What kind of "place" do you expect the City to provide unhoused Fentanyl addicts?

A different park somewhere else in the city core? An empty warehouse in SODO? An office suite in the Stranger's building?

Congress has already lost control. There’s no tactical leverage here, only political fallout from not choosing the right door, in this case putting up a fight. Laws don’t work when leaders fail to follow them. May this misguided move see Schumer out the door, and quick.

@1: “And, let's be clear—the rising crime in the International District and Little Saigon is correlated with Bruce Harrell's push to ‘clean up’ downtown. There is nowhere for these people to go…”

At least she recognized a link between homeless people in parks and rising crime. Even progressives are starting to get it. 😃

@2: As a New Yorker, I can assure you that Sen. Schumer isn’t going anywhere.

“There surely must be better ways to resist than to roll over and show your belly, right?”

Well, perhaps the Stranger could have spent more time last year clearly explaining the dangers inherent to another Trump administration, instead of parroting and justifying the attacks upon the Democratic candidate, Kamala Harris, by pro-Palestinian activists who were making demands she could not legally fulfill?

@3 Clearly the plan should be to give them luxury apartments in Belltown because if only they had a roof over their head they would stop being antisocial assholes whose daily choices negatively effect the rest of us. The continued expectation that we have to pay to house people while they continue their current behavior is a losing proposition. It hasn't worked and it isn't going to work. Offer services to those that want to actually get better, offer deterrents for those that refuse and mandate services for those no longer capable of making rational decisions.

Re Columbia: They are sitting on a $12B endowment and last I read the administration is withholding $400M. Why are the taxpayers giving Columbia anything? I also don't see asking an administration to ensure students feel safe on campus and can access their education as fascist.

Senator Schumer has correctly realized that Donald Trump will have a far easier time shutting down levers of government if the government is not funded and employees are furloughed from lack of funds. Thus, he will vote for the funds to avoid a shutdown and deprive Trump the opportunity to fast-track the Federal demise. This time gives the courts an opportunity to respond to Trump's moves.

University endowments are earmarked for specific use. It’s not a savings account they can draw from at their discretion. And an unchecked, far-right leader demanding institutions bend to his will or face the loss of funds that are supposed to be appropriated by congress, a co-equal branch of government, is as close to fascism as anything our country has experienced, at least besides all the other corrupt and brazenly unconstitutional bullshit this asshole is doing. If you find these actions agreeable I have some news for you.

@3 public and private universities are often given federal funding due to the research work they do is beneficial to the general public and the federal government's agenda. UW received almost $2b in grants both federal and private last year alone. However, we all know the dumpster fire that is this administration doesn't want anything to do with science or an educated general population, so of course Trump is going to make this political as fuck.

@4 Wow, I thought I was reading a local rag penned by opinionated young reporters, not a powerful media apparatus with the power to sway entire elections. I guess if TS spent more time propping national Democrats pandering to their right flank, Washington State would have voted even more overwhelmingly for Harris. Thanks for setting me straight!

@7 Only 67% of Columbia's endowment is designated for specific uses, the remainder is unrestricted. The endowment had a market value of $14.8 billion at the end of the last fiscal year. So, Columbia has $4.88 billion available to spend on whatever it wants.

I don't agree with the Trump administration's approach, but at the same time, I have no idea why the taxpayers must subsidize this incredibly wealthy private institution.

Nathalie: "Police apprehended the suspect."

The story you linked to says: "Police said officers detained an individual in connection with the incident; however, the witness confirmed that the person was not the suspect they observed. The individual was then released, according to police."

District13refugee: "Re Columbia: They are sitting on a $12B endowment and last I read the administration is withholding $400M. Why are the taxpayers giving Columbia anything?"

District13refugee, I normally ignore your comments because it's nothing but one-sided, bad-faith, misleading arguments. You've established you have zero credibility with your audience. But I'm just taking a look at this observation of yours. However justifiable it may be in any particular situation to stick it to some woke liberal institution by withholding funding, either you support the rule of law and the separation of powers and our constitutional republic, or you don't. Just with this comment, you have made it clear that you don't and you are in favor of a dictatorship.

I'm trying to figure out why you're against America and in favor of replacing America with something like Russia. Call us Russia West. Either you're incredibly naive and, well, stupid or you're just a sick and depraved individual who knows they face no consequences. I don't know which it is, but I can tell you perceive yourself to be quite clever.

I'm sure you'll have some snappy comeback waiting for me. I've got some deadlines at work today, so have at me. You have an open opportunity to tear right into me as much as you wish to the rest of the day.

Oh, and before I sign off, thumbs up to Swiftress @6. I initially recoiled at Schumer's decision, but that doesn't mean I'm right. I don't necessarily have to know better than Chuck Schumer does how to do Chuck Schumer's job, and it's all too easy to accuse him of acting in bad faith or being a sell-out. Clearly, he and all the Dems in Congress are facing a sort of Sophie's choice, and I'm just glad I'm not in their shoes.

The Administration's incarceration of Khalil is clearly a move to suppress disfavored speech, full stop. If Khalil were accused of a crime, he would have been arrested by law enforcement and charged.

