Question 1): How close did the President’s State of the Union Address come to inspiring the energy needed for Democrats to reignite the national coalition that won for them in 2020?
Answer 1): “Inspire” is too strong a word to use in describing reaction to any of President Biden’s speeches, but his SOTU remarks probably did move the needle in his direction by quieting doubts about his age, vigor, and mental competency. However, the reaction of the public will last only as long as he continues to show he’s up to the task of being President for another four years. If there are any lapses, his SOTU impression will be quickly forgotten, and the sharks will start circling again.
****************************************************************
Question 2): In spite of the Supreme Court ruling that turned the abortion issue over to each individual state, internet ads are running that claim if Donald TRUMP is elected president, he’ll outlaw abortion nationwide. Running these ads makes sense because so far the Republicans have demonstrated they’re incapable of adequately responding to such claims — right?
Answer 2): Right! — because up to this point Republicans have been inept at responding to this and other aspects of the abortion issue. However, they shouldn’t have allowed themselves to get into such a predicament. Fact is, there is no constitutional provision that gives federal lawmakers the power to make rules concerning a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy or a government’s right to force her to carry her pregnancy to term.
Democrats are just as guilty when they talk about passing a law guaranteeing the right to abortion. The only means for the federal government to regulate abortion would be to propose and then successfully adopt a constitutional amendment that specifically establishes a right or a restriction. That would require the consent of 38 states, and that won’t happen. And, short of that, any Congressional action or presidential executive order would be totally invalid.
That’s why every pro-life Republican candidate should be prepared to explain to voters that he or she will not support unconstitutional legislation to ban abortion.
Republican pro-life candidates can run on a platform of supporting efforts to overturn or restrict legal abortion in each of the 50 states, but they must make it clear to voters that it can’t happen with national legislation — only on a state-by-state basis. Democrats intend to play political games with the issue between now and November, and President Biden already began that process in his State of the Union address wee before last. But Republicans must not take the bait. If they want to seize a majority in both houses of Congress and in state legislatures, they must be prepared to answer the question that the left-leaning media will hit them with repeatedly, “Are you in favor of a federal ban on abortion?”
Their answer should be simple: “I am a ‘Constitution First’ Republican. I will not vote for any laws that do not fall under the powers granted to Congress by Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. Meanwhile, I will support the Supreme Court’s decision to return the responsibility for abortion legislation to the states, and I will fight tirelessly as an advocate for innocent life in my own state and others.”
********************************************************
Question 3): The Alabama Supreme Court recently ruled that stored embryos, used for in vitro fertilization (IVF), are afforded the same legal protection as children under the state’s “Wrongful Death of a Minor Act.” In other words, embryos are “persons.” Does this issue have the potential to reignite the abortion issue for Democrats this year?
Answer 3): Democrats certainly hope so, and the media will cooperate with the Democrats’ game plan. However, Republicans should be able to avoid falling into this trap, and many GOP candidates have already figured out a way to do it — by supporting protections to IVF. A nuanced but solid argument can be made that you can agree with the Alabama Supreme Court’s definition of ‘personhood’ but still believe in IVF, especially if it eschews the destruction of embryos.
**********************************************************
Question 4): A national argument is under way with one side claiming that, if the Biden administration continues to be so supportive of Israel in its war against Hamas, the Democrats won’t have any chance of taking a ‘battleground’ state like Michigan in the general election. Meanwhile, the other side claims the Democrats will lose Michigan if the Biden administration doesn’t stick with its support of Israel. What is President Joe Biden’s way out of this alleged dilemma?
Answer 4): It’s a wash. Looked at politically, Biden is damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t, so maybe he should just stick to what he thinks is the right policy. Numerically, the Jewish vote is just as important to Michigan Democrats as are Arab-Americans, if not more so. Ultimately, it boils down to the question: “Does the State of Israel have a right to exist?” The answer may lie in “Does the USA feel the same way about Israel today as it did in 1948 or 1967, or even 10 years ago?”
*************************************************************
Bill, be real. If trump wins, he will absolutely sign an EO banning the morning after pill nationwide (which the Pres has the authority to do). IF the Republican Party ends up with a trifecta, they will absolutely pass (and trump will sign) a bill banning abortion nationwide. OTOH, IF the Dems win a trifecta there will be an effort to either end the filibuster or create an abortion exception to it, and Roe v Wade will be statutorily passed (that remains a big IF though – i cant predict if the Dems will have 50 votes to eliminate the filibuster).
