RSS
Biden, the Debate and Israel
US President Joe Biden speaks on the phone with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in this White House handout image taken in the Oval Office in Washington, US, April 4, 2024. Photo: The White House/Handout via REUTERS
JNS.org – Many of the president’s most vigorous cheerleaders on CNN, MSNBC and The New York Times, among others, have called for President Joe Biden to step aside after his disastrous performance in the debate. The overwhelming majority of the public, which seems to want neither man as commander-in-chief, thinks that Biden is unfit. As Thomas Friedman put it (and I’m loathed to cite him on anything), Biden can be a modern-day George Washington by prioritizing the nation’s interests over personal ambition.
You must have a massive ego to become president of the United States, so it should not be surprising that someone who achieves their lifelong dream of reaching the highest office in the land—enjoying its perks and the power that comes with it—would not want to give it up.
Imagine if Donald Trump were in the same position. What do you think he would do? Comedian Jimmy Fallon caught the irony when he said, “Yeah, the media has spent almost two weeks calling on a candidate to drop out of the race, and somehow it’s not the convicted felon.”
If dyed-in-the-wool Jewish Democrats like Halie Soifer, CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, believe “this election is not just a binary choice between Biden and Trump,” it is “a binary choice between American ideals and our future as a democracy,” then it is even more reason that Biden should release his delegates. If Biden loses the presidency, he could jeopardize the party’s control of the Senate and chance to win the House, leaving his rival in power with no guardrails.
Biden’s sycophants (and every president has them) have strained credibility with flimsy excuses. First, we heard he had a cold. OK, that explains a raspy voice but not his incoherence. Then, we were told he suffered from jet lag—two weeks after returning from abroad. Does that mean he was befogged during those two weeks while making decisions about the nation’s fate? Shouldn’t that scare everyone since he will be expected to travel in a second term? Does the public trust his aides to run the country with Biden as a figurehead?
Even crazier was the argument that we shouldn’t worry because the election is still four months away. Do Biden’s supporters think he will stop aging during that time, and become more physically and mentally fit?
Biden and his supporters also argue that he won all the primaries and has the public’s support to be the nominee. Of course, most of the people talked about now as replacements didn’t run against him, unaware of his physical and mental deficiencies.
No matter how much they wish the issue would disappear, Biden’s age will remain a constant focus of the media and the public, making it nearly impossible to promote his presidency’s successes.
The election has been miscast as Biden versus Trump. It is Kamala Harris versus Trump, as few people believe Biden can govern until he is 86, given his deteriorating condition. Harris flamed out as a presidential candidate and has yet to distinguish herself as vice president, so the case for Biden staying in the race is much weaker, as is the argument that Harris should automatically be the nominee if he pulls out.
Harris, as expected, has toed the administration line on Israel. Some may recall that she raised hackles when she failed to challenge a student who accused Israel of “ethnic genocide.” She has little foreign-policy credibility or experience. Harris supported the two-state solution as a candidate while acknowledging that outside parties could not impose a solution. She was also no fan of then-newly re-elected Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and is unlikely to have become more enamored with him after his fights with Biden. She is also an advocate of a nuclear deal with Iran, which raises serious questions of national security as Iran’s resources to build a bomb have grown under Biden-Harris. Some supporters may argue that her Jewish husband, who has taken a visible role in the administration’s effort to combat antisemitism, could be a positive influence vis-à-vis Israel.
With Biden’s decline and Harris’s limited foreign-policy inexperience, the influence of Obama-era diplomats at the State Department will grow and imperil US-Israel relations.
There are too many other possible candidates to assess their credentials unless and until one becomes the nominee. The record of those who ran in 2020 is available. Despite viable alternatives, shunting a woman of color will alienate swaths of the party needed to defeat Trump. It would be even more difficult to bypass her if Biden were to resign and she became president. Either way, Democrats will pay a price for sacrificing principle for identity politics.
Whether the party will come together in the face of Soifer and other Democrats’ stark choice is an open question. Just enough people may stay home or vote for a third-party candidate to sink any nominee.
Can Biden count on the Jewish vote if he stays in the race?
A case can be made to Jews for voting for Biden based on his domestic policies and support for Israel. However, recent polling shows that Jews are abandoning Biden in numbers beyond those who rejected Barack Obama in his second term.
Even before his mental acuity came into question, Biden’s support among Jews was eroding because he failed to stem the antisemitic tide in America; is publicly feuding with the Israeli prime minister; withholding and slowing down the delivery of arms to Israel; impeding the IDF’s ability to fight Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran; and refusing to take measures to stop Iran’s march to a nuclear weapon, and ongoing sponsorship of terror against Israel and the United States.
