BLM Does Not Celebrate Father’s Day

Father’s Day in the USA felt a bit different this year. Beyond the pandemic keeping family members at a distance, was the increased traction of the Black Lives Matter movement due to the recent killings of Black people by police.

One of the statements of the BLM agenda directly addresses the construct of family:

“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”

It’s quite a proposition: BLM believes that “Western” society “prescribe[s]” a “requirement” that a family contain two parents taking care of children. They advocate a wide community approach to child-rearing, to the extent that “mothers and parents” would welcome the community’s involvement.

First, the United States doesn’t impose any such requirement. The country has no ban on single mothers, sperm donors, gay parents adopting children, etc. There may be many Americans with a Judeo-Christian notion of a “nuclear family,” but it is not the government. One is left with either concluding that BLM is completely uninformed about US law or it is deliberately attacking Judeo-Christian values.

Second, it is curious that the platform highlights “mothers” but not fathers. Does BLM believe that fathers have no right or say in the upbringing of children? The platform is seemingly deliberately omitting fathers, which leads to a reading of the entirety of the clause above as a motion to get society to fill the gap left by Black men who are not part of a “nuclear family” unit.

Consider a review of the statistics:

Exhibit 1: Single Parent Households

Roughly 2/3rd of Black families are headed by a single parent. This rate is multiples of the levels found in Asian and White families (15% and 24%, respectively) and also above the 41% rate found in Hispanic families. One can therefore understand the desire of BLM to bring up this issue – Black families do not look like other families in America.

Exhibit 2: Fathers with Kids Outside of Marriage

While the information on Exhibit 1 does not specify whether the single parent household is headed by a man or woman, Exhibit 2 gives a bit more color: 76% of Black men have children outside of marriage, whether never being married or have a child with a women other than the current wife. That rate is more than twice the rate of White men.

It would appear that the notion of marriage/ monogamy is not part of many Black men’s orientation, and having children outside of the home is not culturally taboo. This is again seemingly the basis for the BLM platform about “disrupting” Western’s view of a nuclear family.

Exhibit 3: Age of Parents, by Race

Exhibit 3 gives a bit more color about the timing of having children. It would appear that many Black people have children at much younger ages than other races, except for Hispanics. It is therefore not surprising that many Black people have children outside of marriage if they’re having them so young.

Exhibit 4: Parent with High School Diploma

When considering that so many Black women have children when they’re in their teens, it’s surprising and impressive that so many still graduate high school. The 11% rate of heads of households without high school diplomas is barely higher than the 9% rate found among Asian heads of households who almost never have children in their teenage years.

Exhibit 5: Fertility Rates

By starting to have children at a younger age and not being restricted to marriage to have children, it is not surprising that Black people have a higher fertility rate than many other races. Asians have a fertility rate of only 1.5 and Whites at 1.7, while Blacks are closer to 1.9 children per woman. Only Hispanics have more children, but their rate of decline is dramatic (-26% over 8 years), indicating that they may soon have a lower fertility rate than Black women.

According to a recent study, the decline in fertility rates is a cultural, not economic one. The analysis concludes that “fertility declines are most strongly associated with factors that are race- or region-specific, not broadly class-specific, as different economic classes appear to have quite similar trends.

Exhibit 6: Job Security

Despite the good level of high school diplomas (Exhibit 4), Black heads of households still lead in poor job security. This is likely tied to being the sole income provider, living in relatively expensive areas with more kids on average. A second income would help cover items like rent, food and clothing. A second person would provide flexibility for someone taking a child to a doctor or visiting school. Overall, it affords the single parent flexibility to pursue other career choices without the need to be counted upon for basic life expenses and events.

Exhibit 7: Health Insurance

Despite the poor job security of the head of household, Black Children have the same rate of health insurance as Asian and White children.

Exhibit 8: Children in Poverty

All of these exhibits can be seen coming together in Exhibit 8. There are more Black children living in poverty because their mothers have poor job security as most of them are doing the work of raising children alone. Further, they begin having children at a very young age making it more difficult to save money to invest and buy a home.

This is undoubtedly not news to the drafters of the BLM manifesto but rather than ask for changes in behavior within the Black community, they attack the mother-father family concept advocated in Judeo-Christian society. Further, they call on everyone to step into the gap left by absent fathers to help raise their children.

There is no Father’s Day for BLM, just “Village” Day when everyone is celebrated.