Your argument about the federal govt being prohibited from legislating about abortion is simply off base. The Dobbs decision doesn’t prohibit the federal govt from legislating about abortion (they already do – the Hyde amendment is one longstanding example).
So, like it or not, Abortion is on the ballot nationwide. And if Rs dont like it bc of polling, well, they can either lie about their position or lie about
Trump, if elected, could use the FDA to ban or curtail the distribution of abortion medications:
http://www.19thnews.org/2024/01/trump-abortion-restrictions/
A big question is whether the Dems will win a trifecta.
If it happens expect big changes.
The federal government cannot legislate on abortion matters in general. If it is tied to some type of federal funding such as Medicaid, then that is a different story.
Abortion is primarily a states rights matter. Look at the abortion clinics that shut down in the deep South after the Dobbs decision.
QUESTION #1: A reasonable but uninspiring SOTU address that will be quickly forgotten by all.
QUESTION #2: You are correct that there is no general police power under the U.S. Constitution that would give Congress the ability to legislate on purely abortion matters. States have that jurisdiction subject to the limitations in the federal constitution.
GOP propagandists are circulating nonsense as frivolous as Hugo Chavez’s infiltration of Dominion Voting Systems machines during the 2020 presidential election.
QUESTION #3: Expect RTL to have a position declared on this and a band of propagandists seeking to elicit support for that position during the 202 election cycle.
QUESTION #4: “Does the State of Israel have a right to exist?”
No political state has a “right to exist”. States are recognized by others – or rejected.
A better question is whether the USA should recognize both the State of Israel and the State of Palestine as coequal political sovereign entities – as the Canadian parliament is now considering doing.
President Harry S. Truman in 1948 was concerned about inflaming Palestinian Arabs by recognizing Israel – but was told by his advisors that he needed to recognize the independent Israeli state in 1948 to please Jewish voters in crucial swing states such as Illinois and New York.
The “Uncommitted” primary vote percentage totals rejecting Biden are continuing to grow in states holding Democratic primaries – signaling that many Democrats are unhappy with his stance on Gaza.
Minnesota had 20% of Democratic presidential primary voters cast Uncommitted ballots a few weeks ago.
Biden and U.S. Senate candidate Elissa Slotkin have seen their respective polling numbers nosedive in Michigan. So it is hardly a “wash”. Biden has infuriated both Arabs and pro-Israel interests.
There is no “dilemma” here. Biden needs to do the right thing a let the chips fall where they may. By pandering to one side or the other he appears weak and ineffectual.
Trump made a bold statement that PM Netanyahu needed to be impeached and also criticized his defense minister. By not being concerned about who is being offended, he has come across as a strong leader – and polling numbers in Michigan seem to confirm this.
Answer 2 is a joke. While many Republicans will claim that abortion is a matter to determine by the states, they’ll pass HR 431 or the equivalent as soon as possible. With a compliant Supreme Court (see Dobbs), abortion will ban banned nationwide. Four Republican members of Michigan delegation, Moolenaar, McClain, Bergman, and Huizenga are already sponsors. They already appear to believe that abortion is not a matter for states to decide.
Adderall is a wonder drug for aging politicians. If I had a choice between clowns for this circus, I’d pick Bozo over Joe. Bozo isn’t angry. Bozo is always happy.
Hey Bill, thank you for this week’s entry,
With-respect-to (wrt) Q#1: Not sure if speed-ball Joe is a student of ancient Roman Emperors, or, of modern day “Tin-Horn” dictators. Either way, he’s really good at it. Much like Nero, he sure knows how to blame others for his atrocities, blaming republicans for not curing a border crisis he created. Like a third world dictator, he knows how to clamp down on his political opposition via corrupt law-fare.
My thought has always been that presidents use the SOTU as a chance to identify existential threats to the USA, and then to recommend areas of bipartisan action. Joe’s idea of bipartisan cooperation is to invite all republicans to take a swim at his sea-side compound, then try to force them to roll face down and hold them till they have to breath water.
Joe did a real good job of throwing red meat to his partisan acolytes, and throwing any opposition under the bus. As one who used to vote 50-50 repubs-dems, that was almost an hour and a half I’ll never get back. Color me terribly disappointed.
