Biden’s Fiscal Crisis Is Far Worse Than We Thought

https://issuesinsights.com/2024/06/21/bidens-fiscal-crisis-is-far-worse-than-we-thought/

Nothing should shock us anymore, but the latest Congressional Budget Office report did. Released this week, the report shows that the nation is in vastly worse financial shape than anyone thought just a few months ago. And the report makes clear who is to blame.

The CBO’s latest “Budget and Economic Outlook” projects that the federal deficit this year will top $1.9 trillion. That’s $408 billion higher – a 27% increase – than what the CBO thought it would be just four months ago.

This will make the 2024 deficit the biggest ever recorded in American history – not counting the two years of panic-induced COVID-19 spending sprees – and will mark the third consecutive increase in deficits under Biden. (See the chart below.)

It’s also highly unusual for the CBO to make such a huge correction to its forecast.

The nonpartisan office routinely produces a budget and economic forecast at the start of the year, and then an update mid-year. Normally, these don’t vary much. In Trump’s first three years, for example, the average variance between the first forecast and the final deficit was just $73 billion.

Europe: Nazis’ ‘Do Not Buy from Jews’ 2.0 by Robert Williams

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20713/europe-nazis-boycott-israel

Since October 7, when Iranian proxies Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad committed unspeakable atrocities against men, women, children and babies in Israel, large parts of the international community have been in a frenzy over the Jews’ puzzling inclination to defend themselves.

This is the same French government [which banned Israel from participating in Eurosatory 2024 defense industry trade fair] so obsessed with appearing inclusive and non-discriminatory that it recently supported a bill that outlaws discrimination based on hair texture, length, color or style.

Meanwhile, the French government did not think it necessary to ban the participation of China, presently indulging in two genocides – against Tibetans and against Uyghurs – from participating in Eurosatory. China’s representation at the trade fair counts around 61 defense companies.

The French government also did not ban… Turkey, which has been taken to the International Criminal Court for committing crimes against humanity against hundreds of thousands of opponents of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s ruthless regime…

When there are no Jews to blame, evidently, crimes against humanity, genocide and human rights abuses are perfectly acceptable.

Since October 7, more than 19,000 rockets have been launched into Israel, a country smaller than New Jersey, primarily by the terrorist groups ruling Gaza, as well as from another of Iran’s terrorist proxies, Hezbollah in Lebanon

Never mind that John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point, determined that Israel has consistently implemented more measures to prevent civilian casualties than any military in the history of warfare.

“The Middle East does not need more weapons, it needs more peace,” said Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares. The remark, oddly, did not appear to be addressed the entities that started the war: Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and Qatar.

Iran, the Middle East’s warmonger par excellence, and — along with major funding from Qatar, which seems never to have met an Islamic terrorist group it did not finance or promote — was the originator of the current war in Gaza.

Iran’s terrorist proxies span the region — Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Gaza; Hezbollah in Lebanon; the Houthis in Yemen, and various proxy militias in Syria and Iraq — well-funded because of the Biden administration’s lifting sanctions. Yet Albares has nothing but praise for Iran.

The submission to the Islamic regime by European leaders such as Albares, who knows full well that Iran is behind the war in Gaza, tells us more about them than about Israel.

In April, however, the EU imposed sanctions on Israeli “settlers.” Regrettably, to many Palestinians, all of Israel is “one big settlement” that needs to be uprooted, and everyone there, a “settler.”

How California’s Paradise Become our Purgatory How and why did California end up as a warning to Western civilization of what might be in store for anyone who followed its nihilism? By Victor Davis Hanson

https://amgreatness.com/2024/06/20/how-californias-paradise-become-our-purgatory/

California has become a test case of the suicide of the West. Never before has such a state, so rich in natural resources and endowed with such a bountiful human inheritance, self-destructed so rapidly.

How and why did California so utterly consume its unmatched natural and ancestral inheritance and end up as a warning to Western civilization of what might be in store for anyone who followed its nihilism?

The symptoms of the state’s suicide are indisputable.