Related First One Through articles:

BLM: Truth, Relevance and Association

CNN Changes Its Black Transgender Story to Target Police

Black Lives Matter Joins the anti-Israel “Progressives” Fighting Zionism

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Sen. David Carlucci Clarifies Positions on Israel

In response to the First One Through article “Will a Reliable Pro Israel Congressional Seat Flip?” New York State Senator David Carlucci’s office reach out to clarify his positions on Israel.

  1. Carlucci co-sponsored New York’s anti-BDS bill. S2430 was introduced for the stated purpose of “prohibit[ing] New York State from contracting with corporations that are boycotting Israel.” The bill has passed the assembly and has not yet been delivered to Governor Cuomo for signature. This is of particular importance as the United Nations recently assembled a list of 112 companies doing business in Israeli territories which will become the basis for global boycott action.
  2. Opposes UN Security Council Resolution 2334. One of the last acts by the Obama Administration was to allow the United Nations Security Council to pass Resolution 2334 which declared Israel’s activities east of the 1949 Armistice Lines to be illegal. Carlucci said the resolution “is an obstacle peace and should be rescinded.
  3. Recognizes and Supports the 2004 Bush letter to Ariel Sharon. President George W Bush sent a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in April 2004 which specifically stated that final borders in a peace agreement would incorporate “existing major Israeli populations centers” and that in a two-state solution, “the settling of Palestinian refugees [would be] there, rather than in Israel.
  4. Redo UNRWA. Regarding the UN agency which handles Palestinian refugees, Carlucci said “UNRWA failed the Palestinians and the cause of peace.  A new strategy is required to address the humanitarian needs of Palestinians and securing a prosperous future. Meaningful and sustainable investments in Palestinian society and realistic goals for a reinvigorated peace process are essential to bringing stability and growth to the Middle East.
  5. Supports the Taylor Force Act. The Taylor Force Act was designed to condition financial support to the Palestinians on their ceasing to support terror against Americans and Israelis, including paying stipends through the Palestinian Authority Martyr’s Fund to individuals who commit acts of terrorism and to the families of deceased terrorists.
  6. Opposed the Iranian nuclear deal. Carlucci stated “I oppose re-entering the Iran Nuclear Deal of 2015 for many reasons, including  most concerning is that it did not stop Iran’s path to nuclear weapons, it did not address Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism, it lacked inspections at military sites, it allowed Iran to continue its research into what could lead to the development of weapons of mass destruction, and it did not prohibit development of ballistic missiles.  Now that we have been removed from the Iran deal, we must restart negotiations as soon as possible with the goal being that Iran never get control of nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction.  These new negotiations must have these parameters in place to guide a productive resolution.

Sen. Carlucci also added that he supports “a secure Israel to protect our ally and Israeli lives” and will vote to supply Israel with the funding needed to defend itself against nations that want to do it harm. 

Significantly, he wants to ensure that Israel is not politicized and that both parties should be involved in the comprehensive work to support a two-state solution. 

New York State Senator David Carlucci


Related First One Through articles:

Ever-Elections, Never-Elections and Controlling Elections

Considering Carter’s 1978 Letter Claiming Settlements Are Illegal

American Jewry is Right on Israel

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

CNN Changes Its Black Transgender Story to Target Police

On June 15, 2020, CNN published an article “Thousands show up for black trans people in nationwide protests” which picked up a theme of the Black Lives Matter movement protesting police brutality. It referenced a “Black Trans Lives Matter rally in New York,” which “took place amid global demonstrations in support of the Black Lives Matter movement, which has surged in the wake of George Floyd’s death.” It also wrote about a protest in Los Angeles regarding the killing of “Tony McDade, a black transgender man who was shot by a Tallahassee police officer last week” and one in Chicago which held a “Drag March for Change this weekend. They demanded justice for victims of police brutality.

CNN crafted its 2020 story to fit the backdrop of BLM and effectively paint the police as not only racist, but as people who discriminate against the transgender community as well.

Picture from CNN website with sub-header “Thousands rallied outside Brooklyn Museum in New York to support trans rights on Sunday, June 14, 2020.”

This was in sharp contrast to the story CNN published about transgender deaths on November 18, 2019.

That story never mentioned the police. It wrote that “Half of transgender and gender non-conforming people killed since 2013 have been killed by an acquaintance, friend, family member or intimate partner, according to the Human Rights Campaign.” This is a critical fact that was completely omitted from the 2020 story which sought to frame the police for the murder of Black transgender people.

What was also left out of the story is that most transgender people are attacked by Blacks according to statistics by the FBI.