Wrt Q#2: Bingo! Bill, while I try very hard to steer the cynic in me towards the skeptical end of the dial, I can’t help reacting to the total ineptitude of republicans arguing against themselves on the abortion issue. Mom’s get to veto any piece of flesh they bring into the world they don’t care for.
Its like signing up every socialist/atheist leaning conservative to lead the reverse charge on this issue – for years and years. I don’t mind them being in the GOP, I just mind them always arguing this debate in the name of all the other republicans. Just because we look to government to protect society from evil doers up to and including capital punishment, why would anyone allow these people use their reverse logic to proclaim the death penalty on innocent pre-borns? What crime has the pre-born committed other than to exist?
This is not supposed to be a Roman society where one parent gets to give thumbs up, or thumbs down, on an innocent life they’re responsible for bringing into the world. The ante needs to be raised on them, not the child. It starts with the republicans beginning to argue the baby’s case before the mother, and ends when viable embryos/fetus’s get to live, and not die. Except in the areas of VERIFIABLE rape/incest/life of the mom, yes, mom’s should be encouraged to shoulder their responsibility to carry the child to viability when a PAID-FOR C-Section can be performed. Least we can do considering other countries can force abortions.
Wrt Q#3: The state of Alabama should be commended for finally arriving at a state level solution that makes sense. Protecting IVF should be just the beginning of arguing the baby’s rights correctly. I sympathize with mom’s, especially mom’s not of their choosing, I really do. But someone needs to speak for the baby, and it should begin with Right-To-Life speaking sense to both political parties.
Wrt Q#4: Again, we have dictator Joe trying to have it both ways. Tell Israel (and Jewish-american voters) he has their back, then tell the Palestinians (and Muslim-american voters) to hold on, I’ll sabotage Israel’s attempt to cast Nazi-Hamas’ corrupt ideology on the dust heap of history. Egypt had the courage to outlaw the Nazi influenced Muslim Brotherhood ideology. If the Palestinians cannot bring themselves to outlaw the Nazi-Hamas ideology, then it needs to be imposed. Palestinians are being killed, yes, but NOT genocided! Nazi-Hamas IS! To the extent Nazism was. But too many sympathetic Palestinians are not clamoring to get out of the firing line. America would not have succumbed to unilateral cease-fire proposals during WWII, too bad socialist America is now buying into this evil thought process.
1. regarding Biden’s State of the Union speech not inspiring, but energizing and motivating to his damn base number
2. no exceptions to abortion is not realistic for example Tudor Dixon. Plan B is available over-the-counter without prescription. NO Republican can win state wide if they are no exceptions that includes Moolenaarand Huizenga. Republicans must emphasize sanctity of life. Yes, Scott Greenlee, your issue Tim Skubick has recently said there has been a sea change regarding this issue
3. IVF is sacrosanct with the very private relationship between a woman and her doctor. 4, there will be a cease-fire by Israel by the summer. Finally, women and the younger generation are voting for Democrats. For Republicans to win statewide, they need to win back some voters of the younger generation, and with women and healthcare .
Nice article, Bill. And happy St. Patrick’s Day to one and all.
QUESTION 1: – You’re right, it was not inspiring, but an above average campaign speech to show the base that he is ready for the upcoming election. The problem is that his problem isn’t with his base. It’s with the “swing” voters who went his way in 2020 and are jumping ship in 2024. As Nate Silver pointed out in his March 2nd Silver Bulletin on Substack where he quotes Matt Yglesias’ X (or Twitter if you prefer) account that… “BUT BIDEN’S BIGGEST PROBLEM IS THAT PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR IN 2020 WHO NOW SAY THEY WANT TO VOTE FOR TRUMP – JUST INSANELY BANAL SWING VOTER STUFF”.