It's not to hard to infer that the intent of this action is to create a chilling effect such that anybody in the USA on a student visa gets the message to Watch What They Say. Whether or not you agree with the cause Khalil supports should be beside the point as to whether you will countenance the negation of First Amendment protections. The President of the United States sending armed government agents into a private residence to seize and detain a legal resident for the "crime" of saying things the president doesn't like is about as clear an example as one could ask for of the type of abuse the First Amendment was created to prevent.

@5: they'd probably be OK with some of the empty affordable units the city has lying around.

what about their other need? for a gathering place to buy sell and trade? a "drug market", if you will. it could be open-air. block off a street in a different neighborhood every day?

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/law-justice/after-crash-kills-washington-middle-school-student-parents-seek-answers/

All crimes are tragedies. Not all tragedies are crimes.

It's why we have wrongful death civil suits. They address monetarily, negligence that does not meet the threshold to establish a crime. Just because an innocent schoolchild lost their life, through an act of negligence, does not make the death criminal.

All murders are homicides. Most homicides are not murder.

I am surprised The Stranger isn't running this as the next iteration of the "Bad Apples" column. Which writer at The Stranger will revive the work of the bad apple journalist that moved-on, rather than be fired. Who will expose these horrid, insensitive detectives, that won't make an arrest to satisfy the feelings of the parents, whether a crime was committed or not.

@13: It would be tough for the Dems to criticize President Trump for firing government employees and terminating government services, and then turn right around and refuse to fund government employees and services. Even for Republicans, shutting down the government usually backfires. For Democrats, it would be even worse. 😅

@4, time to move on! “But the Democrats” is a whine the party in charge is already lobbing at their detractors, your circular firing approach is not necessary.

"And, let's be clear—the rising crime in the International District and Little Saigon is correlated with Bruce Harrell's push to ‘clean up’ downtown. There is nowhere for these people to go…”

Hogwash and poppycock. We tried to give them a place to go, and they set it on fire.

And the problems at 12th and Jackson have been festering long before the downtown clean up, and have a lot to do with a certain restaurant on 12th that is "open" all sorts of weird hours, and which draws the addicts like flies to honey. Not to mention the shelter (or whatever it is) at 12th and Weller. Morales was content to let the drug addicts wallow in their filth, much to the detriment of the legitimate citzens and businesses in the area - including children who have to walk through that to get to Bailey-Gatzert Elementary, but at least since she took her ball and went home the city has been scrubbing down the sidewalks each morning.

@9, @18: Nice job avoiding having to address the Stranger’s schtick, which I’ll here paraphrase as, “the party we did everything to prevent from winning elections last year, now isn’t doing everything we want.” I’m merely reminding the arsonists here that we’re not going to take their direction on how best to fight their fire.

@19: O that this too, too solid flesh would melt! Naturam expellas furca, tamen usque revenit. 😜

@7 as I have noted in other threads other administrations have taken similar steps to enact policies they feel are justified. No one cried fascism when Obama was using funding as a sledgehammer on schools and states. So what's the difference between what Obama did and what Trump is doing?

@12 being a little melodramatic aren't we? I don't want to take away from your deadlines but if you want to explain why this is ok for some administrations and not others I'm sure others would find that informative.

@15 I hear Pacific Place is available. Easily fit a drug market in there along with plenty of tents.

There's about the be an entire Cheesecake Factory we could lodge the homeless people in. The menu is pretty extensive.

@16,

Guess it's gotta be you Frogginghammer!

@17 the question then is why don't Democrats propose absurdly partisan continuing resolutions and spending bills when in power? When Dems control the government we always hear how they can't do XYZ because it isn't bipartisan, or some particular Senator won't support it. When Republicans are in power they do absolutely whatever they want and the Dems just lie down and let it happen.

If the political cost of a shutdown is prohibitive they should have put it to the Republicans. If it's not they should stand strong now. It has to be one or the other.

@19: That's what I suspected. You should know as anyone who lives on Beacon Hill goes by 12th and Jackson nearly every day or so. It's been festering for decades.

@22 The difference is that Obama was trying to force schools to obey the law, while Trump is trying to force them to obey HIM. And maybe Trump would have a shred of credibility on the antisemitism issue if he weren't simultaneously trying to stamp out any and all efforts to make this country more welcoming and congenial for people of all races and religions other than white Christians. Jews aren't being spared in this crusade: The defense department under its unabashedly white-supremacist secretary has canceled its annual Holocaust remembrance ceremony. If I were Jewish and conservative I'd be feeling more than a little schizoid right now.

Although the arguments against passing this budget resolution are strong, I'm willing to give Schumer a little bit of leeway. There's a good case that a shutdown under Trump 2.0 would be unlike any we've been through up to now. It could easily last many months, during which millions of people would very likely lose their SNAP, their housing assistance and quite possibly their Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Love him or hate him, Schumer's been in DC a very long time and he's seen some things. Let him play this very bad hand the way he sees fit, if only just this once.

@25 "the question then is why don't Democrats propose absurdly partisan continuing resolutions and spending bills when in power?"