In a previous column, I advocated that Jews follow the example of Arab Americans and Muslims who were voting uncommitted to send a message of their dissatisfaction with Biden’s policy towards Israel. We don’t know how many Jews took that advice in the primaries, but the Biden team is taking the Jewish vote for granted because Jews are reliable Democratic voters. They believe Jews should appreciate Biden’s “ironclad” commitment to Israel during the war.
The American Jewish Committee poll taken before the debate found that only 61% of Jews plan to vote for Biden. That would be eight points below Obama’s 2012 total and seven less than Biden received in 2020. It would be the lowest percentage since Walter Mondale’s 57% in 1984 (a Jewish Electoral Institute poll has Biden doing better, receiving 67%, which would be worse than any Democrat since Dukakis in 1988).
It’s hard to imagine Biden attracting more Jewish votes after his debate performance. Their defection alone could sink his candidacy. Whether any other candidate would have more support is debatable, but they will likely do better.
Biden’s interview with George Stephanopoulos was supposed to reassure voters, but it was unlikely to do so as he again sputtered. When he said, “If the Lord Almighty came down and said, ‘Joe, get out of the race,’ I’d get out of the race,” I was reminded of actor and Republican political activist Charlton Heston at a National Rifle Association (he served as a five-term president) convention when he said, “I’ll give you my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.”
I hope a journalist follows up with Biden and asks if he thinks God is talking to him, and that he is making decisions for the country based on what he hears or if Biden meant he’ll only drop out if the Almighty strikes him down.
Maybe Jill should whisper in his ear while he’s sleeping, “Joe, this is God. I’d like you to withdraw from the race.”
The post Biden, the Debate and Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Northwestern University Touts Progress on Addressing Campus Antisemitism Amid Federal Scrutiny
Signs cover the fence at a pro-Palestinian encampment at Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill. on April 28, 2024. Photo: Max Herman via Reuters Connect.
Northwestern University on Monday touted its progress in addressing the campus antisemitism crisis, issuing a statement containing a checklist of policies it has enacted since being censured by federal lawmakers over its handling of pro-Hamas demonstrations which convulsed its campus during the 2023-2024 academic year.
“The university administration took this criticism to heart and spent much of last summer revising our rules and policies to make our university safe for all of our students, regardless of their religion, race, national origin, sexual orientation, or political viewpoint,” the statement said. “Among the updated policies is our Demonstration Policy, which includes new requirements and guidance on how, when, and where members of the community may protest or otherwise engage in expressive activity.”
The university added that it has adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, a reference tool which aids officials in determining what constitutes antisemitism, and begun holding “mandatory antisemitism training” sessions which “all students, faculty, and staff” must attend.
“This included a live training for all new students in September and a 17-minute training module for all enrolled students, produced in collaboration with the Jewish United Fund,” it continued. “Antisemitism trainings will continue as a permanent part of our broader training in civil rights and Title IX.”
Other initiatives rolled out by the university include an Advisory Council to the President on Jewish Life, dinners for Jewish students hosted by administrative officials, and educational events which raise awareness of rising antisemitism in the US and across the world. Additionally, Northwestern said that it imposed disciplinary sanctions against several students and one staff member whose conduct violated the new “Demonstration and/or Display Policies” which regulate peaceful assembly on the campus.
“In closing, although Northwestern has made significant progress in the fight against antisemitism on campus, the university remains vigilant and will continue to do what is necessary to make our campus safe,” the statement concluded. “Importantly, the fight against antisemitism is NOT [sic] a zero-sum game. All members of our communities on campus — all religions, races, national origins, genders, sexual orientations, and political viewpoints — deserve to feel safe and know that our rules will be enforced to protect them against hate, discrimination, harassment, and intimidation. Northwestern is committed to this principle.”
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, Northwestern University struggled for months to correct an impression that it coddled pro-Hamas protesters and acceded to their demands for a boycott of Israel in exchange for an end to their May 2024 encampment.
University president Schill denied during a US congressional hearing held that year that he had capitulated to any demand that fostered a hostile environment, but his critics noted that part of the deal to end the encampment stipulated his establishing a scholarship for Palestinian undergraduates, contacting potential employers of students who caused recent campus disruptions to insist on their being hired, creating a segregated dormitory hall that will be occupied exclusively by students of Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) and Muslim descent, and forming a new advisory committee in which anti-Zionists students and faculty may wield an outsized voice.
The status of those concessions, which a law firm representing the civil rights advocacy group StandWithUs described as “outrageous” in July 2024, were not disclosed in Monday’s statement.
