His enemies are the most repulsive people alive today

But he has done something: Trump’s anti-Semitism order is a Rorschach test for Jews:

If you are against federal action to stop anti-Semitic discrimination on college campuses just because Trump is doing it, then you’re the one with the problem.

Not to mention this: Trump lashes out at ‘Do Nothing Dems’ for impeachment, says they’ve become ‘Party of Hate’.

How can he say he has done nothing?

Physics is their thing not politics

Both via Instapundit.

THIS PIECE IS NOT ACTUALLY A PARODY, IT JUST READS LIKE ONE:

After Tuesday’s massacre in Jersey City, New Jersey’s Jews are still in shock, just like the Jews in Pittsburgh last year. When our Shabbat services ended the day of that shooting, I left the sanctuary to be greeted by a fleet of police cars surrounding our synagogue. As I learned what happened 350 miles to the west I thought of Sinclair Lewis’ ironically titled 1935 novel, “It Can’t Happen Here.” What he meant, of course, was it can happen here. And it just did. . . .

And, perhaps, this latest massacre will increase the momentum for the serious and effective gun policies this country so obviously needs.

All of which is well and good. But, If antisemitic incidents are on the rise, we Jews have to figure out what we do next. Then, I thought, who better to ask than a Muslim?

Who, indeed?

,
PLUS
,

BECAUSE THEY’RE MORE LOYAL TO LEFTY POLITICS THAN TO JUDAISM: Caroline Glick: Why Leftist Jews Slander President Trump.

In its Twitter feed, the New York Times reported Trump’s action thus: “President Trump will sign an executive order defining Judaism as a nationality, not just a religion, thus bolstering the Education Department’s efforts to stamp out “Boycott Israel” movements on college campuses.”

This tweet was so off-base that it is impossible to view it as a mere misunderstanding by the paper of record for the liberal establishment. The assertion that Trump’s move “defined Judaism” smacks of cultural appropriation, and as such, it sounds like an act of aggression against Jews.

By falsely claiming Trump defined Judaism as a nationality, the Times made it sound like Trump was saying that Jews aren’t American nationals.

And by writing the purpose of the effort was to “stamp out ‘Boycott Israel’ movements on college campuses,” rather than protect Jewish students from anti-Semitic harassment, the Times made the order seem like a political ploy rather than a civil rights action long supported by Democrats and Republicans alike.

Liberal Jews pounced on the message and ran with it. Halie Soifer, the executive director of the Jewish Democratic Council of America accused Trump of being “partially responsible” for the rise of anti-Semitism in America.

“If President Trump truly wanted to combat anti-Semitism,” she said, “he would accept responsibility for his role in perpetuating anti-Semitic conspiracy theories and emboldening white nationalism.”

“We said it before and we’ll say it again – Donald Trump is the biggest threat to American Jews,” she added.

J-Street’s executive director Jeremy Ben-Ami echoed the criticism of BDS advocates in Congress and on campuses by claiming that the executive order harms the free speech rights of anti-Israel activists. In his words, “The executive order, like the stalled congressional legislation it is based on, appears designed less to combat anti-Semitism than to have a chilling effect on free speech and to crack down on campus critics of Israel.”

Undoubtedly, Soifer and Ben Ami were directing their statements towards the “a-political” Jewish establishment in the hopes of mobilizing them against the pro-Jewish executive order.

In the event, they failed. The Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee both applauded Trump’s executive order.

But Soifer and Ben Ami had grounds to think the ADL and AJC would join them in characterizing Trump’s friendliness and support for Jewish people as anti-Semitism. Earlier this week they did.

Which ties into Ken Stern’s (below) bogus comments about Trump’s use of “anti-semitic” tropes.

,

V-E Day 2

cover-image

All the great ones are known by their first names: Winston, Maggie and now Boris. And if you don’t know the reference in the heading, go to the link: V-E Day. The world is now a better place.

Given that Boris was born in New York, just like PDT, he could even become President after PDT has served his second term (well, technically). And who knows, the Anglo-sphere may about to be re-assembled.

Does the UK remain John Stuart Mill’s actual island? Can only hope. And there is more to it than just economics.

Mandate: Boris Johnson has won a mandate for a Tory manifesto which promises to take Britain out of the EU by January 31 and introduce a points-based immigration system

American Leftists Believed Corbyn’s Inevitable Victory Would Be Their Model. Hope they’re right.

 

Facebook and pornography cannot just be left to the market

Here’s one way to discredit the market system:

The great The clueless Arnold Kling asks the question:

I am sick of reading about people who want to regulate Facebook. You didn’t come up with the idea. You didn’t build the business. Now that it’s here, who the heck do you think you are telling them how to run it?

There is not a business in the world anywhere in the present or at any time in that past that is not and was not regulated by government (see the toothpick industry for a salient example). It is sometimes done well and sometimes with devastating consequences. At the present moment in most market economies, the level of regulation is heavy-handed and could use greater restraint. But to imply that because a business has been set up by some private entrepreneur that there is nothing further to be said by the community via its government shows such a lack of sense that I can barely believe this was a genuine quote.

Let’s therefore have a look at another area of the business community that has just come to our attention: A Group Of Republicans Want The Government To Start Fighting Hardcore Pornography. They’re Right. Here’s Why.

As National Review reports, a small group of Republican lawmakers have sent a letter calling for Attorney General Bill Barr to enforce obscenity laws as a way to fight hardcore pornography. Representative Jim Banks of Indiana explains that pornography causes measurable harm in a number of significant ways.

Who can deny it? And speaking of Facebook and pornography, as it happens this was the front-page story in The Australian just yesterday: Facebook fuelling avalanche of child sex abuse.

Facebook was responsible for nearly two-thirds of the 18.4 million worldwide reports of child sexual abuse material last year, as a new international threat assessment warns of a looming ­“tsunami” of online child abuse and exploitation in 2020.

The report found publicly ­accessible social media and communications platforms were the most common place for meeting and grooming children online. It warned that the nearly 12 million incidents of child sexual abuse material reported by Facebook Messenger were likely to be the tip of the iceberg.

Regulation is a balancing act, but this is a cesspool that most people will agree that something needs to be done, even if Arnold is not one of them. There was then this, also in The Oz: Google hit for billions but EU chief regrets not going harder.

A European competition chief who imposed fines of more than €8bn against Google says she should have been “bolder”, as the Morrison government moves to respond to the Australian regulator’s report into the tech titans.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg and Communications Minister Paul Fletcher are on Thursday to ­announce the government’s ­response to the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission’s digital platforms inquiry released six months ago.

“There are privacy issues, consumer protection issues, competition issues, a lot of media policy issues, and so we are obviously working through our response on that,” Mr Fletcher said.

His comments came after ­European Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager said with hindsight she would have taken a different line with Google despite imposing massive fines after a decade-long investigation.

“If I knew then what I know now I would have been bolder,” Ms Vestager said.

For me it’s their disgusting political bias that riles me the most, but there are other things as well that are also clearly important.

And then there’s this, from our ABC even, which you can tell by the snide leftist presenter who is even more unctuous than normal, and that is truly saying something. But the story is truly interesting, bias or no bias.

“By now we should realise that we can’t really trust Facebook.”

That’s correct. That is what occurred