Chart 1: FBI Hate Crimes Against Transgender People, by Race

         5.71x
White Black W/B Ratio Black Likelihood
2013 8 18          0.44        12.85
2014 37 36          1.03          5.55
2015 34 38          0.89          6.38
2016 30 57          0.53        10.85
2017 41 43          0.95          5.99
2018 57 76          0.75          7.61

Since the FBI began tracking information about hate crimes against transgender people in 2013, Black people have been greater offenders in every year except for one, 2014. In considering that there are 5.7 times as many Whites as Blacks in the United States, the Black community is much more disproportionately likely to attack a transgender person, by as much as 5 to 12 times.

That statistic is left out by CNN, even when it breaks down statistics by likelihood (events per X people) comparing the United States to other countries and the use of police force against both Blacks and Whites.

CNN rewrote the latest story of attacks on Black transgender people to feed the anti-police narrative of the moment, even though most of those attacks are from the Black community, including from friends and family members, not the police. It is a form of incitement and junkyard journalism that gives protesters fuel and a false sense of moral superiority. #MainstreamMediaIsFullofCrap


Related First One through articles:

For CNN, The Critical Israeli Facts Have No Murdered Jews

CNN Will Not Report Islamic Terrorism

CNN’s Embrace of Hamas

YouTube Enhances Hatred of Israel and Extinguishes Hate for Palestinians

Anti-Semitism Is Harder to Recognize Than Racism

The Press Are Not Guardians of the Galaxy

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

End the Civil War Before It Starts: Vote Engel and Schleifer

The tension in U.S. politics has grown progressively worse over the past few years. The center began to crumble several years ago when centrist Democrats felt like there was no room for them in a party lurching leftward (goodbye Evan Bayh (IN) and Joe Lieberman (CT)) and the moderate wing of the Republican party took a whipping with John McCain’s failed run for president in 2008. By 2016, outsiders began to take over each party, when Bernie Sanders (VT), an Independent on the far left extreme had a real shot at being the Democrat’s nominee, and a political novice who spent virtually his entire life as a Democrat named Donald Trump ran through the establishment Republican candidates.

The far left-wing of the Democratic Party was livid with the way Sanders was treated by the party establishment and even more that Trump became president. They organized themselves as “Justice Democrats” and pushed to elect socialists into congress and to rewrite the Democratic platform. They had success in 2018 with the election of a few of their favorites including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (nicknamed “AOC”) and three other women including Rashida Tlaib (MI), Ilhan Omar (MN) and Alyssa Pressley (MA), a group which became known as “The Squad”. These individuals would normally have only been found running on the Working Family’s Party or the Green Party with no shot at winning a seat in a system dominated by two-parties. But they have pushed their way in and are transforming the Democratic Party in a very toxic way, much the way Trump has in the Republican party.

The Justice Democrats are targeting additional seats long held by centrist Democrats in 2020. Two are in lower New York State, including Eliot Engel (NY-16) and the seat vacated by retiring Nita Lowey (NY-17). Their candidates are every bit as extremist as the Squad but with more up-to-date woke initiatives, and will push jobs and people out of the region and add fuel to the budding civil war in the United States.

Adam Schleifer versus Mondaire Jones

There are eight Democrats running for Nita Lowey’s seat, and Jones is currently in the lead according to polls. His vision for America is more radical than AOC, Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, all of whom endorsed him. His goal is best described as give everything away for free and let corporations and the rich pay for it. The fact that the numbers don’t add is irrelevant.

Behind Jones in the polls is Evelyn Farkas and Adam Schleifer. Voting for Farkas is equivalent to voting for former Secretary of State John Kerry (who endorsed her). She is well versed in foreign affairs but that doesn’t mean she has good ideas or capabilities to effectuate good US policies. Adam Schleifer is tied with her for second. He is so mainstream that the New York Times refused to mention his name even while profiling the other seven candidates.

New York Times endorsement of all alt-left candidates, refuses to even mention Adam Schleifer’s name

If you want to avoid being represented by an even worse-AOC or a John Kerry-clone, vote for Schleifer.

Eliot Engel versus Jamaal Bowman

Like Jones, Jamal Bowman is endorsed by the alt-left fringe. His pedigree as a middle school principal makes him as qualified for congress as Trump was for the presidency.