Huh. It's almost like people willing to vote for Dems tend to be different than those willing to support what the "Republican" party is doing.

@25: “why don't Democrats propose absurdly partisan continuing resolutions and spending bills”

Because “absurd” bills are bad, regardless of whose absurdity it is? 🤪

@30 absurdly PARTISAN bills are only bad if you're from the other party

@29 do people who vote Democrat not like getting their policy goals accomplished? As it's been said "politics is war by other means." There's no sportsmanship award you either win for your constituents or you don't, and increasingly lately the Democrats have not. Including today.

@31: Inflation Reduction Act? Obamacare? Plenty of bills pass with 100% Democratic support and 0% or nearly 0% Republican support. Those weren’t absurd bills, but I suppose you could the votes “absurdly partisan” if you wanted to. I dunno, I think you might be arguing with your own demons again! 😂

@32 the same Inflation Reduction Act that was an aggressively watered down version of the Build Back Better Act which Joe Manchin singlehandedly killed because the Dems are too weak to control their own caucus? That's your big win?

@33: All Democrats voting in favor, and all Republicans voting against, and a tie-breaking vote in the senate by the vice president? How much more partisan can a vote be before you would describe it as “absurdly partisan?” 🤣🤣🤣

@7: Whether Trump has the full letter of the law on his side or not, our taxpayer money comes with strings attached, and one of those strings says the schools must treat all of their students equally, including providing equal protections to all students from mobs of protestors. Many of last year's protests were abusive toward Jewish students, and other students, on their campuses. A school cannot both take federal money and allow that, hence the lawsuits from students alleging discriminatory behaviors by their schools.

By your own account, you have many examples of Trump's autocratic diktats which you could describe as "close to fascism." Why pick one where public sympathy seems to be on his side?

@14: Khalil isn't living in the US on a student visa. He has a "Green Card," making him a legal permanent resident of the US. That Trump's goons claimed he was on a student visa shows how ignorant they all are.

@25: "...the question then is why don't Democrats propose absurdly partisan continuing resolutions and spending bills when in power?"

Um, because as @30 told you, that's a poor way to 'govern,' and their voters demand better?

@31: "...do people who vote Democrat not like getting their policy goals accomplished?"

As @32 recounted, there have been plenty of 'Democrat' (BTW that's a Republican verbal tic, Mr. Horseshoe Theory) policy goals which have been accomplished. I'll add Bill Clinton's first budget, which reversed Reaganomics, and thus created the longest economic expansion in the history of the United States up to that point. And it passed without a single Republican vote, and many Republicans predicting disaster. Was that "absurdly partisan" enough for you? Was it enough of an accomplished policy goal for you? If not, what would be?

@35: He was very clear @31 that he did not mean Democratic bills whose substance was absurd, but rather Democratic bills whose partisanship was absurd. Then you show him some Democratic bills whose partisanship was as high as it is possible to be, and he’s like, “No that’s not what I meant either.”

Sometimes all you can do is lol!

@6 Swiftress, @13 Cressona, and @28 CKathes: +3 Well said. Deep breath (me). I'm nervous about where we're heading, economically, environmentally, and as a country. Jesus, and it hasn't even been two months!
I wish I had answers. All I know is that I'd hate to be in Senator Chuck Schumer's shoes right now, struggling with the evil that is Mu$k and its Sock Puppets, Mein Trumpf and its right hand Jack-off Vance.
If nothing else, I trust Chuck Schumer over the current KKKlown KKKar Admini$tration any day of
the week, and three times on Sunday.

@1, @3, @5: Almost ten years into both a Homelessness Crisis and a supposed housing crisis, the Stranger continues to simultaneously claim that Seattle’s lower-paid workers can’t stay, but yet the homeless can’t leave.

Then the Stranger wonders why it can no longer get Seattle’s voters to agree with the Stranger’s proposed solutions to these crises.

@35, 36 -- it's legitimately amazing that with everything Trump has done since he took office all Thirteen12 can do is try to shit on Democrats and pretend that they're the real problem. Ah well, bad faith actors are going to bad faith!

@39 It's not that shocking since Thirteen12 is cut from the same cloth as averagebob. It's Exhibit A as to why a voter should never trust the far left (or the far right) - extremists live to be "extreme" and "counter culture"... their actual policy objectives are whatever is the flavor of the week.

@3 You mean that concentrating marginalized people and drug addicts into a square block resulted in an increase in some types of crimes over the area. You, sir, must be a genius.

@4 Quit lying: The Stranger spent plenty of time "last year clearly explaining the dangers inherent to another Trump administration". All of which is entirely consistent (and necessary) with denouncing the massacre of Palestinians. Only pro-Israel partisan hacks like you think that Democratic elites were entitled to deny the will of the Democratic party base and independents that are overwhelmingly against genocide. You contributed to the low turnout for Democrats, You prepared the ground for Trump's attack against freedom of speech thus showing again that your 'horseshoe theory' claptrap is just that. Own it.