Mr. Silver differs a bit on this, but not a lot. He states… “HERE’S A SLIGHTLY SPICY ARGUMENT, IN FACT: I SUSPECT THAT SOME OF THE REASON THAT PUNDITS DON’T LIKE THIS TAKE IS BECAUSE THE MEDIA HAS BECOME CONSIDERABLY MORE PARTISAN. IN CONTRAST A COUPLE OF DECADES AGO, PUNDITRY WAS DOMINATED BY NEWSPAPER COLUMNISTS WHO WERE MILQUETOAST CENTRISTS AND TV PANELISTS WHO WERE SCRUPULOUSLY NONPARTISAN. NOW, PEOPLE WHO COMMENT ABOUT POLITICS ON BLOGS AND SOCIAL MEDIA TEND TO BE LOYAL, RELIABLE PARTISANS, ALIGNING WITH EITHER DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS ON NEARLY EVERY ISSUE. THAT SORT OF CONSISTENT PARTISANSHIP IS MUCH LESS COMMON AMONG THE BROADER ELECTORATE, ALTHOUGH IT’S BECOMING MORE SO.” Mr. Silver still believes Biden can win. But only if he changes course. He concludes his March 2nd posting with the following: “BUT IF THEY WANT TO MAXIMIZE THEIR CHANCES OF WINNING IN NOVEMBER, DEMOCRATS OUGHT TO FOCUS ON THIS GROUP OF VOTE-SWITCHING SWING VOTERS FIRST, AND THE BASE SECOND. WHY DO THESE BIDEN 2020 VOTERS NOW PREFER TRUMP IN 2024?
• IS IT BIDEN’S AGE? ALL THE EVIDENCE POINTS TOWARD AGE BEING A MAJOR FACTOR. IS IT TO THE POINT WHERE DEMOCRATS OUGHT TO PULL THE EMERGENCY LEVER AND NOMINATE A DIFFERENT CANDIDATE INSTEAD?
• IS IT GENERAL DISGRUNTLEMENT WITH THE DIRECTION OF THE COUNTRY AND THE DECLINING INCUMBENCY ADVANTAGE? THAT MIGHT ALSO ARGUE FOR REPLACING BIDEN.
• IS IT THAT THE WHITE HOUSE’S MESSAGING IS OFTEN TARGETED AT COLLEGE-EDUCATED PROGRESSIVES? THIS IS PERHAPS THE EASIEST THING TO FIX.
• IS IT THAT BIDEN’S SUPPORT IN 2020 CAME FROM VOTERS WHO THOUGHT THAT TRUMP MISHANDLED THE COVID PANDEMIC – AN ISSUE WHICH HAS NOW FADED FROM PUBLIC VIEW – AND VOTERS SEE A COUNTRY THAT STILL HAS A LOT OF PROBLEMS? THAT COULD BE A HARD PROBLEM TO SOLVE, BECAUSE IT STEMS FROM A SORT OF FAUSTIAN BARGAIN THAT BIDEN MADE IN 2020, OVERPROMISING WHAT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE WITH NEW LEADERSHIP. NEVERTHELESS, BIDEN DOES HAVE A LOT OF SUBSTANTIVE, BIPARTISAN ACCOMPLISHMENTS THAT HE CAN TOUT. THE WHITE HOUSE OFTEN DOESN’T FOCUS ON THIS, INSTEAD DEVOTING A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF THEIR BANDWIDTH TO THE DANGERS OF TRUMP.
• OR IS IT THE DECREASING LOYALTY OF BLACK, HISPANIC AND ASIAN AMERICAN VOTERS TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY? IN THE TIMES POLL, NONWHITE VOTERS WERE CONSIDERABLY MORE LIKELY TO SWITCH FROM BIDEN TO TRUMP. THERE ARE MANY THEORIES FOR THIS APPARENT SHIFT. SOME ARE FRANKLY QUITE BEARISH FOR DEMOCRATS, IMPLYING THAT THEY’LL NEED TO RETHINK THEIR ENTIRE COALITION, NOT SOMETHING EASILY DONE IN THE NEXT EIGHT MONTHS.
BIDEN CAN STILL WIN – TO REPEAT MYSELF, THE CALENDAR JUST TURNED TO MARCH, AND LIKELY VOTER POLLS MAY HAVE BETTER NEWS FOR HIM. BUT THE WIDESPREAD ASSUMPTION AMONG DEMOCRATS THAT THEY CAN JUST RUN BACK THEIR 2020 STRATEGY OR TAKE A PAGE FROM THE OBAMA 2012 PLAYBOOK APPEARS TO BE FLAWED. THERE ARE STILL PLENTY OF SWING VOTERS, AND THEY’RE SWINGING TOWARD TRUMP.
Nate’s comments hit on Question 4 which I will address later.