His platform includes:

  • Defunding the police
  • Abolishing the immigration department
  • Quick release bail reform
  • Medicare-for-all
  • Cancelling student debt
  • Free college
  • A full green new deal
  • Pouring additional tens of billions of dollars into the failed public school system rather than restructuring it completely the way he has proposed for the police
  • Expanding labor unions
  • Taxing the rich
  • Making tax payers spend $638 billion to bail out under-funded luxurious union pension funds
  • Paying people to have babies
  • Pushing programs to get the poor to own homes (like the initiatives that created the housing and market collapse in 2008).
  • Using financial pressure on Israel to end the “occupation of the Palestinian people
  • Re-entering the Iranian nuclear deal which gave the leading state sponsor of terrorism a legal pathway to nuclear weapons.

In the same breath as stating support for Iran’s nuclear weapons aspirations, he wrote that the US must “stand up to this far-right authoritarian movement that’s taking place across the world, not cozy up to them, whether that’s in Saudi Arabia, Hungary, Brazil, India, Israel.” Not Iran. Not North Korea. Not China or Venezuela. Israel.

New York voters have a chance to turn the tide against the growing cleft in America by rejecting the extremists running for office and push aggressively to get the vote out for Adam Schleifer (NY-17) and Eliot Engel (NY-16). Primary is June 23.

Adam Schleifer running for Congress


Related First One Through articles:

Please Don’t Vote for a Democratic Socialist

Bernie Sanders’ Antisemitic and Anti-Zionist Friends

Adam Schleifer Shares His Positions on Israel

The Left Wing’s Accelerating Assault on the Holocaust

As Ilhan Omar Clearly Demonstrates, Not Every “First” is Jackie Robinson

Naked Democracy

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Americans Welcome the Philosophy of ISIS

Just five years ago, the world watched in horror as Islamic fanatics went on a rampage through Iraq destroying artifacts. Headlines read “History in Ruins” and “Casualties of War” as the whole world cringed as physical history was obliterated.

Jim Cuno of the J Paul Getty Trust said of the vandalized artifacts: “it roots us in our origins. It understands that we are part of a much larger picture; a picture that is as diverse as the world itself.” Gayle King of CBS News added that “it is hard to watch the glee that goes into destroying something.

The militants felt justified in their vandalism, saying on camera: “these statues are idols to people in previous centuries which were worshiped other than God. God Almighty says ‘And we sent a messenger to you, just to reveal no God but I. Worship Me.’ The Prophet ordered us to get rid of statues and relics. His companions did the same when they conquered countries after him.

Members of ISIS destroy statues in Iraq in 2015

Bernard Haykel of Princeton University said “it is a gratuitous and barbaric act frankly, but one that is intended to appeal to an audience looking for some sort of authenticity.” PBS News noted that “the act [of destruction] fits into a broader campaign by the Islamic State to brazenly and publicly destroy cultural relics in the name of religious purity.

And so it seems today with a new religion with a single truth which demands complete purity. #BlackLivesMatter #WhitePrivilege #DontSayAnythingCounterToWokeNarrative

While there is a rationale and appeal to common decency to remove statues on US soil of people who fought against these United States such as generals of the Confederacy who were famous specifically for such acts, it is preposterous to attack statues of America’s founders like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison because they were not perfect. To read the Declaration of Independence or the Federalist Papers is to be a witness to the crafting of not only a new country but an entirely new construction of government: the break with monarchy and authoritarian rule to set a course for a government by the people for the people. The founders mission was liberty from tyranny and oppressive government.

Neither those documents nor the people who wrote them were perfect, and no one has ever claimed as much. To make a statue of perfection is indeed to craft an idol, the very objection of ISIS and other religious purists.

America names schools and has busts of leaders because of their positive contribution to the society we live in. We celebrate the achievements of the people who helped create and protect our great nation with their likeness which reminds us of the events that “root us in our origins… that we are part of a much larger picture,” as Cuno said of artifacts in Iraq.

Today’s woke movement answers to a higher authority. Like ISIS, it wraps itself in righteous smugness while it destroys anything viewed as impure, be it statues of the dead or reputations and livelihood of the living. It has no patience for a common past as it launches a crusade “intended to appeal to an audience looking for some sort of authenticity.”

Defenders of the rioters claim there is no common past in America and that “systemic racism” built into the founding of the country manufactured disparate societies. A constitution that advocated for free speech while ignoring enslaved people was never a template for justice. They seek a fresh start, a revolution of sorts, where diversity of people will trump diversity of opinion. Their New America will shatter Old America’s imperfect idols and enforce the Gospel of Wokeness. Liberty for all people will require a new form of tyranny: a Crusade to either destroy or convert non-believers.