Northwestern University is not the only school creating distance between itself and the anti-Zionist movement, a step many colleges have taken in response to US President Donald Trump’s vowing to cut the flow of taxpayer funds supplementing their budgets should they refuse to crackdown down on illegal protests and antisemitism. Following the Trump administration’s cancelling of over $400 million in federals contracts and grants awarded to Columbia University, former interim president Katrina Armstrong proposed a list of reforms the school would agree to undertake — in areas ranging from undergraduate admissions to campus security — to restore the funds.
Armstrong later resigned from her position, saying in a statement which explained the decision that she wishes to return to her role as executive director of the university’s Irving Medical Center, as well as several other positions she holds.
Meanwhile, Harvard University recently fired a librarian whom someone filmed ripping posters of the Bibas children, two babies murdered in captivity by Hamas, off a kiosk in Harvard Yard and denounced him as “hateful.” Additionally, it paused a partnership with a higher education institution located in the West Bank, a move for which prominent members of the Harvard community and federal lawmakers had clamored in a series of public statements. The Trump administration initiated a review of $9 billion in taxpayer funds it receives anyway, prompting interim president Alan Garber to defend Harvard’s handling of the issue.
“For the past fifteen months, we have devoted considerable effort to addressing antisemitism,” Garber said. “We have strengthened our rules and our approach to disciplining those who violate them. We have enhanced training and education on antisemitism across our campus and introduced measures to support our Jewish community and ensure student safety and security.”
Northwestern University is in the Trump administration’s crosshairs too. It is one of 60 universities being investigated by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights over its handling of campus antisemitism, a project that will serve as an early test of the administration’s ability to perform the essential functions of the agency after downsizing its workforce to increase its efficiency.
“The department is deeply disappointed that Jewish students studying on elite US campuses continue to fear for their safety amid the relentless antisemitic eruptions that have severely disrupted campus life for more than a year,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in March. “US colleges and universities benefit from enormous public investments funded by US taxpayers. That support is a privilege, and it is contingent on scrupulous adherence to federal antidiscrimination laws.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Northwestern University Touts Progress on Addressing Campus Antisemitism Amid Federal Scrutiny first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Pressure Mounts on UN Members to Block Reappointment of Controversial Anti-Israel Official
Francesca Albanese, UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, attends a side event during the Human Rights Council at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, March 26, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Denis Balibouse
The United Nations is facing growing pressure to block the reappointment of Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, who has an extensive history of using her role to denigrate Israel and seemingly rationalize the terrorist group Hamas’s attacks against the Jewish state.
The UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is set to reappoint Albanese for another three-year term on Friday, despite calls from several countries and NGOs urging UN members to oppose her reappointment due to her controversial remarks and alleged pro-Hamas stance.
Since taking on the role of UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories in 2022, Albanese has been at the center of controversy due to what critics, including US and European lawmakers, have described as antisemitic and anti-Israel public remarks.
In the months following the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, atrocities, across southern Israel, Albanese accused Israel of perpetrating a “genocide” against the Palestinian people in revenge for the attacks and circulated a widely derided and heavily disputed report alleging that 186,000 people have been killed in Gaza as a result of Israeli actions.
She has also previously made comments about a “Jewish lobby” controlling America and Europe, compared Israel to Nazi Germany, and stated that Hamas’s violence against Israelis — including rape, murder, and kidnapping — needs to be “put in context.”
Last year, the United Nations launched a probe into Albanese for allegedly accepting a trip to Australia funded by pro-Hamas organizations.
In the past, she has also celebrated the anti-Israel protesters rampaging across US college campuses, saying they represent a “revolution” and that they give her “hope.”
On Monday, US Rep. Brian Mast, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, sent a letter to the president of the UNHRC, Ambassador Jürg Lauber, to express his strong opposition to Albanese’s reappointment.
In the letter, Mast claimed that Albanese has failed to act “in an independent capacity with a professional, impartial assessment, and maintain the highest standards of efficiency, competence, and integrity.”
“Ms. Albanese unapologetically uses her position as a UN special rapporteur to purvey and attempt to legitimize antisemitic tropes, while serving as a Hamas apologist,” the letter read.
“In her malicious fixation, she has even called for Israel to be removed from the United Nations while likening Israel to apartheid South Africa,” Mast wrote in a letter signed by six fellow lawmakers. “Regrettably, Ms. Albanese’s rhetoric has perverted the very institution and its foundational principles in which she was appointed to serve.”
Governments worldwide, including France, the UK, Germany, Canada, and the Netherlands, have condemned her statements as antisemitic and urged that she not be given another term in her role.
Last month, 42 members of the French Parliament publicly urged the government to oppose Albanese’s reappointment, arguing that it “would send a regrettable signal to victims, human rights defenders, and states committed to credible multilateralism.”
This week, British Labour Member of Parliament David Taylor also objected to Albanese’s reappointment, saying “there is no place for such alleged antisemitism on the international stage.”