QUESTION 2 – A very astute political response. The ads do indicate that Joe Biden plans on using support for abortion on demand as a primary campaign tool. An odd position for a self-professed “devout” Catholic as it is antithetical to the teachings of the Church he professes to belong to. In case Mr. Biden reads TBR, here’s the language from the Cathechism:
2270 HUMAN LIFE MUST BE RESPECTED AND PROTECTED ABSOLUTELY FROM THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION. FROM THE FIRST MOMENT OF HIS EXISTENCE, A HUMAN BEING MUST BE RECOGNIZED AS HAVING THE RIGHTS OF A PERSON – AMONG WHICH IS THE INVIOLABLE RIGHT OF EVERY INNOCENT BEING TO LIFE. 72
BEFORE I FORMED YOU IN THE WOMB I KNEW YOU, AND BEFORE YOU WERE BORN I CONSECRATED YOU. 73
MY FRAME WAS NOT HIDDEN FROM YOU, WHEN I WAS BEING MADE IN SECRET, INTRICATELY WROUGHT IN THE DEPTHS OF THE EARTH. 74
2271 SINCE THE FIRST CENTURY THE CHURCH HAS AFFIRMED THE MORAL EVIL OF EVERY PROCURED ABORTION. THIS TEACHING HAS NOT CHANGED AND REMAINS UNCHANGEABLE. DIRECT ABORTION, THAT IS TO SAY, ABORTION WILLED EITHER AS AN END OR A MEANS, IS GRAVELY CONTRARY TO THE MORAL LAW:
YOU SHALL NOT KILL THE EMBRYO BY ABORTION AND SHALL NOT CAUSE THE NEWBORN TO PERISH. 75
GOD, THE LORD OF LIFE, HAS ENTRUSTED TO MEN THE NOBLE MISSION OF SAFEGUARDING LIFE, AND MEN MUST CARRY IT OUT IN A MANNER WORTHY OF THEMSELVES. LIFE MUST BE PROTECTED WITH THE UTMOST CARE FROM THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION: ABORTION AND INFANTICIDE ARE ABOMINABLE CRIMES. 76
2272 FORMAL COOPERATION IN AN ABORTION CONSTITUTES A GRAVE OFFENSE. THE CHURCH ATTACHES THE CANONICAL PENALTY OF EXCOMMUNICATION TO THIS CRIME AGAINST HUMAN LIFE. “A PERSON WHO PROCURES A COMPLETED ABORTION INCURS EXCOMMUNICATION LATAE SENTENTIAE ,” 77 “BY THE VERY COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE,” 78 AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS PROVIDED BY CANON LAW. 79 THE CHURCH DOES NOT THEREBY INTEND TO RESTRICT THE SCOPE OF MERCY. RATHER, SHE MAKES CLEAR THE GRAVITY OF THE CRIME COMMITTED, THE IRREPARABLE HARM DONE TO THE INNOCENT WHO IS PUT TO DEATH, AS WELL AS TO THE PARENTS AND THE WHOLE OF SOCIETY.
2273 THE INALIENABLE RIGHT TO LIFE OF EVERY INNOCENT HUMAN INDIVIDUAL IS A CONSTITUTIVE ELEMENT OF A CIVIL SOCIETY AND ITS LEGISLATION :
“THE INALIENABLE RIGHTS OF THE PERSON MUST BE RECOGNIZED AND RESPECTED BY CIVIL SOCIETY AND THE POLITICAL AUTHORITY. THESE HUMAN RIGHTS DEPEND NEITHER ON SINGLE INDIVIDUALS NOR ON PARENTS; NOR DO THEY REPRESENT A CONCESSION MADE BY SOCIETY AND THE STATE; THEY BELONG TO HUMAN NATURE AND ARE INHERENT IN THE PERSON BY VIRTUE OF THE CREATIVE ACT FROM WHICH THE PERSON TOOK HIS ORIGIN. AMONG SUCH FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ONE SHOULD MENTION IN THIS REGARD EVERY HUMAN BEING’S RIGHT TO LIFE AND PHYSICAL INTEGRITY FROM THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION UNTIL DEATH.” 80
“THE MOMENT A POSITIVE LAW DEPRIVES A CATEGORY OF HUMAN BEINGS OF THE PROTECTION WHICH CIVIL LEGISLATION OUGHT TO ACCORD THEM, THE STATE IS DENYING THE EQUALITY OF ALL BEFORE THE LAW. WHEN THE STATE DOES NOT PLACE ITS POWER AT THE SERVICE OF THE RIGHTS OF EACH CITIZEN, AND IN PARTICULAR OF THE MORE VULNERABLE, THE VERY FOUNDATIONS OF A STATE BASED ON LAW ARE UNDERMINED. . . . AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE RESPECT AND PROTECTION WHICH MUST BE ENSURED FOR THE UNBORN CHILD FROM THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION, THE LAW MUST PROVIDE APPROPRIATE PENAL SANCTIONS FOR EVERY DELIBERATE VIOLATION OF THE CHILD’S RIGHTS.” 81
2274 SINCE IT MUST BE TREATED FROM CONCEPTION AS A PERSON, THE EMBRYO MUST BE DEFENDED IN ITS INTEGRITY, CARED FOR, AND HEALED, AS FAR AS POSSIBLE, LIKE ANY OTHER HUMAN BEING.
PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS IS MORALLY LICIT, “IF IT RESPECTS THE LIFE AND INTEGRITY OF THE EMBRYO AND THE HUMAN FETUS AND IS DIRECTED TOWARD ITS SAFE GUARDING OR HEALING AS AN INDIVIDUAL. . . . IT IS GRAVELY OPPOSED TO THE MORAL LAW WHEN THIS IS DONE WITH THE THOUGHT OF POSSIBLY INDUCING AN ABORTION, DEPENDING UPON THE RESULTS: A DIAGNOSIS MUST NOT BE THE EQUIVALENT OF A DEATH SENTENCE.” 82
THE CITATIONS
72 CF. CDF, DONUM VITAE I,1.
73 JER 1:5; CF. JOB 10:8-12; PS 22:10-11.
74 PS 139:15.
75 DIDACHE 2,2:SCH 248,148; CF. EP. BARNABAE 19,5:PG 2 777; AD DIOGNETUM 5,6:PG 2,1173; TERTULLIAN, APOL . 9:PL 1,319-320.
76 GS 51 § 3.
77 CIC, CAN. 1398.
78 CIC, CAN. 1314.
79 CF. CIC, CANN. 1323-1324.
80 CDF, DONUM VITAE III.
81 CDF, DONUM VITAE III.
82 CDF, DONUM VITAE I,2.
As for the President, if someone will lie about his relationship to God – and that is what a pro-abortion Catholic is essentially doing – is there anything he or she won’t lie about? It’s highly unlikely any of the current folks that Mr. Silver mentioned in his Substack piece will choose to bring this up to either President Biden or the Archbishop of Washington, Cardinal Gregory. (Cardinal Gregory cannot formally excommunicate the President as he is head of state, that requires Papal action, but he could deny him Holy Communion under Canon 915. The late Archbishop of New Orleans, Joseph Rummel, who excommunicated lay and political leaders for their opposition to civil rights and desegregation in the 1960s would have).
QUESTION 3 – Good point made, especially your final sentence. I believe that Louisiana has similar legislation to that end. Now I am sure that the Democrats will cite this and use it politically, but their point is all screwed up. The Alabama Supreme Court interpreted the law as it was written. This is what courts are supposed to do. Shortly after the dust had settled on the decision (in what was probably record time), the Alabama legislature then changed the law. When a legislature passes legislation that goes beyond what they wanted – or what the people want – they are supposed to change the law or pass new legislation. That’s basic civics. If a legislature doing what it is supposed to do is now a problem, that says more about the folks complaining.
QUESTION 4 – An interesting point you’ve raised here. Here my response might be perceived as a rant. So be it.
The current violence began October 7th with a well-coordinated attack by Hamas forces from Gaza into Israel that led to over 1200 dead and more than 100 abductions, mostly women, including Americans. Let’s be honest. Hamas is a psychopathic murder-death cult that is perfectly content to see their civilian population suffer and die if they feel it helps to destroy Israel. The documented rape and degradation of these women (Bari Weiss, among others, has done several videos on it), as well as celebrating the number of Jews the Hamas terrorists killed is well documented. Douglas Murray has also done good reporting on the ground. With a wee bit of effort, you can find the videos that Hamas themselves posted showing this. Yet here we are. Fear of the pro-Hamas wing of his party is leading President Biden to effectively side with Hamas while having his minions (Senators Schumer and Van Hollen, among others) tell the Israelis who should be their Prime Minister and denying UNRWA workers collaboration with Hamas. And Hamas is still holding American citizens as hostages, making rather obscene demands for their return. The fact that the President is allowing Hamas to dictate the terms of prisoner exchange of these hostages is more than appalling. In ancient Rome, the term CIVIS ROMANUS SUM meant something. As for the American hostages of Hamas, the term CIVIS AMERICANUS SUM means much less.