@19 Note that it is entirely possible for both "problems [..] festering long before the downtown clean up" and "the rising crime in the International District and Little Saigon is correlated with Bruce Harrell's push to ‘clean up’ downtown" to be true. Conditions at 12th and Jackson have considerably degraded over the last few years.

@40 Joe MCCarthy wannabe claims OTHERS are extremists ...

Hey the Tesla torcher got away. That’s a good thing at least. As long as people are not inside when it happens, I think it’s an interesting development. Does insurance cover malatov cocktails? Sounds like it could be an act of good type thing.

when a(n unoccupied) tesla's torched
does an Angel get their
Wings

or
Gitmo'd?

@39 Nobody but you said that Democrats "are the real problem". If we only needed to point out all that is wrong with Trump to win, we wouldn't be where we are now. If you keep losing to Trump and keep claiming there is nothing wrong with you, you are objectively part of the problem.

will Dems
run yet another
Lackluster against
djtjr or Ivanta in '28

or will Appeasement
Finally have run
its Course?

@27 "Jews aren't being spared in this crusade"

We have seen nothing yet. Just wait for the concept of antisemitism to be completely abused, to the point of being meaningless, as argued by both hardline anti-Palestinians and rightwing reactionaries

@46: Average Bob never bats an eye at antisemitism, but he freaks out over every accusation of antisemitism. Nothing alarms a racist more than being called a racist! 🤣

@41: No one ‘concentrated’ anyone. Even the Stranger’s version of the story says some homeless persons were rousted from downtown, and some of those persons decided to further burden the CID with homelessness. They could have chosen to go anywhere, including leaving Seattle. Only you could take a story about dispersing persons and rewrite it into the exact polar opposite.

‘The Stranger spent plenty of time "last year clearly explaining the dangers inherent to another Trump administration".’

How? By calling his opponents “Genocide Joe” and “Killer Kamala”? Or had you something else in mind? If you did, please provide quotes and URLs to show what you mean.

our dear
Wormtongue
staring Intently
into (unbreakable)
mirror pointing finger
whilst gesticulating Wildly:

"Only you
could take a story
about dispersing persons
and rewrite it into the exact polar opposite."

our
Master
Projectionist
plying his trade

pooty's
Checks
being in
The Mail.

@18 "time to move on! "

did you see who you were talking to? tensorna, like a good propagandist, never, ever moves on from obsessively repeating the same nonsensical garbage over and over and over again until everyone else has gone from the thread.

Just let me know when the dude say something new that hopefully isn't terminally twisted..

@47 aka wormmy's
ai sickbott
🛴🔨:

you
and the
djt redefining
"antisemitism"
into anti-Fascism
thinking the World
will Never even Notice

right you may be
Far right you
Are.

per usual thumpus the thug has nothing but slander. Not only does carry water for Trump by justifying his war on free speech but he continually degrades the meaning of antisemitism to justify the unjustifyable like ethnic cleansing, apartheid and genocide (charming fellow)

@36 this continuing resolution was written solely by House Republicans with zero input from Democrats. That's why House Democrats strongly opposed it's passage and felt betrayed by Schumer. In contrast the Inflation Reduction Act, which again was a severely watered down version of the Build Back Better Act which Dems negotiated against themselves, included at least one GOP amendment from Sen. Thune. The ACA also had numerous Republican amendments. Those bills were NOT as partisan as this CR.

@39 obviously the Republicans are doing shit people left of center consider bad; what's understood doesn't need to be explained. The Democrat's job is to stop them from doing those things, and to do things people left of center consider good. When they abjectly fail, like say by pathetically caving and passing a purely Republican CR, people left of center are right to complain. Imagine the Kraken goalie jumped out of the way to allow the other team to score a goal: your argument is like saying Kraken fans shouldn't be mad at the goalie but rather the player on the other team who shot the puck.

@53: You’ve already been given examples of bills which the Democrats passed without any Republican support. Other commenters have already explained why it is in the best interest of pretty much everyone not to allow a government shutdown with Trump in power. Yet you just keep pounding away at whatever point you believe you’re making, as if it matters, or as if anyone would care, even if it did. All you’re doing is exemplifying the “blame Democrats” schtick you’ve already been called out for.

You can stop digging that hole anytime you like.

from the Ralph Nader Radio Hour:

Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza

Ralph welcomes Peter Beinart, to discuss his book Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza. An observant Jew, Beinart argues “We are not history’s permanent virtuous victims. We are not hardwired to forever endure evil but never commit it.”

Plus, premier global trade expert, Lori Wallach, joins to help sort out the on again, off again tariffs Donald Trump is assessing U.S. trade partners. What kind of a tool is a tariff? When should it be used? Who should it be used against? And are the current tariff threats on Canada really about stopping fentanyl?

--by Ralph Nader; Mar 15, 2025

oodles:
https://www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/p/being-jewish-after-the-destruction

“Israel can't destroy Hamas. Israel has totally laid waste to Gaza, and yet Hamas is still there. And Hamas will have new recruits from all of these people whose family members were killed by Israel.