“Albanese’s response to the largest antisemitic massacre of the 21st century was to describe it as ‘a response to Israel’s oppression,’” Taylor told the Jewish Chronicle. “She described Israel as being a ‘settler colonial conquest.’”
“Making statements of this nature in a UN capacity is abhorrent and does so much damage to communities already torn apart by horrific violence, going against everything the United Nations stands for,” Taylor said.
Human rights groups and NGOs have also campaigned to prevent the anti-Israel rapporteur from receiving a second term.
UN Watch, a Geneva-based NGO, has organized a petition against her reappointment, which has garnered over 83,000 signatures.
Last month, Maram Stern, executive vice president of the World Jewish Congress, sent a letter to the president of the UNHRC urging him to reject the renewal of Albanese’s mandate, citing what she described as the UN official’s history of anti-Israel animus and antisemitic statements.
“Ms. Albanese has repeatedly made public remarks that propagate harmful antisemitic tropes, question the legitimacy of the State of Israel, and employ rhetoric that undermines the credibility of the Human Rights Council itself,” the letter read. “Her persistent lack of objectivity and failure to uphold a balanced and impartial approach required of her as special rapporteur compromises her credibility as an independent expert.”
The American Jewish Committee (AJC) also urged UN Members to reject Albanese’s second term, saying she “has systematically demonstrated a troubling pattern of conduct and expression that is incompatible with the responsibilities, neutrality, and integrity expected of a UN special rapporteur.”
“Her actions not only betray the victims of terrorism and antisemitism but also are a stain on the credibility of the Human Rights Council itself,” the AJC wrote in a letter.
The post Pressure Mounts on UN Members to Block Reappointment of Controversial Anti-Israel Official first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Three Jewish Coaches Lead Teams in NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament Final Four
Florida Gators head coach Todd Golden and Auburn Tigers head coach Bruce Pearl talk before the game as Auburn Tigers take on Florida Gators at Neville Arena in Auburn, Ala., on Saturday, Feb. 8, 2025. Photo: USA TODAY NETWORK via Reuters Connect
The men’s 2025 NCAA Tournament Final Four bracket includes four No. 1 seed teams, three of which have Jewish coaches who will lead the way in the two national semifinals taking place on Saturday.
Auburn University Tigers head coach Bruce Pearl has contributed Auburn’s success in the NCAA in part to God and his Jewish faith. He described Israel as the “ancestral homeland for the Jewish people” and called for the release of American-Israeli Edan Alexander from Hamas captivity at a post-game conference last month. He also took the Auburn team on a trip to Israel, where they made stops at the Western Wall and Yad Vashem – The World Holocaust Remembrance Center.
The Tigers will compete on Saturday in the NCAA Tournament Final Four against the Florida Gators whose Jewish coach, Todd Golden, is an Israeli citizen who previously played two years professionally for Maccabi Haifa in Israel.
In 2009, Golden was co-captain of the USA Open Team, coached by Pearl, that won gold at the Maccabiah Games, which is an international multi-sport event for Jewish and Israeli athletes. Golden has been the coach of the Tigers for two seasons, but prior to that he was the assistant coach at Columbia, the head coach at San Francisco, and even worked under Pearl. Golden was director of basketball operations for the Auburn staff for the 2014-15 season and was promoted to assistant coach for the 2015-16 campaign.
Duke and Houston also play each other on Saturday in the Final Four. The head coach of the Duke Blue Devils, Jon Scheyer, also formerly played in Israel and holds Israeli citizenship. He played professionally for Maccabi Tel Aviv from 2011-12. In October 2023, not long after the start of the Israel-Hamas war, Scheyer commented on the conflict and said in part: “My heart breaks for the people in Israel — that have hostages, American lives that are taken, mourning loved ones.” Scheyer is leading Duke to the Final Four in only his third year as head coach.
The Houston Cougars – the fourth men’s team competing in the Final Four – do not have a Jewish coach, but they have a player who was born in Israel and played for Israel’s national youth squad. Guard Emanuel Sharp, who is the son of Derrick Sharp, was part of Israel’s under-16 national basketball team and also played for Maccabi Tel Aviv for over a decade.
This year’s Final Four have a combined record of 135-16. Since seeding began in 1979, this is only the second time in history that all four No. 1 seeds advanced to the Final Four. It previously happened in 2008. Larry Brown was the last Jewish coach to win the NCAA Tournament when he led Kansas to the victory in 1988.
The 2025 NCAA Tournament Final Four begins on Saturday, with two national semifinals taking place at the Alamodome in San Antonio, and ends on Monday with the national championship.
The post Three Jewish Coaches Lead Teams in NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament Final Four first appeared on Algemeiner.com.