The national argument is mostly coming from the pro-Hamas “progressive” left of the Democratic Party and their adjacent hangers on. And yes, I mean pro-Hamas.* Their position is that Israel is essentially an illegal entity (that’s what the phrase ‘FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA” means). Conversely, as long as Hamas exists, Israel can never be secure, which is what they want. They advocate positions that benefit Hamas at the expense of the US and – to what was a couple of months ago – a strong US ally that Richard Nixon was willing to risk war with the Soviets during the Yom Kippur war, the last time Israel was truly caught with their proverbial pants down. This “side” of the national argument supports the leaders of Hamas who are safely hidden in other countries living the high life. It condones the October 7th attacks (yes, I know they have criticized the attacks, but those criticisms are muted and immediately dismissed in the effort to seek a cease fire). They condone the Hamas folks on the ground who routinely dig up metal water pipes to make missiles to shoot into Israel (see the Ryan McBeth YouTube video “HOW JLOTS WON’T WORK IN GAZA, BUT THE SONS OF PALESTINE MIGHT” at the 3:21 mark). Yet somehow the Israelis are to blame for the lack of water and the subsequent loss of food imports and the like. Seriously, what would we have done to ships or others trying to bring in food, medicine and the like into Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan in World War II? Let them in? Hell no. So why should the Israelis? The pro-Hamas faction here says that the Israelis should. Madness.
Let’s examine the siding with Hamas. Any ceasefire benefits Hamas. How? Well, first of all, their leaders and soldiers are not being targeted and killed; their leadership and soldiers can move about in relative freedom to re-position themselves, escape, or prepare for their next attack; they can move and stage weapons; they can reposition supplies from tunnels or shore up damaged tunnels; they can integrate into the general population guaranteeing more civilian casualties when the ceasefire ends (this is a Hamas goal since dead Gazans moved the President. It works); and someone else gets to feed the people they’ve allowed to starve setting up even more potential hostages. And to do this, we are putting in what is a floating pier (JLOTS) that will have to have US military personnel on the ground to secure the area and on the pier/dock to secure it as well, to make sure the food is properly distributed, thus making them convenient targets. Not only that, but Hamas still has American hostages. Since October 7th. The fact that the President is allowing Hamas to dictate the terms of prisoner exchange of these hostages is more than appalling. Yet here we are.
Now to the pro-Hamas wing. If you see the entire McBeth video previously mentioned, you will see advocates of the cease fire. The kindest way to describe them is useful idiots (It’s Lent, I am trying to control my temper). These pro-Hamas folks channel their inner Karl Marx and Frantz Fanon (see “The Wretched of the Earth”) and have divided the world into oppressors and oppressed, and the oppressed are justified in doing whatever is necessary to overthrow the oppressor (I know I am being very brief in describing their work). Another video example of this is Ryan McBeth’s video on banning TicTok, “TICTOK IS A CYBERWEAPON”. The recent college graduate in tears after seeing a pair of orthodox in New York City must be seen to be believed. Personally, I don’t think she should be allowed out in public without a competent adult escorting her, but that’s just me. Israel is a target because their answer to the question Emma Green posed in an article for The Atlantic in 2016 – ‘ARE JEWS WHITE’ – is yes, thus making them oppressors. I could spend oodles of paragraphs going over how extensive their ignorance of history is, but then this response might get too long to read.
President Biden and the Democrats have problems with the pro-Hamas wing of their Party who are having a tantrum. And the tantrum is working. Your final two sentences state: ULTIMATELY, IT BOILS DOWN TO THE QUESTION: “DOES THE STATE OF ISRAEL HAVE A RIGHT TO EXIST?” THE ANSWER MAY LIE IN “DOES THE USA FEEL THE SAME WAY ABOUT ISRAEL TODAY AS IT DID IN 1948 OR 1967, OR EVEN 10 YEARS AGO?” I answer YES to both questions. As for the Democrats answering them, do Democrats really believe that the pro-Hamas voters will stay home and allow Trump to win? But as Mr. Silver pointed out, Biden’s problem is with the diminishing number of swing voters who support him. Do Democrats really believe that siding with Hamas – which is the logical outcome of their actions – will entice those swing voters back into the fold? As long as the answer to the question of “Does Israel have a right to exist?” is YES, I don’t think so.