Statue of Thomas Jefferson is removed from its base in front of Jefferson High School in Northeast Portland on June 14, 2020. Jamie Goldberg/Staff

UNESCO called the wanton destruction of cultural relics by ISIS in Iraq “a war crime” but it is highly doubtful it will do the same regarding the anarchists destroying statues of America’s founders. More importantly, is whether Americans themselves will let the philosophy of ISIS permeate its streets enabling the caliphate of cancel culture to raise its flag over every government building in the land.


Related First One Through articles:

The End of Together

The Monumental Gap between Nikki Haley and Donald Trump

BLM: Truth, Relevance and Association

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Genes Versus Leadership in the Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has received a lot of ink. Much of the writings from the liberal press has had virtually nothing to do with science and much to do with promoting a liberal narrative.

The New York Times pushed forward the idea that radical right-wing men were the worst kind of leaders in a pandemic in a June 2, 2020 article called “Where the Virus is Growing the Most: Countries with ‘Illiberal Populist’ Leaders.” It must have gotten rave reviews because Nicholas Kristof decided to write a similar piece in an Op-Ed story on June 14 called “Nations May Be Safer Under Women.

These stories are utter nonsense as described in “Where the Virus is Killing the Most: Countries with Socialist Leaders,” which uses actual statistics to show the exact opposite of what the Times conveys. This was not #AlternativeFacts; it was the essence of #FakeNews.

The news today has a set narrative that aggressively seeks an anchor in current events. If the facts don’t fit, the editors will reframe them somehow. Would the Times ever write that the worst hit country in the world by the pandemic is headed by a liberal woman? Never! (For those playing at home, it’s Sophie Wilmès of Belgium).

And it’s beyond a shame; it’s a crime. People are dying all around the world and the Times is playing politics rather than educating its readers and possibly helping point to a cure by looking at figures honestly.

Genes Versus Leadership in the Pandemic

During this election year, the mainstream media is pushing the notion that right-wing autocratic men like Donald Trump literally kill people, while progressive women save people. It’s a narrative tailored to November.

A more honest appraisal of why people are dying from COVID-19 has seemingly little to do with government leadership as much as circumstances. Age, season and genes are statistically the leading indicators of mortality.

AGE: According Worldometers, only 4.5% of all deaths in NYC occurred in patients under 65 years old who did not have underlying health conditions, even while almost 86% of the population is under 65. There is a direct correlation between advanced years and probability of dying from COVID-19.

SEASON: The northern hemisphere was rocked by the coronavirus. Countries like Belgium, the United States, Spain, Italy, Sweden and France were all hit hard. Meanwhile, countries in the Southern hemisphere were barely touched through May. That may be changing together with the seasons with winter coming to South America, Africa, Australia and New Zealand.

GENES: The liberal media has written about the higher mortality rate of Black people in the United States and has both implied and stated outright that it is because of systemic racism. But an examination of Jews and Arabs in the Middle East may point to a very different reason: genes or cultural habits.

The death rate in Israel is roughly 33 people per million as of this writing. Meanwhile, the mortality rate for Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza is only 0.6 per million and in Jordan it is 0.9 per million. A deeper examination into the numbers in Israel by the Taub Center in Israel, shows that Arab infections were less than half of Jewish infections inside of Israel.

Israeli Arabs, Palestinian Arabs and Jordanian Arabs are from a very similar gene pool and live next door to each other but each live in very different circumstances in regards to leadership, yet had roughly the same mortality rate. Meanwhile Israeli Jews living nearby died at a rate roughly 50 times as high. This suggests that either genes or cultural habits account for the dramatic differences in death rates, not whether the leader is male or female (the way that Kristof posits) or a monarch, autocrat or Democratically-elected (unless the liberal media wants to reframe its entire narrative about the besieged poor Gazans).

Seem too far fetched? Tests are beginning to show that people with Type A blood are more likely to be infected by COVID-19 and those with type O blood, much less.


People are dying in a pandemic and the New York Times is feeding its readership complete fabrications in order to secure a Democratic victory. It’s both sad that liberals have such little faith in their party leaders that they need to manufacture tales, and that they use a global tragedy for political ends.


Related First One Through articles:

The CoronavirUS is Not Us Versus Them

“The Death of George Floyd” Opera and The Humanity of Derek Chauvin

Toronto Star Sanitizes Hamas During Pandemic

Liberal Senators Look to Funnel Money into Gaza

The U.N. Doesn’t Care About Middle-Aged White Male Victims of Covid-19

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Pelosi’s Vastly Different Responses to Antisemitism and Racism

The most powerful Democrat in the United States, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, is probably the sharpest politician in America today. She knows how to make Washington move to her beat, directing her party and challenging Republicans in both policy and directly for their jobs.