And Hamas will reconstitute its weapons, because I think actually a lot of the Hamas weapons now are coming from assembling Israeli weapons that were dropped on Gaza, just like the Viet Cong did in Vietnam. They reassemble to make their own weapons.

So Hamas will still be there as a force for Israel to continue to fight. And I think Netanyahu will continue this war for as long as he can.”

--by Peter Beinart
https://www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/p/being-jewish-after-the-destruction

bibi wants to keep
Outta Prison so’s
bibi’s Gotta fight
til the Very. Last.
Hamas. even If
it means Total
Destruction
Of Gaza.

Which it
Will.

but, look at the Bright Side:
WE are Co-fucking
Sponosrs!

@54 the vote total is not the be all and end all, the difference, as I explained in the comment you replied to, is this CR had no input at all from the opposing party. That makes it significantly different from any of the bills other people referenced as, again, I explained in the comment you replied to. I don't know if you're too stupid to understand this or too stubborn or whatever but I can't make it any more clear so at this point I'll have to accept you remaining self-righteously ignorant.

@55 wow shame on you for platforming a virulent antisemite like Beinart 🤪

@52: “degrades the meaning of antisemitism to justify the unjustifyable like ethnic cleansing, apartheid and genocide”

Antisemitism is hostility to Jews, whether individually or collectively. Antizionism is antisemitism. That’s already true, and increasingly it is also becoming the law. Coming soon to a workplace near you! 😉

@56: Clinton’s first budget wasn’t merely passed without a single Republican vote in either house, but with the active opposition of the Republican leadership, and loud Republican denunciation of the bill as irresponsible governance. But even that isn’t partisan enough for you, because your purpose here is to slag on Sen. Schumer, in the pious guise of opposing partisanship. And you’ll just make up whatever definition of partisan you need to get there.

You’re not actually fooling anyone here about that, although you seem to believe you actually are.

Again, thanks for validating how you’ll criticize Democrats and only Democrats for whatever happens, just as noted above.

@57 "Antizionism is antisemitism. "

False. Antizionism is opposition to Zionism, a nationalist movement that is in the process of colonizing Palestine, a land already occupied by Palestinians without interruption for Millennia. Many Jews worldwide aren't Zionists, in fact a number of them are antizionist including important historical figures that make Jewish culture proud like Sigmund Freud, Albert Einstein, Erich Fromm, Primo Levi, Marek Edelman (leader of Varsaw uprising), Hannah Arendt, Isaac Asimov, Noam Chomsky, Uri Avnery and many others.

" it is also becoming the law"

We'll see but what is sure is the collusion between Zionists and reactionaries to enshrine laws meant to prevent criticism of Israel's crimes.

@59: Criticize Israel all you want. In fact, no one criticizes Israel more than Israelis do. 😁 But if your so-called “criticism of Israel” denies the Jewish right to self-determination, then your criticism is, in reality, antisemitism - a trap you fall into routinely! 😆

@59: "...a land already occupied by Palestinians without interruption for Millennia."

The 'Palestinian' identity, meaning 'Palestinian Arab,' originated in the late 19th century at the very earliest. The people who've occupied that land "without interruption for [m]illennia" are the Jews.

I don't actually care either way, because I base the legitimacy of Israel (and, hopefully, of a Palestinian state) on UN Resolution 181, not upon whichever tribe of Homo sapiens supposedly emigrated out of Africa first.

Repeating your fake history does not fool anyone, no matter how many times you repeat it. Rather, you're just "...obsessively repeating the same nonsensical garbage over and over and over again...", to coin a phrase.

@60 Stop the BS excuses. Accusations of Israeli war crimes routinely prompt charges of antisemitism by Zionists and reactionaries in general so any "new laws" you are so eager to see, aren't going to be constrained by sophistry.

Israelis can self-determinate as much as they want without denying Palestinians the right to self-determination by forcibly taking their land, and kicking them out if they are lucky, an eminently racist thing to do. But we have gone around this too many times and like a good zealot, you keep reciting the same falsehoods

@58 cool story, got anything from this millennium?

@62: Palestine can self-determinate anytime it wants. They just gotta stop launching wars that they then go on to lose, like, a week into it! 😂😂😂 In this latest episode, they got rocked so hard some people think it looks like genocide! 🤣🤣🤣 Great plan guys, you almost had em this time, lol!

Two sovereign states for two indigenous peoples, that’s what’s fair. Or, I mean, Palestine could just go on ordering more asskicking for itself, I guess! 🤪

@61 All that matters is that historical and genetic studies show that the people we know as Palestinians today descend from people who lived in the Levant during the Bronze age. Who the fuck cares what they called themselves and what religion they practice thousands of years ago. One has to be some kind of bigot to decide on their legitimate claims based on the religion they practice today rather than whether their ancestors lived on that land.