If the President is serious about wanting to end this, I offer a simple solution. And he can claim it as his own if he wishes. It’s only two words. HAMAS SURRENDERS. A Hamas surrender stops the fighting. It leads to the disarmament of Hamas supervised by someone not aligned with them. It means the parties responsible for the atrocities of October 7th are dealt with. Then, and only then, can humanitarian aid and rebuilding begin. Gaza was a de facto Palestinian state, or at least a state-let. Maybe after Hamas’ surrender, they can become a real state and not a staging point for terrorists.
*The Hamas charter calls for the destruction of Israel. Everything they do is to achieve that goal. Giving Hamas what it wants facilitates this.
Israel needs to become a signatory to the International Criminal Court compact and submit themselves for investigation and potential prosecution for war crimes in Gaza and the West Bank.
Likely a vigorous prosecution of Israeli leaders for war crimes will deter the ongoing problems in Gaza and Israel.
The real problem Israel suffers emanates with the Likud Party and other extreme right elements in the Knesset. They created the conditions in Gaza that led to the October 7th attacks.
What will happen at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago starting on August 19th? A replay of August 28, 1968 in Chicago?
If today’s Hamas Democrats disrupt the convention the way the NVA Democrats disrupted Chicago in 1968, the Michigan General Election vote for the Democratic candidate will be diminished. RFK Jr. is set to play the same spoiler role this year as George Wallace did in 1968, giving disaffected Democrats a place to go, assuming Democrat lawyers and judges allow him on the ballot.
Biden has to “evolve” and switch his allegiance to Hamas. American Jews won’t riot at the Chicago convention, but the Hamas Democrats will.
I am just waiting to see what happens in Chicago.
Vietnam was the organizing principle for 1968 protestors and Gaza will likely be the rallying point for 2024 activists.
Biden needs to chose one side or the other decisively. Likely the best option is to ardently embrace Israel and show up at AIPAC functions vowing to supply weaponry to conquer Gaza.
Joe Biden has already burned his bridges with Arab-Americans. Why should he care about “doing the right thing”?
Don’t look now but a cease-fire resolution just failed this morning in the UN Security Council over the language of the proposed resolution.
Sleepy Joe’s administration continues to founder over Gaza.
Answer 1) Not even remotely close; the display by Dementia Joe just shows the effects received by a diseased weasel after it received a shot of adrenaline, or whatever other confiscated substance the DEA could procure to inject the varmint with.
Answer 2) The right answer is the ending paragraph of this section. But don’t expect anyone in the GOP to be pragmatic enough to adopt it. Even to the most casual, unconcerned observer, the GOP is in the middle of a continued meltdown. A quick perusal of the ongoing disaster concerning the MIGOP is all the evidence needed to arrive at this conclusion. Imagine any chair of any political party actually refusing to meet with mega donors (or should I say MAGA donors), causing the party’s line of credit to get called by Comerica. The sooner KK and her sidekick Labadie are banished to Beaver Island, the better!! MIGOP will be lucky to keep the offices it has, much less gain additional seats.
Answer 3) This is a ‘dead’ issue, as the embryos are placed by cooperating parents. Since there was an agreement voluntarily made to create and preserve the embryos, it’s only practical that the court would protect them. While the Deathocrats would just as soon make abortions retroactive, this is an issue that they would be foolish to wade into. But rest assured, they’ll find a way.
Answer 4) This is an issue where there is no way out. Dementia Joe is damned if he does, and damned if he doesn’t. If he hops on the Netanyahu chariot, he’ll be stoned by the Arabs; if he wanders into the tunnels dug by Hamas, he’ll be ostracized by the Zionists.
If you’re a Republican, however, this is a perfect issue in the storm of an election year. Your reaction should be one of extreme joy, while you watch Senile Old Joe disintegrate week by week while failing miserably in navigating between two groups at odds with each other for centuries. He’s going to alienate both sides to the extent that neither votes for him.
Jimmy Carter was the last donkey rider that had any degree of success in the Middle East. Maybe he can be persuaded to leave Hospice for a few weeks to help out. At least his mind is still intact.
Joe Biden has a serious credibility issue with Americans now.
He appears to lack the ability to communicate his positions and implement them in a coherent manner.
His dealings with Israel appeared to give them a “green light” to enter Rafah and this was followed up with declaring an invasion of Rafah a “red line” that Netanyahu should not cross.
Much of the problems in the Middle East right now – especially Gaza – can be attributed to the failings of the Biden administration.