It has been quite a display watching how she has handled antisemitism and racism.

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN) made a series of antisemitic remarks in early 2019. Fellow members of Congress were appalled and wanted her called out and sought a resolution clearly condemning Jew hatred. But Pelosi sought to shield her fellow Democrat, especially a Black Muslim Woman. She managed to have Omar’s named pulled from the resolution and rather than specifically condemn antisemitism, the final wording covered ALL forms of hatred including “Islamophobia, racism and other forms of bigotry.

Omar and fellow female Muslim Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) were thrilled by the wording and saidIt’s the first time we have voted on a resolution condemning Anti-Muslim bigotry in our nation’s history.” Rather than being scolded and embarrassed, Omar emerged as a proud victor.

She received a lesson that hateful words and actions do not matter: it’s power that protects, and Nancy Pelosi is both powerful and astutely political.

Ilhan Omar and Nancy Pelosi (photo: J. Scott Applewhite/AP Images}

On June 8, 2020 Pelosi sought to address another case of bigotry regarding the killing of an unarmed Black man by a police officer in Minnesota. Pelosi issued a clear statement that “Black Lives Matter,” and said that only “House Democrats” seek justice on behalf of George Floyd’s family and other African-Americans.

So when a Black elected member of Congress made a series of antisemitic tropes, Nancy Pelosi came to her defense and said ALL hatred is terrible, but when a local White police officer killed a Black man, Pelosi stated that ONLY Black lives mattered. When Omar was vilified, Pelosi said she was particularly worried about Omar’s safety, as though Jews were murderers coming to get her, but now seems nonplussed by the nationwide riots and violence – including the killing of police officers – after the killing of George Floyd and Omar’s chant that police are a “cancer” that should be rooted out.

Leading Democrats alongside Nancy Pelosi donning African garb and bending a knee

Pelosi knows politics and knows the 2020 election will be determined by turnout. There are seven times as many Black as Jews in the USA and the number of Muslims will surpass Jews in a decade. This crafty politician knows where her power ultimately lies, and it’s not with the ever-shrinking Jewish minority, two-thirds of whom vote for Democrats regardless of who is running.

If you want an unvarnished view of America’s concern for antisemitism today, consider the cold calculus of America’s leading politician.


Related First One Through articles:

Covering Racism

Examining Ilhan Omar’s Point About Muslim Antisemitism

Anti-Semitism Is Harder to Recognize Than Racism

Fact Check Your Assumptions on American Racism

Black Antisemitism: The Intersectional Hydra

Criticizing Muslim Antisemitism is Not Islamophobia

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

The New York Times Recognizes the Problem of Municipal Unions, Selectively

In light of the recent killing of a Black man by police in Minnesota, the NY Times belatedly came to the realization that municipal unions protect their union members and not the public at-large. While this should be obvious to anyone, it is remarkable for the liberal media.

On June 7, 2020, a front page article led with a sub-title “Unions Using Their Outsize Political Power to Resist Checks on Officers’ Behavior.” The article continued:

“as demands for reform have mounted… unions have emerged as one of the most significant roadblocks to change.”

The Times was fine writing negatively about this particular union – law enforcement – but these are words that are true for ALL MUNICIPAL UNIONS, especially the one that the Times cherishes the most: the Teachers Unions.

Front page story of The New York Times on the police unions

For years the Teachers Unions has fought against necessary changes for millions of young Americas. They have fought against Charter schools which outperform public schools. They have fought to keep weak teachers on payroll and make it virtually impossible to fire someone who would have been quickly dismissed in any other profession. They have been sued for corruption by its own members who are forced to pay dues which end up into the coffers of politicians who may not be of the individuals liking.

The union negotiates for raises and incredible pension benefits for its retirees. The United States has a real divided society which no one talks about: those with secure guaranteed pensions who work for government unions, and the rest of America which is worried about retirement.

Meanwhile, millions of students are falling behind students in Europe and Asia in reading, math and science. According to a person administering the exams “About a fifth of American 15-year-olds scored so low on the PISA test that it appeared they had not mastered reading skills expected of a 10-year-old.

Politicians are too scared to take on these powerful unions. The union leaders have the muscle to deliver millions of dollars and votes, so government officials are forced to give in to their demands. They look like they’re taking action by investing billions into a broken system.

