to-3, in favor of Republican-appointments.
While the number of appointees by a Republican or Democratic president should not be the litmus test, we are seeing extreme biases to the right (Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito) and left (Sonia Sotomayor), each scoring above 2 on the Martin-Quinn score, with Stephen Breyer nosing up to the extremist liberal line. The court has become a war room of ideologies rather than a debate of the law.
The presidency, deeply political by design, has become infested by the power of the office. From Republican President Ronald Reagan until Democratic President Barack Obama, no executive issued more than an annual average of 48 Executive Orders. Republican Donald Trump issued 55 on average in his term, and Democrat Joe Biden has issued a horribly high 59. Modern presidents are seeking to end run congress.
Congress, in the Senate and most notably in the House of Representatives, has become a polarized pit of extremists. The govtracks report card for 2020 had eleven Republicans with an ideology score of 0.90 and above, and 14 Democrats scoring 0.10 and below. That compares to 2016 ideology scores when 17 Republicans scored 0.90 and above (change of -6) and Democrats had six people of 0.10 and below (change of +8). Republicans have become more ideologically moderate and Democrats more ideologically extreme. While Republican extremists exceeded Democrats by 183% in 2016, Democratic extremists now exceed Republicans by 27%.
Democratic extremists exceed the number of Republican extremists in 2020, a sharp reversal from 2016, when Republicans had more extremists.
The 2022 Vote
If one has a goal – as I do – of a more moderate and peaceful society, then the extremism and political partisanship should be alarming.
Fortunately, one can try to have an impact at the voting booth.
One cannot vote for Supreme Court judges; that is the responsibility of the president. As the court is currently right-leaning, one should vote for a Democratic president, if the party doesn’t put forward a proven incompetent (like VP Kamala Harris) or extremist (like Elizabeth Warren) in 2024. Hopefully that will balance the judicial and executive branches, which should have been separated anyway.
The legislative and executive branches are where Americans get to protect themselves from a new form of tyranny. It is critical now, when the president is a Democrat, to put Congress in Republican hands. This is especially true, as moderates from both parties are resigning and the Democrat Socialists are gaining significant strength in the Democratic Party.
Should the House and Senate stay in Democratic hands, the economy and crime will surely suffer.
A fully Democratic executive-legislative combination would advance a much larger government with more spending. Complete student loan forgiveness, free community college, free child care, billions of dollars for first time home owners and more giveaways would pass without a modifying voice. Inflation would rise as the money spigot would go on overdrive.
Putting more of a strain on the economy would be the open border policy and ‘abolishing ICE’, the agency managing immigration, as called for by Democratic extremists.
Adding to the crime wave would be the extremist push to ‘Defund the police’ and the catch-and-release program for violent criminals.
The United States would resemble New York City in the 1970’s: crime ridden and bankrupt.
But such is tyranny. An extremist belief coupled with unchecked power to enforce wild agendas upon a public that the elitists believe are too stupid to know what is good for them. In the end, the socialist extremists know they win either way in flattening of society, with everyone either rich or destitute.
Save America, stop tyrannical government and embrace a moderate agenda. Keep the separation of powers by voting Republican.
First One Through 