ru24.pro
News in English
Ноябрь
2024

Politics VII: Same reason, opposite choices

0

Our son told us about a very intelligent black woman he works with  who feels the Trump contingent is so racist that she’ll never be able to live in a red state with Trumpistas controlling state government.  So she voted for Harris.

I had grave concerns about living in a country controlled by the hard left, so I voted for Trump.

I have no idea what the woman’s life experiences are, but I doubt that they contain an attempt to drown her or a physical assault resulting in a comminuted ankle fracture.  I doubt that anyone in her family was lynched in the 1940s because they were black.  The Nazis took a great uncle of mine, and 70 of my wife’s family still living in Hungary.

So likely she’s worried about the future and what might happen, while I worry about what has already happened, and what is likely to happen under the hard left in America from which Harris sprang.  The hard left is now the main source of antisematism in this country. That wasn’t the case for most of my life but it is now.

Harris’s response to a question about Israel hardly inspires confidence.  From a transcript of a CNN interview  (by CNN).

“COOPER: Do you believe Donald Trump is Antisemitic?

HARRIS: I believe Donald Trump is a danger to the well-being and security of America.

COOPER: He has said that he — he’s casting himself as a protector of Israel. Do you believe you would be more pro-Israel than Donald Trump?

HARRIS: I believe that Donald Trump is dangerous. I believe that, when you have a president of the United States who has said to his generals, who work for him because he is commander in chief — these conversations, I assume many of them took place in the Oval Office.

And if the president of the United States, the commander in chief, is saying to his generals, in essence, “Why can’t you be more like Hitler’s generals?” Anderson, come on. This is a serious, serious issue. And we know who he is. He admires dictators, sending love letters back and forth with Kim Jong-un; talks about the president of Russia, and then, most recently, the reports are that, in the height of COVID, when most Americans could not get their hands on a COVID test, Americans were dying by the hundreds a day, he secretly sent COVID tests to the president of Russia for his personal use.

So, again, there — this — this election in 13 days is presenting the American people with a very significant decision. And on the one side, on this issue of who is going to model what it means to use the bully pulpit of the president of the United States in a manner that, in tone, word and deed, is about lifting up our discourse, fighting against hate, as opposed to fanning the flames of hate, which Donald Trump does consistently.

I — I’m going to tell you. We are an incredible country, and we love our country. You all wouldn’t be here unless we love our country. And there are certain things where we’ve just got to come together and realize that — that — that we do believe in the importance of healthy debate on real issues, but there are certain standards we’ve got to have.

And, you know, another point that even John Kelly talked about, I believe, and many have, is January 6th, where you have the president of the United States defying the will of the people in a free and fair election and unleashing a violent mob, who attacked the United States Capitol. One hundred forty law enforcement officers were attacked. Some were killed.

And so I — I say that to say the American people deserve to have a president who encourages healthy debate, works across the aisle, not afraid of good ideas wherever they come from, but also maintains certain standards about how we think about the role and the responsibility, and certainly not comparing oneself in a clearly admiring way to Hitler. ”

More to the point about the antisematism of the hard left is this article by Virginia Fox (born Palmieri), congresswoman from Virginia, chair of the House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce investigating the way elite academe behaved after the Hamas attack on Israel 10/23.  Congress has subpoena power and used it to get records of internal deliberations at Harvard and elsewhere.  It isn’t pretty and it’s not about what might happen in the future but what has already happened under control of the hard left.

The following was published in the New York Post and is shamelessly copied verbatim (so it isn’t plagiarism)

“These so-called elite universities have a glaring antisemitism problem

 

Two days after the most disastrous testimony in congressional history revealed the ugly antisemitism running rampant on America’s college campuses, the Committee on Education and the Workforce, which I chair, opened investigations into Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania and MIT.

At first, I didn’t know what to expect.

So-called elite universities are a black box for 99% of the American public.

However, I knew that Jewish students needed support from Congress, and that these postsecondary institutions were derelict in their moral leadership.