The teachers unions will say they are fighting for our kids but it’s plainly untrue; they are fighting for their public school teachers, just as the police unions fight for their members. While Americans have come to question whether the police are providing safety for all people, we have known for years that the public school system is failing millions of children yet we fail to point the finger and demand reforms of the teachers’ unions.

In fact, the liberal media DEFENDS the teachers over America’s children consistently.

Consider the teachers strike in Los Angeles last year. The Times wrote about the sad state of students while failing to talk about the huge salaries and pensions that LA teachers receive. Teachers strikes are for teachers, not students. The Times acted like an open mic for union leaders, deflecting the entire issue.

This week, the Times turned on its very first municipal union and called for reform of police unions. All Americans should take that momentum and forcefully push for a complete dismantling of the broken educational system which is a direct result of the corrupt and inept public teachers’ unions.


Related First One Through articles:

The Democratic Socialists Tell Lies and Half Truths About Lobbyists

When Only Republicans Trust the Police

NY Times, NY Times, What Do You See? It Sees Rich White Males

Leading Gay Activists Hate Religious Children

Subscribe to YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook groups: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Adam Schleifer Shares His Positions on Israel

Adam Schleifer is running for Congress in New York’s 17th District.

In response to the First One Through article posted on June 5 about the Israel positions of the various Democrats competing for Nita Lowey’s seat, Schleifer’s team updated the candidate’s website with a section called “Strong, Sustainable US-Israel Relationship.” The section contained over 1,000 words and covered Schleifer’s Jewish background, the benefits to America from its relationship with Israel, thoughts about peace in the region and analysis of how best to deal with Iran and its threat to the region.

Schleifer also spoke with me directly about his positions on Israel which are shared in a condensed, summarized fashion below.

First One Through: Question on Jerusalem: As recently as 2008, the Democratic platform stated “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel.” The statement was contested at the Democratic convention floor of 2012 but approved. In 2016, President Obama let a United Nations Security Council resolution pass which declared that Israel’s control of the eastern half of Jerusalem was “illegal.” However, President Trump later recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moved the US embassy there. What is your position about the city? Would you move the US embassy out of Jerusalem or change the recognition of the city?

Adam Schleifer: Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. While I am not the president, I will take no action to undue the recognition of Jerusalem nor would I move the US embassy from the city.

FOT: Borders: President George W Bush wrote a letter to Ariel Sharon in 2004 that stated “it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949.” Virtually identical language was used in the official Democratic platform of 2008 only to be removed under Obama’s presidential tenure. For his part, Trump stated that “the establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se inconsistent with international law.” What do you think should be the basis for the borders and how does it impact your view of Israelis living east of the Green Line?

AS: I will not dictate or opine where the borders should be. The goal of America should be to get two parties [Israel and the Palestinians] to start negotiating with each other. They need to figure out out a number of details about how to exchange various parcels of land, and how to accommodate the demographic realities of various areas versus the legal claims to the same, including how to get the disconnected occupied territories to become connected by a transit route.

Right now we don’t have good parties in the mix. Arafat walked away from a historic opportunity in 2000 (I was in DC watching with sadness as the deal unraveled) and Hamas is terrible and not a partner for peace. I won’t get into whether I think Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is a good guy or not; that’s not our role. We just need to be constructive in getting the parties talking.

The reality is that under international law most legal opinions conclude that the territories are “occupied” in violation of that law, whatever the historical, moral and practical realities of the situation. It’s also true that the Israeli government’s actions of building settlements in far out places and areas that are almost certain to conflict with an orderly peace process and is a recipe for difficulty both for the Palestinians and Israel to ultimately dismantle.

FOT: Palestinian State: The UN Declaration of Human Rights states that all people should have self-determination, however, the UN declared that Palestinians also have a unique “inalienable right” to sovereignty, a sentiment that no other people in the world have. Do you believe that Palestinians have such inalienable right to have their own country, or just citizenship in some country, whether their own, Israel, Jordan or Egypt?

AS: That is not a useful question. The Palestinians operate and view themselves as having a unique culture and desire an independent state. The reality is that that aspiration will need to be accommodated as a pragmatic matter for a sustainable solution. Many other people similarly have aspirations for statehood, though, and one particularly legitimate additional example in the middle east appears to be the Kurds, who we have failed to stand by after they stood by us, and we should work to see them at least have autonomous regions permitting self-rule and determination of some form.