Governor Gavin Newsom enjoyed a recent $98 billion budget surplus—gifted from multibillion-dollar federal COVID-19 subsidies, the highest income and gas taxes in the nation, and among the country’s steepest sales and property taxes.

Yet in a year, he turned it into a growing $45 billion budget deficit.

At a time of an over-regulated, overtaxed, and sputtering economy, Newsom spent lavishly on new entitlements, illegal immigrants, and untried and inefficient green projects.

Newsom was endowed with two of the wettest years in recent California history. Yet he and radical environmentalists squandered the water bounty—as snowmelts and runoff long designated for agricultural irrigation were drained from aqueducts and reservoirs to flow out to sea.

Newsom transferred millions of dollars designated by a voter referendum to build dams and aqueducts for water storage and instead blew up four historic dams on the Klamath River. For decades, these now-destroyed scenic lakes provided clean, green hydroelectric power, irrigation storage, flood control, and recreation.

Steven McGuire What Does the Student Intifada Want? A recent conference in Detroit revealed its radical aims.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/what-does-the-student-intifada-want

With few exceptions, college and university presidents were slow and ineffective in responding to the protests and encampments on their campuses this spring. Their passivity calls to mind the character Gottlieb Biedermann in Max Frisch’s play The Fire Raisers, who, hearing about a series of local arsons, refuses to believe that the men who manipulated their way into occupying his attic could be the perpetrators. Deceived by feelings of guilt, Biedermann is unwilling to throw the men out or believe that they are dangerous—even when they tell him exactly what they are doing. Remaining in denial to the end, he hands them the very matches they use to incinerate his home.

Too often, when faced with the fervent demands and outlandish behavior of student demonstrators, university officials allowed them to violate institutional policies, disrupt academic life, and harass Jews. When presidents finally acted, many negotiated with the protesters and capitulated to their demands. Even those who rightly called the police often failed to impose serious consequences on the disrupters. In the end, few protesters face meaningful sanctions for their extended violations of campus policies and, in many cases, the law.

Yet, the protesters and their allies complained about “authoritarian” crackdowns, betrayals of democratic values, and free-speech violations as their camps got cleared away. Their complaints can be attributed partly to ignorance; a student speaker at Harvard University’s commencement, for example, proclaimed to a cheering crowd that the university had violated students’ “right to civil disobedience,” a right she genuinely seemed to believe that they had. One poll showed that more than half of those who said they supported chanting “From the river to the sea” were unable to name the river and the sea to which the chant referred. When a young woman at New York University was asked what she wanted the university to do, she turned the question to her friend: “Why are we protesting?”

Big News: The Surgeon General Calls for a Warning Label on Social Media Dr. Murthy is right. The evidence of widespread harm to adolescents is now strong.Jon Haidt And Zach Rausch

https://www.afterbabel.com/subscribe?utm_source=email&utm_campaign=email-subscribe&r=

The U.S. Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy, has long been a leader on the youth mental health crisis. He wrote a book in 2020 on loneliness (Together: The Healing Power of Human Connection in a Sometimes Lonely World), and in 2023 he issued a landmark report on loneliness. In 2023, he also published a major report, a Surgeon General’s Advisory reviewing the research on social media and concluding that:

The current body of evidence indicates that while social media may have benefits for some children and adolescents, there are ample indicators that social media can also have a profound risk of harm to the mental health and well-being of children and adolescents.

Yesterday, June 17, Dr. Murthy dropped a bomb: An essay in the New York Times in which he called for government-mandated warning labels on social media, akin to those that a previous Surgeon General called for in 1964, on cigarettes.

‘Conformity is the enemy of free speech’ Greg Lukianoff on the sad demise of America’s free-speech culture.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/06/19/conformity-is-the-enemy-of-free-speech/

The Gaza solidarity encampments that spread across US universities earlier this year showed that free speech is under threat from all sides. Intolerant ‘pro-Palestine’ students wanted to exclude Zionists, Jewish students and anyone not fully committed to their cause from campus. They were happy to disrupt university life and to prevent classes and lectures from taking place. At the same time, some on the pro-Israel side called for these protests to be forcibly shut down, for demonstrators to be arrested and for Israelophobic speech to be censored or punished. Those who are consistent in their support for free speech are becoming rarer by the day.