On Thursday, after a year of investigations into universities across the country, I released a shocking 325-page report detailing the committee’s findings — based on over 400,000 pages of documents, hearing testimony and transcribed interviews.

What we discovered was a massive, systemic failure by university administrators to respond to the antisemitic displays roiling their campuses.

What’s more, internal documents show university leaders viewed antisemitism as a public relations issue, not a pressing assault on the well-being of their Jewish students.

In one instance, she approved a request by the dean of Harvard Medical School to remove the description of Hamas’ terrorism as “violent” from the draft of Harvard’s initial statement about the Oct. 7 assault on Israel Oct. 7.

Around 1,200 Israelis were murdered that day at the hands of Hamas.

Harvard’s decision not to characterize this terrorism as “violent” is unthinkable.

In another instance, Gay refused to label the eliminationist slogan “From the River to the Sea” as antisemitic, despite its obvious call for the annihilation of the state of Israel and extermination of its Jewish population.

Fellow Harvard leaders admitted the phrase contained “genocidal implications” and compared the protests to KKK rallies, but Gay determined in a private email that labeling the phrase as such would “prompt [people to ask] what we’re doing about it, i.e. discipline.”

The notion that antisemitic conduct may go unchallenged because those in authority were unwilling to pursue disciplinary action is deeply offensive.

Moreover, these examples show that the former president’s inability to act decisively and with moral clarity was just as pronounced in private meetings as it was before Congress.

It’s no wonder she lost her job.

After reading additional internal documents, I realized aversion to accountability is the rule at so-called elite universities, not the exception.

Northwestern, Columbia, UCLA and others all failed to enforce their rules and hold students accountable for vile antisemitism.

In perhaps the most egregious case, UCLA allowed an unlawful encampment to escalate into antisemitic violence.

Radical protesters denied Jewish students access to campus through certain “checkpoints” on campus, a violation of the federal Civil Rights Act.

UCLA police messages now definitively prove that officers were informed to “hold off” as the encampment grew, in violation of university rules and the law.

Further report revelations detail the depth of ideological groupthink and emotional incontinence among Hamas-sympathizing faculty at multiple institutions.

When confronted with an opposing viewpoint in a meeting, the executive committee chair of Columbia’s University Senate histrionically ranted, “This is my meeting, my meeting, my meeting.”

At Northwestern, a professor who had chosen to lead negotiations with encampment organizers argued for a boycott of Sabra hummus in the school cafeteria for its association with Israel and touched on “cultural appropriation themes.”

I’m unsure what that even means, but apparently it made enough sense for Northwestern’s provost, Kathleen Hagerty, to approve of a Sabra boycott.

‘Purveyor of hate’

Finally, the report outlines a shared fear of congressional oversight by universities.

In a telling moment among friends in a board meeting, Gay lashed out at Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), whom she described as a “purveyor of hate” and “supporter of proudboys” — a downright slanderous accusation and completely removed from reality.

So-called leaders like Gay disparage oversight on the one hand, while showing extreme bias behind closed doors on the other, a contradiction that only validates the committee’s investigations.

To Harvard, Columbia, Northwestern, UCLA, and every other university that failed to address antisemitism: You are on notice.

Unaccountable leadership, emotionally fragile outbursts, hummus culture wars, and baseless ad hominems — the findings in this report depict so-called prestigious universities as anything but. 

Back in April, on the steps of Columbia’s Lowe Memorial Library, I declared, “The inmates are running an asylum.”

Today, I offer a slight addendum: it’s more like the children are running the day care. “

That’s the end of the article. It’s worth repeating two sentences.

“To Harvard, Columbia, Northwestern, UCLA, and every other university that failed to address antisemitism: You are on notice.” 

I certainly hope the Republicans hold the House of Representatives, so she can continue holding them responsible.

Currently (9 PM EST 7 November, the Republicans have 209 seats the Democrats 198 with 218 needed for control.