" Historical records and later genetic studies indicate that the Palestinian people descend mostly from Ancient Levantines extending back to Bronze Age inhabitants of Levant."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Palestinians

@65: ha ha ha, I love it! Averagebob thinks ancient Gideonites or Amorites or whatever else are the same nation as modern Palestinians, but he doesn’t think ancient Jews are the same nation as modern Jews! 😂😂😂 Buddy, there’s only one nation with an unbroken, 3,000-year-old claim to Israel, and it’s not the one you think! 🤣

@66 All the emojis and fake lolling in the world aren't going to make your science and history denial more convincing. I can tell it's unsettling to you and your beliefs that historians and genetic scientists tell us that Palestinians ancestors lived continuously in Palestine since the Bronze age. Just think that some of these Palestinian ancestors were likely Jews until they converted during subsequent conquests, which explains why modern Palestinians are the most genetically proximate population to modern Jews. Tragic.

@67: lol, what! you think nationality depends on genetics?! Ha ha ha! Of all the flavors of racism out there, that one is the most odious! 😆😆😆 In your contempt for Jews, you’ve horseshoed yourself all the way back around to racialism! 😂🤣😂🤣

what a Sad Waste
of Pixels your a
i sickbott pro-
jectionist Is
wormmy

@78 ya averagebob you IDIOT, you absolute CLOWN! Science doesn't matter, who was actually living there doesn't matter, all that matters is their fairytale book says god decided that land was there's so it's there's, period. 🤪 And if you don't agree you're racist! 😆

@70: “their fairytale book says god decided that land was there's”

Actually, 3,000 years of uninterrupted habitation and national identity says the land is theirs. Other nations have breezed in and out of existence in Israel over the centuries (this 19th-century nation of self-identified Arab “Palestinians” being merely the most recent to emerge), but the Jewish nations goes on and on. That’s indigenous, unceded land for ya! 😃

It sounds like maybe you attribute Jewish perseverance in Israel to god, but I don’t. The Jewish nation simply has the oldest and deepest roots in Israel, that’s all. Jewish indigeneity in Israel is a matter of history, not a matter of faith. 😄

Thumpus, Israel is ethnically cleaning Palestine ( Gaza, the West Bank and now parts of Syria). If that's zionism, moral people must oppose it.
They are saying the quiet part out loud now.

@72: lol no but they’re socking it to some terrorists though! 💥💥💥

@60, 56

Peter Beinart is Professor of Journalism and Political Science at the Newmark School of Journalism at the City University of New York. He is also Editor-at-Large of Jewish Currents, an MSNBC political commentator, a frequent contributor to The New York Times, and a Non-Resident Fellow at the Foundation for Middle East Peace.

His latest book is entitled “Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza” and his recent op-ed in the New York Times is “States Don’t Have a Right To Exist. People Do.”

https://peterbeinart.net/biography/

https://www.journalism.cuny.edu/

https://jewishcurrents.org/

Foundation for Middle East Peace
https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/775348/being-jewish-after-the-destruction-of-gaza-by-peter-beinart/

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/27/opinion/israel-state-jewish.html

https://www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/p/being-jewish-after-the-destruction

Foundation for Middle East Peace
https://fmep.org/

@63: Thank you for validating my point, and the point raised earlier, about how you will blame Democrats, and only Democrats. Confronted with evidence of extreme and persistent partisanship, you simply attempt to dismiss it. Your purpose is to blame Democrats and only Democrats, here in the person of Sen. Schumer, and you’ll just do whatever you need to get there.

@67: “… historians and genetic scientists tell us that Palestinians ancestors lived continuously in Palestine since the Bronze age.”

The Roman Empire fought Germanic tribes. That’s a very long way from saying there was a state called “Germany” in Roman times.

Your arguments actually support the Israeli claims to the land better than they do the Palestinian claims, because not only does everything you’ve written apply to modern-day Jews every bit as much as it applies to modern-day people we now call Palestinians, but also there was an actual state run by Jews when the Romans attacked it. (The history of that conflict, written back then, even has the title, “Jewish War.”) You’re just so blinded by ideology that you can’t see this.

(Plus, it’s really, really funny to watch a modern American claim nationhood depends upon genetics. It’s almost as amusing as watching an American claim that settler-colonist theory can deligitimitize a nation’s claim to the land they live upon.)

"Your purpose is to blame Democrats and only Democrats, here in the person of Sen. Schumer, and you’ll just do whatever you need to get there." --@the Wormtongue, always Eager af to promote the Status Quo

"but, Why?"
you may well query
'cause, Cuz, ole wormmy's
Already Got HIS. Sux to be You, eh? 😎

three nyt readers’ comments from

The Interview -- Chuck Schumer
on Democrats, Antisemitism
and His Shutdown Retreat
by Lulu Garcia-Navarro
March 16, 2025

It has been quite a week for Chuck Schumer. When I spoke to the Senate minority leader on Monday, we talked about a lot of things: the direction of his party; how Democrats are communicating their opposition to President Trump; and his new book, “Antisemitism in America: A Warning,” which will be published March 18.

That was Monday. When we spoke again on Saturday afternoon, it was after an extraordinary few days in Congress, during which Democrats had to decide whether to vote for a Republican federal spending bill or to allow a government shutdown. House Democrats voted in near unanimity against the bill.