Greg Lukianoff – president of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) – returned to The Brendan O’Neill Show last week to discuss the need for a radical revival of free speech. What follows is an edited extract from the conversation. Listen to the full thing here.

Brendan O’Neill: Where does the left-right divide currently fall on the question of free speech?

Greg Lukianoff: One of the reasons I’m worried about the future of freedom of speech, in the United States and beyond, is that there used to be a contingent of the left that unapologetically defended free expression. These people were always in tension with those totalitarians who believed that, if society was governed by enlightened people like them, censorship would be justified. For the most part, I grew up at a time when freedom of speech was actually considered a left-wing value. But with totalitarian thinking winning on the left and the rise of the populist right, there’s no natural constituency for free speech today other than the centre.

Eco-vandals Came to Stonehenge. They Won’t Stop There By Andrew Follett

https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/06/eco-vandals-came-to-stonehenge-they-wont-stop-there/

Environmental stewardship may be a laudable goal, but some radical environmentalists believe their ends justify extreme, damaging means.

Eco-vandals are at it again in England, having launched an attack on the priceless ancient historical site Stonehenge.

Two activists from the radical environmental group Just Stop Oil desecrated the ancient monument with orange powder paint. The site was saved from further attack only by the immediate intervention of another person at the site, who seized their paint equipment.

Just Stop Oil lied on X, formerly Twitter, that this wasn’t a major problem for the historical site because the paint “will soon wash away with the rain, but the urgent need for effective government action to mitigate the catastrophic consequences of the climate and ecological crisis will not.”

No doubt the irony that they likely traveled to the site in carbon-emitting vehicles to spray propellant-filled industrial dyes onto a historical landmark, then recorded the whole thing on a petroleum products–filled camera, is lost on these eco-vandals.

“Stonehenge at solstice is all about celebrating the natural world — but look at the state it’s in! We all have a right to live a life free from suffering, but continued burning of oil, coal and gas is leading to death and suffering on an unparalleled scale,” Niamh Lynch, an Oxford student who participated in the stunt, said in a statement.

The official Stonehenge X account replied to the activists, telling them the site was both protected and environmentally sensitive, and that they should “expect a prison sentence.” Local police have so far arrested two people, likely the two who recorded themselves attacking the site.

Biden Administration Seeks to Silence Consensus Civil Society Organizations in Israel by Naomi Linder Kahn

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20712/biden-administration-seeks-to-silence-consensus

The letter provides irrefutable evidence and undeniable testimony that the humanitarian aid provided to Gaza, ostensibly to the civilian population, is invariably commandeered by Hamas: The letter cites statements to this effect by the US embassy in Israel, the US government itself, the IDF, UNRWA – and even Fatah officials.

“The shocking truth is that the United States is providing material support to a terrorist organization that is waging a brutal war against the only democratic ally the US has in the middle east, and the US-funded and trained Palestinian Authority Security Forces are no different than Hamas. Exposing the terrorist nature of the US’s ‘partner for peace’ is ‘inconvenient,’ to put it politely, so the Administration has decided to attack the messenger in order to suppress the message.” – Meir Deutsch, Director General, Regavim.

Biden Administration seeks to silence consensus civil society organizations in Israel with sanctions typically used against terrorists: “A draconian measure that harks back to the days of colonialist oppression.”

A team of legal experts submitted a sharply worded letter to the US State Department following the announcement of Executive Order 14115 sanctioning the Tzav 9 Movement. “The Executive Order is an anti-democratic attack on free speech and the right to protest.”

Earlier this week (Monday), following publication on Friday, 14 June 2024 of a US Executive Order imposing sanctions on the Israeli protest movement Tzav 9, a team of lawyers headed by Attorneys Marc Zell, Noam Schreiber, Jerome Marcus and other experts in US and international law, on behalf of the Regavim Movement, sent a request for clarification to the US State Department.

