Welcome to a discussion about the upcoming 5th Revolution in the US, which I’ve titled the “Revenge Revolution.” For more about the Revenge Revolution and the author, click “About the Author” tab. Periodically I write a “sense check” to assess whether a revolution in the US is possible or whether the entire exercise is based on a statistical aberration — i.e., a roughly 50-year cycle between major upheavals in the US Entry #476 was the most recent “sense check.”
BEGIN #498: Ah, December, the time of good cheer and merriment and a key month leading up to political caucuses and primaries. ‘Tis also the season of grandstanding and so-called fact-finding by the vaulted elected members of Congress.
While the Senate is not immune from occasional silliness, the House of Representatives under the leadership of KevIn McCarthy and now Mike Johnson has set a new standard for meaningless hearings. Topics of the hearings in the House may sound legitimate but more often than not the “Freedom Caucus” forces topics to be those most important to their hard-right political base.
Witnesses for these Republican clown shows, err hearings, are selected to emphasize what’s wrong with the other party. Questions are often irrelevant, misleading and/or phrased to be a “gotcha” much like the proverbial unanswerable question, “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?“ The phraseology demands a “yes” or “no” answer, which can be used in campaign ads or by the talking heads on Fox News.
The most recent example was a House hearing 12/05/2023 supposedly addressing antisemitic behavior on college campuses. Witnesses just happen to be three women presidents from so-called elite universities. – Harvard, Penn and MIT.
Sidebar: Why certain academic institutions are called “elite” is unclear. They’re certainly not elite because of any athletic programs. I guess they are elite because of a very high application rate, and a low acceptance rate. Gee, the high application rate just might indicate these schools offer an excellent education. Nah, must be some other reason.
At the 12/05/2023 hearing the formal testimony of all three presidents included the importance of addressing antisemitic behavior on campus. Where the fiasco started was with questioning by representative Elise Stefanik, who represents a district in upstate New York.
Stefanik asked the president of the University of Pennsylvania and then presidents of Harvard and MIT whether students who publicly supported genocide for Jews and/or made other antisemitic remarks would be punished. All three presidents gave answers based on existing law and ensuring the 1st First Amendment rights of the students. All three noted that words without action would not be punishable.
Well, do you think a proper legal answer satisfied the Republicans? Of course, not! The response by Republicans was to first take the answers out of context. Doing so allowed the Republicans to claim by not emphatically stating that students should be punished regardless of circumstances, each of the presidents must be antisemitic, and therefore anti-Israel and therefore pro Muslim.
Even some what I call Israel-whether-right-or-wrong Jews jumped on the bandwagon, condemning the presidents, especially Penn’s president McGill. The Penn chairman of the board of trustees called for her immediate resignation. A Wharton alum who supposedly planned to donate $100 million also jumped on the bandwagon and demanded her resignation. The list grew longer over the next couple of days and eventually included Ronald Lauder, president of the World Jewish Congress. (Mm Ron. Be careful. If you lie down with pigs, you get up smelling like a pig. And that’s not kosher.)
Saturday, 12/09/2023, the Board at Penn effectively forced President McGill to resign. The chairman of the Board also resigned.
Simple ending. Case closed, right? The more you dig into the story, the more it appears the hearings were a greater sham than imagined by all but the most cynical. Key donors to Penn and especially donors to the Wharton Business School, whose list of distinguished graduates includes Donald Trump, have been frustrated with McGill since she was hired less than 2 years ago. The most recent incident was an event on campus that included speakers discussing Palestinian-related issues. Shame on you McGill for protecting free speech rights. You must be fired.
What should come out eventually is all the behind-the-scenes maneuvering in the House to set up the hearing. It appears the hearing was set up on very short notice, possibly a day or two after the Palestinian session at Penn. President McGill was the primary target. Harvard is always fodder for Republicans and it would be harder to find a better target to humiliate than the new president of Harvard, who happens to be black. Selecting MIT remains a mystery, but we know the president received very short notice of the hearing.
The response from the Harvard trustees was more muted than Penn’s, but still a bit reactionary. President Gay apologized over the weekend. But, of course, an apology from a non-Republican is never enough. The Board of Harvard Corporation was meeting Monday to discuss the issue. The president received strong support from faculty. Outcome TBD.
The response from the MIT Executive Committee was straightforward. Strong support for President Sally Kornbluth. (For those unfamiliar with the culture MIT, it is a great example of a combination of meritocracy and apolitical, science-based thinking. The straightforward response supporting the president was not unexpected.)
The resignation of Penn’s president was more fodder for Republicans. The hypocrisy of the Republican response, especially from Stefanik – “One down and two to go!” – while frustrating, is not puzzling. Stefanik sold her soul and became a “hatchet man” for Trump. I guess she forgot about graduating from Harvard. Wonder if she returned her diploma?
So, where’s the hypocrisy? Republicans denounced the university presidents for not punishing students from making statements even though students were within their 1st Amendment rights. In the next breath the same Republicans claimed any restrictions on Trump‘s remarks, no matter how extreme and/or dangerous violate his First Amendment rights.
In Trump world, Trump can say anything and be protected. Forget his antisemitic remarks directed at the Jewish law clerk in the state of New York fraud case. Forget his racist remarks directed at the New York Attorney General, who has already won a fraud conviction against Trump’s companies in NY and may win additional convictions. Forget the racist remarks directed the Fulton County Georgia District Attorney, who has charged Trump under a RICO statute for trying to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia. And forget the racist remarks against the Federal judge in the DC insurrection case.
Even though Trump’s remarks have resulted in continuing death threats to all those listed and other remarks have led to death threats for two black election workers in Detroit, that’s OK by Republican standards. But any antisemitic comments by students, even though no action was taken after the remark, must be punished.
Republicans also do not acknowledge that anyone under criminal indictment, and that includes Trump, has restrictions placed on their 1st Amendment rights. But don’t tell the Republican base the truth. That would just ruin your argument.
One final note about the Republicans’ supposed support for Jews and Israel that never seems to get discussed, at least publicly. The religious right, which claims to have unequivocal support for Israel, continues to discriminate against Jews at home. So why do Republicans support Israel, while discriminating against Jews in the US?
For the far right, Israel is not a Jewish state, but the “Holy Land” – the home of Christianity. To preserve access for visiting the holy land, Christians must have the right manager in Israel. The dilemma for Christian is which manager option do they choose? Keeping Jews in charge of managing Israel will likely ensure Christians can continue to visit. If Jews are not in charge of managing Israel, Muslims would likely control the holy land and lock out Christians from visiting.
Cutting to the chase, the claim by Republicans that colleges and universities must punish students for antisemitic remarks, even if the students take no action to harm Jews, is pure BS. The grandstanding is designed to keep Jews as the manager of the Christian holy land. END ENTRY #498
Other Topics. Interested in more info about climate change, what’s required to electrify a fleet of cars/trucks, what it was like to work day-to-day with Lee Iacocca and an array of other topics? Visit another page of this website, https://usrevolution5.com/jrd-thought-comments/
usrevolution5 