Schumer initially said that he would as well, but in a surprising about-face on Friday, he and eight other Democratic senators joined Republicans, and the bill passed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/16/magazine/chuck-schumer-interview.html

the three nyt readers’ comments:

The inexcusable error that Schumer made wasn’t voting for the CR, it was having zero strategy for weeks leading up to that vote. Hoping the house wouldn’t get its act together is not a strategy.

At minimum he should have led democrats in staking out a clear position weeks earlier that any budget legislation has to include guarantees that money allocated will get spent as intended, and that trump and musk won’t have authority to impound or otherwise cancel or repurpose funding.

A majority of Americans don’t like what musk is doing / it would have been a popular position and a reasonable one — democrats are committed to the constitution which says congress controls the purse.

At least It would have laid bare that republicans are abdicating their responsibilities to musk. Without that clarion call it feels like democrats are doing the same….because they are.
--@Pny22; New York

@Pny22 thank you for saying this. It’s fine to be angry at him for swinging his vote, and seemingly that of other senators with him, at the last second and abandoning the party…that alone is anger inducing. But from a strategic perspective what you talk about is the true failure.

This man and the party couldn’t find a position to stake out in the weeks leading up to this that coherently opposed the spending bill and laid it at the feet of the Republicans? They should consider attending a town hall for a sitting Republican to get some speaking points from the public.
--@No Thanks; Again, No Thanks

@Pny22 This is right on. The lack of strategy and messaging leading up to the vote was where Schumer failed, and why he should be replaced as leader,
--@Paul; Utica NY

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/16/magazine/chuck-schumer-interview.html#commentsContainer

@77 & @78

"... and
you’ll just
do whatever
you need to get there."

--@Wormtongue
in yet another of his
"Masterful" Projections

speaking of anti-semitism:
from the Kucinich Report

American Spring? Uphold
Freedom of Speech on
American Campuses

Protect the First Amendment!

Throughout my political career, I have steadfastly defended the First Amendment, particularly the right to free speech. In 2002, I delivered a speech entitled A Prayer for America, where I challenged the rationale of the PATRIOT Act and questioned actions that infringed upon the constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and protection against unreasonable searches.

My commitment to upholding free speech has been a guiding principle throughout my tenure in public service. While a Member of Congress, I consistently opposed measures that, in my view, threatened civil liberties, including the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, which I believed was unconstitutional and could potentially criminalize thought. The bill passed. I was one of 6 members who voted against it.

The Current Assault on Free Speech on Campus

In the past few weeks, federal officials have conducted aggressive attempts to squelch protest and dissent on college campuses, intimidating higher education administrators into adopting standards that inherently violate First Amendment guarantees of free speech and freedom of association.

The government prescriptions for campus conduct, if actually implemented, expose the academic institutions to civil lawsuits.

There is an open assault on the First Amendment. College students who have peacefully exercised their constitutional right to freedom of speech and association—by challenging government policies or the policies of a foreign government—have been arrested in droves, suspended, expelled, or even faced deportation.

Much of this government activity claims to target anti-Semitism as a civil rights violation, which, on its face, seems reasonable. However, the way this policy is being applied has significant implications for free speech and so needs to be examined.

The Definition of Anti-Semitism and Its Misuse

In the late 18th century, the term “Semite” described languages relating to Hebrew and Arabic. Linguistically, the Semitic Language Tree includes Jews (speaking Hebrew), Arabs (speaking Arabic), and several other groups.

However, in May 2016, a European Union commmittee redefined “anti-Semitism” to refer exclusively to abhorrent conduct toward Jews. This definition was later updated by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) and was formalized through Executive Order 13899 by President Trump.

The order placed anti-Semitism under the enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, classifying it as discriminatory conduct against Jews in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.

No reasonable, fair-minded person supports discrimination against Jews or anyone else. Yet, this definition is now being used to suppress legitimate criticism of the Netanyahu government, which has faced condemnation both on American college campuses and within Israel for its deadly actions toward Palestinians.

A paradox emerges: It is deemed anti-Semitic to criticize Israel for killing Arabs, but not anti-Semitic for the Israeli government to kill Palestinians, who are also Semitic. This contradiction, tragically, will likely stir genuine anti-Semitism against Jews in particular.

If criticism of Israel is officially equated with anti-Semitism, then attempts to suppress public outrage over war crimes and genocide can only undermine the moral weight of actual cases of anti-Semitism—such as stereotyping, demonization, harassment, incitement, and discrimination against Jewish people.

--by Dennis Kucinich*
Mar 16, 2025

oodleses:
https://kucinichreport.substack.com/p/american-spring-suppression-of-the

*Mayor, Cleveland, Ohio (1977-1979)
U.S. House of Representatives (1997-2013)

“If criticism of Israel is officially equated with anti-Semitism, then attempts to suppress public outrage over war crimes and genocide can only undermine the moral weight of actual cases of anti-Semitism—such as stereotyping, demonization, harassment, incitement, and discrimination against Jewish people.”
--Dennis Kucinich

Fucking
BINGO.

shoot the Messenger
if you Must; it Won’t
make the Message
ANY less Correct.