The sharply-worded letter decried the Executive Order as vague and unsubstantiated, describing it as an attempt to stifle free speech and the right to protest. The legal team called upon the US government to explain both the basis for the sanctions and the practical implications for Tzav 9 and Regavim, one of several civil society organizations that helped the Tzav 9 activists organize.

Harvard Accuses Its Jews of Being Unreasonable New court filing from Wilmer Hale also misleads judge about Sidechat Ira Stoll

https://www.theeditors.com/subscribe?utm_source=email&utm_campaign=email-

A new court filing by the eight lawyers Harvard is paying to defend the university from student complaints of antisemitism says the Jewish students were being unreasonable when they feared violence at the hands of anti-Israel protesters on campus.

A federal lawsuit by Alexander “Shabbos” Kestenbaum and Students Against Antisemitism, Inc. had reported that on October 19, 2023, a mob stormed Harvard Law School. “Fearing a violent attack, students in the study room removed indicia of their Jewishness, such as kippot, or hid under desks,” the complaint says.

In a June 18, 2024 court filing, lawyers for Harvard insist that the Jewish students do not “describe an environment in which an objectively reasonable person would fear physical violence.”

The filing carries the name of eight Harvard lawyers—Mark Kirsch, Gina Merrill, Zachary Fardon, and Zoe Beiner of King & Spalding, and Felicia Ellsworth, Seth Waxman, Bruce Berman, and Jeremy Brinster of WilmerHale. Waxman and Ellsworth of WilmerHale billed Harvard millions of dollars for an aggressive defense against a similar federal lawsuit brought over discrimination against Asian-Americans in college admissions that wound up with a Harvard loss at the Supreme Court.

Goodbye, Harvard When will people stop buying the Ivy hype? by Bruce Bawer

https://www.frontpagemag.com/goodbye-harvard/

I went to Harvard. I don’t remember exactly when. I visited Boston several times during the 1980s and 90s, and on one of those occasions I decided to take the appropriately named Red Line up to Cambridge and check out the campus of America’s oldest university. It was cute. It was certainly prettier than my own alma mater, Stony Brook, which at the time must have been one of the world’s premier showplaces of brutalist architecture at its most brutal. But on the other hand I’d seen a lot of campuses that were more beautiful than Harvard’s, among them Chapel Hill, Duke, Ann Arbor, Michigan State, Berkeley, and Stanford. Yes, the buildings – and the trees – were old and stately. But there was a stuffiness about the place. You could feel it. Or maybe I’m just guilty of committing the pathetic fallacy. Admittedly, a couple of my closest and very smartest friends went to Harvard; so did a few of the dumbest people I’ve ever met. You can get a great education there, but that’s true of a lot of places. What sets Harvard apart is that it inculcates in its students (not all, but many) an obnoxious sense of superiority, readies them to rise to the heights of the American establishment, and encourages them to subscribe to that establishment’s most cherished orthodoxies.

Pretty much every one of my closest friends in high school ended up at an Ivy League college. I had the highest SAT scores in my graduating class of more than a thousand, but partly because my father wasn’t eager to shell out Ivy-level tuition and partly because of what now seems to me an odd indifference to the whole business on my own part, I ended up at a state school. I’m glad I did. When an accreditation team came to check out our English department – that was the subject in which I received my B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. – they said it was better than Harvard’s. But who cared about things like that? Stony Brook, founded in 1957, was still half-finished, an active construction site where, when it rained, you had to slog through mud to get from one hideously ugly building to another. Harvard had over three centuries’ worth of cachet. Its name was synonymous the world over with academic excellence. However much of an idiot you might be, a Harvard diploma could take you anywhere. Even our own department chairman felt obliged to rub in the difference. When a bunch of us Ph.D. students got to the point at which we were supposed to start thinking about applying for jobs, our chairman gathered us together and explained how he and his faculty colleagues dealt with applications from newly minted Ph.Ds. “We put them in two piles,” he said. “Ivy and non-Ivy.” The next step for the latter, he made clear, was the trash bin.