Chuck Schumer | First One Through

Before the Democratic primary for mayor of New York City, The New York Times editorial board wrote that Democratic Socialist Zohran Mamdani was “uniquely unsuited to the city’s challenges” due to his complete lack of experience in running organizations, negotiating contracts and impractical solutions for the largest city in the country. After Mamdani won the primary, the paper quickly churned out articles casting him in a positive light.

First the Times posted puff pieces about “Zohran Mamdani’s Winning Style,” followed a few hours later by “The Parents Who Helped Shape Zohran Mamdani’s Politics.”

Just a few hours later there was an article on “The Age-Old Question Behind the New York Mayor’s Race,” followed ten minutes later by an opinion piece “Plenty of Jews Love Zohran Mamdani.”

The next day, the paper continued its posting frenzy. First it posted about unions switching to support Mamdani and the alt-left politician’s courting Black voters. Then it posted twice about the Mamdani’s social media campaign and success with young voters.

The paper seemed to have an artificial intelligence blogger on autopilot, trying to familiarize the world with this inexperienced 33-year old extremist, and cast him in a positive light.

Why the sudden flip? Why did the Times choose to ignore the millions of New Yorkers who loathe the politics and economic plan of the far-left socialist and fear his hatred for the Jewish State fighting a multifront war? Why pretend that the paper had never recommended that voters stay away from Mamdani?

It’s a terrifying reality of today’s world where party loyalty is paramount over anything else.

And it’s not just the Times. Jewish New York politicians like Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Jerry Nadler ran to support Mamdani after his win, abandoning the majority of the 1.4 million Jews in the city who think of Mamdani the way those two politicians think of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. #AnyoneButMamdani. #MadManny

In an embarassing – and more frequent – dynamic, non-Jewish New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand had no issue calling out Mamdani for his hateful rhetoric. While Schumer and Nadler have become the WOAT, “Worst Of All Time,” non-Jews are proving themselves better allies than fellow Jews.

While millions of New Yorkers are attempting to figure out how to keep a radical socialist out of Gracie Mansion, leaders of the Democratic party are rallying around the primary winner whom they know is unfit and dangerous, whom they had shunned. Such is politics today: an ugly circus in which loyalty is in the center ring and the ringmasters sacrifice innocent heads in the mouths of tigers.

From Vienna to Queens: Karl Lueger, Zohran Mamdani, and the Politics of Polite Antisemitism

Make New York Bankrupt Again: The Danger of Mamdani and 21st Century Socialism

The Normalization Deformity: No To Zionism and Peace; Yes To Massacres and Terrorism In a Global Intifada

Be A Proud DINO And Expunge Extremists

It has now been revealed that Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer told the administration of Columbia University to “keep heads down” and ride out the controversy of antisemitism on campus. He said that issue of rampant Jew hatred were “political problems are really only among Republicans,” and that Jews and the country would soon move on.

To unpack those statements, the most powerful Democratic politician outside of the Executive branch dismissed the Jew-hatred at Columbia despite one of the rabbis on campus telling Jewish students to go home, “no one should have to endure this level of hatred, let alone at school.” He encouraged the university to do nothing to assist the beleaguered Jews, and that once Democrats took over the House of Representatives, university presidents would no longer be dragged to Washington.

Others also believe that only Republicans cared about the systemic Jew hatred at American universities. Rep. Virginia Foxx, Chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said that Democrats would drop investigating Jew hatred at universities should they win the House in the November 2024 election.

Schumer’s suggestion that leaders wait out setbacks in attacking Jews has precedent.

During Donald Trump’s term in office, former Secretary of State John Kerry under Democratic President Barack Obama passed a message to Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority “that he should stay strong in his spirit and play for time, that he will not break and will not yield to President [Donald] Trump’s demands.” Kerry predicted that Trump would last a single term and then a Democratic Administration would go easy on the PA, and apply hard pressure on Israel.

*Sen. Chuck Schumer and Secretary of State John Kerry discuss the Iranian nuclear deal in 2015*

Democrats know that Jews are a minority-minority, a very small and forgiving people. The old guard Democratic leaders like Schumer and Kerry believe that Jews’ ongoing quest for “tikkun olam / repairing the world” would include self-annihilation, if so required. They believe they know history that Jews (non-Orthodox at least) will look past any insult and cleave to the Democratic Party regardless of actions. Jews will give up land, rights and dignity just as they handed over the Judaism’s holiest site of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, if peace so dictated.

The new generation of Democratic leaders is less convinced. It is waging a war to strip Jews of power, position, wealth and property in a broad redistribution to majority-minority groups like Blacks, as chanted by Reps. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Rashida Tlaib, and their sponsor at Justice Democrats.

The cleft in the Democratic Party between the old and new guards is a tactical decision whether to wait for Jews to hang themselves or to give clearance to rob, rape and murder them immediately. Regrettably – no, frighteningly – the party’s view of Jews has been buried under an avalanche of DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) that elevates Victims of Preference, even when those groups are directly coming for Jews.