@79 "There is an open assault on the First Amendment. College students who have peacefully exercised their constitutional right to freedom of speech and association—by challenging government policies or the policies of a foreign government—have been arrested in droves, suspended, expelled, or even faced deportation."

False, people who were arrested were not detained for their speech. They were detained for trespassing, vandalism and assault. They have not been arrested in "droves". There has been very little repercussions for any of them as those who were arrested mostly ended up not being charged.

"No reasonable, fair-minded person supports discrimination against Jews or anyone else."

This is true which incriminates these protests as they have absolutely discriminated against Jewish students as has been well documented.

@70 If you're going to go down that rabbit hole I look forward to your discussion on the Quran

@80: The anti-Jewish nature of last year’s campus protests has been completely ignored by the Stranger, and denied by sympathetic commenters here. Some of the protestors tried to use “anti-Zionist” as a fig leaf for their anti-Israel, anti-Jewish statements and behaviors, got called on it, and are now bitter at having gotten caught in their not-so-clever attempt at deceit. So they whine their ‘civil rights’ to assault Jewish students were then violated by big meanie whomever. Spoiled children.

@71 "The Jewish nation simply has the oldest and deepest roots in Israel, that’s all."

Not true. Even according to their own fairytale book they took the land from the Canaanites. It's lucky you don't believe in genetics because guess who the Canaanites' modern descendants are.

@82 they're fucking
Genetics Deniers,
TOO? suprise,
suprise, eh
Gomer?

workin'
Overtime
for the fat man

@83: "...because guess who the Canaanites' modern descendants are."

Many of them are Jews. Some of whose families have lived there since Biblical times.

And most modern-day residents of North America have little generic material in common with the entirety of persons who lived here from thousands of years ago, to as recently as 1491. Yet, somehow, that never figures into any examination as to the legitimacy of our residence here, or of the countries we reside in. Any idea why?

@84: Because comprehensive, thoughtful, arguments often unravel the desired conclusions.

@84 you brought up this issue before and I readily admitted the US is also a settler colonial country. To be honest I think subconscious guilt over our history is part of why Americans are so uncritically defensive of Israel compared to the rest of the world. Your stance on the current situation in Gaza is like arguing in support of the Trail of Tears while it was happening.

@82: lol, first you’d have to explain to your ancient Canaanite what a “Palestinian” is, because he never heard of one. 😂 Your ancient Jew, though, you could just start chatting with in Hebrew. 🤣 You see, one of these nations has a 3,000-year-old continuity in Israel, and one of them doesn’t. 😉

@86: "...you brought up this issue before and I readily admitted the US is also a settler colonial country."

And the ramifications of that are what, exactly? You didn't take it any further. If some of Israel's actions are indefensible simply because it is a "settler colonial country," and for no other reason, then does similar logic apply to the United States? Canada? Mexico, or anywhere else in Latin America?

"To be honest I think subconscious guilt over our history is part of why Americans are so uncritically defensive of Israel compared to the rest of the world."

As you've given no examples, there's nothing upon which to make an argument. Perhaps Americans believe the only democracy in the region is worth supporting? Or that Tel Aviv is the only capital in the region where a Pride celebration can take place openly, maybe that counts for something?

"Your stance on the current situation in Gaza is like arguing in support of the Trail of Tears while it was happening."

Trump is actually the one who has proposed deporting everyone from Gaza. Once you're done admiring his incredible manliness in getting a cease-fire, maybe you could take your objections to him?

@88 do you oppose deporting every Palestinian from Gaza? What if Israel said that was the only way to eliminate the terrorist threat?

@87 "Your ancient Jew, though, you could just start chatting with in Hebrew."

Except they'd be incredibly confused why you keep saying Jerusalem is in Israel. And neither of you could talk to a Jew born in one of the 1500 years when nobody spoke Hebrew.

@90: “1500 years when nobody spoke Hebrew”

That’s weird, since there is a huge corpus of Hebrew literature spanning that entire time, as well as the centuries before and after. 😛 Say, what language were your Canaanites speaking all that time? “Palestinian?” 🤣🤣🤣

Chicken or the egg arguments have nothing to do what what is the right way to treat your neighbors as yourself in any timeline.

@89: I actually oppose most of what Trump wants, and his proposed ethnic cleansing of Gaza merits no exception.

Now, if you’re finally done slobbering over Trump’s incredible manliness in obtaining a cease-fire, did you ever consider he may have obtained that cease-fire by promising to support ethnic cleansing of Gaza? Including by promising he’d agree to a complete cleansing as the only way to eliminate the terrorist threat?

@93 so you think Israel is justified in killing Gazans because "Hamas is using them as human shields" but opposed to Gazans just being removed from the territory? You think it's worse to relocate them than to kill them? Bizarre.

I see you all solved anti-Semitism over the weekend. Good job.

@tbass

perhaps not 'solved'
but Dennis Kucinich's
little essay @78 & @79
goes a long ways toward
understanding the perils of
Thedonolde's weaponizing of
the term for political gain. If one

happens to Read
and Understand it.

but thedjt don't
Care about definitions
he only cares about 'Winning'

& becoming
KING.