FOT: UNRWA: Refugees from around the world are managed by the UNHCR, taking care of over 60 million people fleeing war-torn areas, forced to resettle, build shelter and schools. Meanwhile, a distinct UNRWA handles grandchildren of Palestinian refugees who have a long-established infrastructure. UNRWA has bloated itself to provide services for people who are not even descendants of refugees and has arbitrarily extended its mandate to run until the establishment of a Palestinian State, rather than getting these descendants resettled. Do you think UNRWA should be dissolved or folded into the UNHCR?

AS: I have no opinion and would need to explore the issue further. It is clear that the UN has a very troubling double standard for all things related to Israel. Consider the UN Human Rights Committee which condemns Israel while ignoring the brutality of Libya, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Sudan.

FOT: USA as Moderator: Do you believe that the US should be the sole mediator of the peace process or should it be part of the “Quartet” of the European Union, UN and Russia? How should the America’s role change in situations of it acting alone or in concert with others?

AS: The United States is now viewed as weak and ineffective on the world stage because of the current president. I am a big believer of multi-lateralism and will take the UN involvement whenever we can get it. It will lead to reigning in regional chaos and injustice.

The current president of the US unduly relies on personal relationships to manage foreign policy, but such approach cannot endure beyond his tenure. We need to map out policies beyond the particular individuals. We are in a situation now where the US has no credibility and to be effective, you have to have credibility.

Being effective also means being honest. When it comes to Israel, America is a strong friend but being a friend doesn’t always mean being a non-critical friend.

We need to include other parties as part of the peace process and be an honest credible moderator to the parties.

FOT: Iran: What do you think of Iran and the Iranian nuclear deal and the withdrawal from it? 

AS: The U.S. cannot allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. It is a malignant autocratic regime. We cannot allow such an autocratic regime to arm themselves. We need to drive a hard bargain for a new and better deal.

More so, the U.S. must get the whole world to empower the people of Iran. Through various means, the U.S. should push for hard sanctions to pressure the regime to make real change towards the rule of law.

FOT: Antisemitism: How do you plan on fighting antisemitism?

AS: Antisemitism is a thread that unites extremists around the world. All forms of extremism are inherently dangerous. In France they self-define as left-wing and in Poland and Hungary they self-define as far right. They are united only in antisemitism.

Education is key to fighting the hatred. Holocaust education is critical, as are instituting new laws like the Hate Crime Prevention Act. We need to be creative with actively fighting against all kinds of antisemitic attacks.


It is worth reviewing Schleifer’s prepared AIPAC remarks which are now on his website.

Adam Schleifer on a trip in Israel


Subscribe to YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook groups: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

U.S. Police Are Killing Men

The United States is going through an analysis of the possible causes of police departments disproportionately killing Black people and considering methods of dealing with the situation. It is certainly past time to consider the reasons that police are killing men at a significantly more disproportionate rate than women.

According to Statista, police killed about twice the number of White people than Black people between 2017 and 2020. However, accounting for the fact that there are 5.7 times the number of Whites (76.5% of population) than Blacks (13.4% of population), the adjusted ratio implies that an average Black person is three times more likely to by shot by a cop than a White person.

Exhibit 1: People Shot to Death by Police, by Race

Year White Black W/B Multiple B/W Adj Multiple
2017 457 223 2.0x 2.8x
2018 399 209 1.9x 3.0x
2019 370 235 1.6x 3.6x
2020 YTD 172 88 2.0x 2.9x

The numbers for police killings are much worse when examining the numbers by gender. There are slightly more women (50.8%) than men in the United States. However, men are almost exclusively shot to death by police according to data by Statista.

Exhibit 2: People Shot to Death by Police, by Gender

Year Men Women M/W Multiple M/W Adj Multiple
2017 940 45 20.9x 21.6x
2018 942 53 17.8x 18.4x
2019 961 43 22.3x 23.1x
2020 415 13 31.9x 33.0x

An average male is 33 times more likely to be shot and killed by a police officer than an average woman, while an average Black person is three times more likely to be killed than an average White person. As society examines how to reduce the disproportionate killing of Black people, we must no longer be blind and silent to the catastrophe impacting men in this country.

An image taken from video shows Walter Scott shortly before he was shot dead by North Charleston, S.C., Police Officer Michael Slager in 2015.(Associated Press )


Related First One Through articles:

BLM: Truth, Relevance and Association

NY Times, NY Times, What Do You See? It Sees Rich White Males

The U.N. Doesn’t Care About Middle-Aged White Male Victims of Covid-19

Older White Men are the Most Politically Balanced Demographic By Far

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough