@Edroso Commenter Threatens Workplace Harassment Over Pete Seeger Communist Blogging — UPDATED AND BUMPED!!

It's one of the leftists over at Roy Edroso's blog, who writes:

Wonder how your employer's administration would enjoy reading a copy of this comment?

The comment's at the link.

Interesting how Edroso's entire community of depraved harassment leftists are down with it. No push back. F-k 'em. It never ceases to amaze me that virtually the first response of all leftists is to contact your employer. It's too pat. I understand more than ever why people blog anonymously. Personally, I've always put my reputation out there. Regressive leftists can't debate you. They can't win on the merits. All they have are lies and harassment. I've been through this too many times to recount. I'm up to a half dozen or so attempts to have me fired, a couple of which have instigated frivolous investigations.

These people are driven by hatred. All in a day's blogging, I guess.

Here's the search tag for "workplace harassment," which is voluminous.

Previous Communist Pete Seeger blogging is here.

*****

UPDATED!!

My department chair has been contacted by someone named "Selwyn Hollis."

I have sent this Hollis person an email to their gmail account of the same name. I have not heard back.

Also there is a Dr. Selwyn Hollis, Professor of Mathematics, at Armstrong Atlantic State University, Savannah, Georgia. I cannot confirm if my harasser is the same as Professor Hollis.

Again, I do not know if this is the same "Selwyn Hollis"?

However, if readers are concerned, and need information or confirmation on "Selwyn Hollis," they should inquire with the Chairman of the Department of Mathematics, Dr. James Brawner:

Department of Mathematics
College of Science and Technology
University Hall 297
11935 Abercorn Street
Savannah, GA 31419

Thanks dear readers. And remember, never cave to these assholes. All they have are threats and intimidation. They never win debates on the merits. They attack and harass like the evil assholes they are. F-k 'em.

GOP Senate Takeover Within Reach

From Beth Reinhard, at National Journal, "6 Signs a Republican Senate Takeover Is Within Reach":

Republican gains and President Obama's weakness have Democrats on their heels, preparing to fight for Senate seats they never thought they would have to defend and hoping that 2016 will give them a chance to win back the Senate if they lose it next year.

Mark Warner, one of the most popular Democrats in the Senate, is now facing a serious challenge from one of the few Virginia Republicans who can keep pace with his fundraising. Polls show the Republican favorite in Michigan running evenly with Democratic Rep. Gary Peters, and raising more money than him as well. Republicans are even watching the Oregon Senate race closely, where a Republican physician running against Obamacare raised a half-million dollars against Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley.

Democrats are feeling the pressure and looking longingly at 2016, when the political landscape should be nearly as favorable to them as the 2014 environment is perilous to their majority. This year, the party is defending seven states that rejected Obama in 2012; the GOP will be defending six seats in state that he carried that year in 2016.

"We always knew this cycle would have a number of difficult seats to defend," said Democratic strategist Jef Pollock. "Everything stacks up better for us in 2016."

What's changed in the past month is that a handful of states once thought to be safely Democratic—such as Michigan, Oregon, and Virginia—could become highly competitive in a best-case GOP scenario. If President Obama's approval ratings don't improve and Republicans catch a few breaks, the GOP could ride a wave to a majority that could withstand a small 2016 setback.

"They've put candidates on the ballot," acknowledged J.B. Poersch, who advises Senate Majority PAC, a Democratic super PAC focused on the Senate. But he added, "Six months from now, or even four months from now, how many of these are actually going to be races? It's great to be able to laundry list candidates and another to see how viable they're going to be."

Keep reading.

With Social Media's Rise, the Pulpit Isn't Just the President's Anymore

Heh.

At NYT:

On floor of house waitin on "Kommandant-In-Chef"... the Socialistic dictator who's been feeding US a line or is it "A-Lying?"

— Randy Weber (@TXRandy14) January 29, 2014

WASHINGTON — Twitter has fast become the conventional-wisdom clearinghouse and real-time echo chamber for major political events, so it was not surprising Tuesday evening when Twitter also became the forum where opinion on President Obama’s State of the Union address seemed to crystallize before he had even finished speaking.

“The media party line where everyone can listen in,” said Mike Murphy, a Republican strategist.

“The town hall for the media and political elite,” said Erik Smith, a Democratic strategist and founder of Blue Engine Message and Media.

The power of Twitter to shape the debate (for better or worse) was on display shortly before Mr. Obama began, when Representative Randy Weber, Republican of Texas, posted an error-riddled message that called the president a “Socialistic dictator,” and quickly went viral.

Indeed, Twitter’s ability to focus the pundit class helps explain why, in the fierce competition to control the political narrative, lawmakers, candidates, operatives and even the president are increasingly turning to it and other social media. The battle is the same as before, but they are now hoping to prevail 140 characters at a time.

“Conventional wisdom is like fast-drying concrete in the Twitter age — it doesn’t take long to harden,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York. “Twitter is one of the fastest ways to shape opinion.”

The State of the Union address spawned a bipartisan embrace of new photo- and video-sharing platforms, and a rush to create tweetable graphics and synchronized hashtags to amplify messages. Democrats and Republicans competed to make their views the majority, often with little regard to what the president actually said. Members of Congress sent out 750 tweets over the course of Mr. Obama’s speech, according to data provided by Twitter.

Congressional Republicans rallied around hashtags like #CloseTheGap, to push their message of reducing income inequality, and #YearOfAction, to call on Mr. Obama to act on some of their major proposals in the coming year. (Of course, especially after the president called for a “year of action” in his address, #YearofAction took off among Republicans and Democrats alike.)

And, perhaps more notably, Republicans set up “recording stations” on Vine, the Twitter-owned platform for sharing six-second videos, and Instagram to allow caucus members to record short responses that they could share before, during and after the speech.

When Mr. Obama got to the part of his address where he said he was willing to go around Congress through executive orders, Representative Paul Gosar, Republican of Arizona, was ready. As if on cue, he tweeted out a prerecorded Vine video featuring him sitting him behind his desk and stating, “If the president has a pen and a telephone, we have the Constitution.”

Keep reading.

.@MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell: 'Iran Was More or Less an American Ally' Before Bush's 'Axis of Evil'

Oh brother.

At Hot Air, "Andrea Mitchell: Remember how Iran was sort of an ally after 9/11 until Bush’s “axis of evil” speech?"

And at Twitchy, "‘Are you insane?’ Andrea Mitchell suggests Iran was our ally before Bush’s ‘Axis of Evil’ speech."

Barack Obama's Imperial Presidency

Man, I'm glad at least someone's not hiding behind their mama's knickers. Sheesh.

Take it to these f-kers. You go Ted Cruz!

At WSJ, "The Imperial Presidency of Barack Obama":

Of all the troubling aspects of the Obama presidency, none is more dangerous than the president's persistent pattern of lawlessness, his willingness to disregard the written law and instead enforce his own policies via executive fiat. On Monday, Mr. Obama acted unilaterally to raise the minimum wage paid by federal contracts, the first of many executive actions the White House promised would be a theme of his State of the Union address Tuesday night.

The president's taste for unilateral action to circumvent Congress should concern every citizen, regardless of party or ideology. The great 18th-century political philosopher Montesquieu observed: "There can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or body of magistrates." America's Founding Fathers took this warning to heart, and we should too.

Rule of law doesn't simply mean that society has laws; dictatorships are often characterized by an abundance of laws. Rather, rule of law means that we are a nation ruled by laws, not men. That no one—and especially not the president—is above the law. For that reason, the U.S. Constitution imposes on every president the express duty to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

Yet rather than honor this duty, President Obama has openly defied it by repeatedly suspending, delaying and waiving portions of the laws he is charged to enforce. When Mr. Obama disagreed with federal immigration laws, he instructed the Justice Department to cease enforcing the laws. He did the same thing with federal welfare law, drug laws and the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

On many of those policy issues, reasonable minds can disagree. Mr. Obama may be right that some of those laws should be changed. But the typical way to voice that policy disagreement, for the preceding 43 presidents, has been to work with Congress to change the law. If the president cannot persuade Congress, then the next step is to take the case to the American people. As President Reagan put it: "If you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat" of electoral accountability.

President Obama has a different approach. As he said recently, describing his executive powers: "I've got a pen, and I've got a phone." Under the Constitution, that is not the way federal law is supposed to work.

Keep reading. (Via Memeorandum.)

Tea Party Response to the State of the Union — Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah)

A hard-hitting address.

At Politico, "Mike Lee tea party response: Barack Obama at fault for inequality":

Sen. Mike Lee tried to challenge the Democrats on their own turf by discussing an “inequality crisis” in his official tea party rebuttal to the State of the Union on Tuesday, while fellow tea party darling Sen. Rand Paul struck more familiar Republican chords in a separate speech.

Lee’s language echoed Democrats who have been actively raising concerns about growing inequality in American society. But the Utah Republican cast the solution in distinctly conservative terms.

“This inequality crisis presents itself in three principal forms,” Lee (R-Utah) said. “Immobility among the poor, who are being trapped in poverty by big-government programs; insecurity in the middle class, where families are struggling just to get ahead, and they can’t seem to get ahead; and cronyist privilege at the top, where political and economic insiders twist the immense power of the federal government to profit at the expense of everyone else.”

Lee highlighted educational and economic inequality, but argued that government is a root cause of growing disparities. He also included issues like abortion, same-sex marriage and National Security Agency surveillance as examples of big-government policies that lead to “real inequality.”

But the worst culprit, Lee argued, is the Democratic health care law.

“Obamacare – all by itself – is an inequality Godzilla that has robbed working families of their insurance, their doctors, their wages and their jobs,” Lee said. “Many Americans are now seeing why some of us fought so hard to stop this train-wreck over the last four years.”

President Barack Obama, Lee added, “has paid lip-service” to addressing inequality “but seems uninterested in truly confronting or correcting” it.

We'll see.

He's got a pretty good laundry list of reforms. It's going to take majority power to actually push these things through the Congress, which is why the stakes are as high as ever in November.

More at Hot Air, "The State of the Union: Six down… and two to go" (via Memeorandum).

Cintia Dicker for Sports Illustrated Swimsuit 2013

Taking it day by day, now. Heh.

Until next month, at SI, "Cintia Dicker Swimsuit Photos."

#SOTU: 'Time to Do Away With Workplace Policies That Belong in a 'Mad Men' Episode...'

I thought half the Democratic conference was going to have a collective orgasm. Looks at these lollygagging dolls.

At the Wrap, "Obama Says Enough With Anti-Women Policies That ‘Belong in a ‘Mad Men’ Episode’ in State of the Union Address."

Leftists will be all over this today, although O's comments are easily fact-checked and found wanting. Women, at comparable levels of education, make as much as men do. I'll update when there's more on this.

'And don't forget Republicans led by Teabagger Ted Cruz shut down the Government!'

Heh.

You gotta love Twitchy, "‘Racist honkie trailor park living people’; 30 tweets bashing the Tea Party during the SOTU speech."

And don't forget Republicans led by Teabagger Ted Cruz shut down the Government! It either their way or no way! Screw Americans #SOTU

— Nicole (@MzDivah67) January 29, 2014

Leftists are dirtbag scum. And communist filth. Fight them to the finish. Stand up to their hatred. Hit back twice as hard.

President Clinton Passed Speaker Gingrich a 'Secret Note' Before 1996 #SOTU

Longtime readers will recall that I'm no fan of Newt Gingrich.

That said, this is interesting. Here's the former Speaker with an intimate look back at what appears to be a proud moment in the political limelight.

Congressman Michael Grimm Threatens NY1 Reporter

Not becoming of a congressman, at NY1 News, "Rep. Grimm Threatens NY1 Reporter Following State of the Union."

The reporter finished his on-air report, saying Rep. Grimm didn't want to talk about campaign finance allegations:

"So Congressman Michael Grimm does not want to talk about some of the allegations concerning his campaign finances," Scotto said before tossing back to the station. But as the camera continued to roll, Grimm walked back up to Scotto and began speaking to him in a low voice.

"What?" Scotto responded. "I just wanted to ask you..."

Grimm: "Let me be clear to you, you ever do that to me again I'll throw you off this f-----g balcony."

Scotto: "Why? I just wanted to ask you..."

[[cross talk]]

Grimm: "If you ever do that to me again..."

Scotto: "Why? Why? It’s a valid question."

[[cross talk]]

Grimm: "No, no, you're not man enough, you're not man enough. I'll break you in half. Like a boy."

More at the link, plus video.

Also at CNN, "New York congressman threatens to throw reporter off balcony." (At Memeorandum.)

Grimm's a Republican, the idiot. Here's his statement:

“I was extremely annoyed because I was doing NY1 a favor by rushing to do their interview first in lieu of several other requests. The reporter knew that I was in a hurry and was only there to comment on the State of the Union, but insisted on taking a disrespectful and cheap shot at the end of the interview, because I did not have time to speak off-topic. I verbally took the reporter to task and told him off, because I expect a certain level of professionalism and respect, especially when I go out of my way to do that reporter a favor. I doubt that I am the first Member of Congress to tell off a reporter, and I am sure I won’t be the last...”

'Too many people are falling further and further behind because, right now, the president's policies are making people's lives harder...'

That's the line that stuck with me most. It's something I've talked about in my classes, especially on healthcare and jobs for college aged students.

At Politico, "McMorris Rodgers promotes ‘hopeful’ agenda."

The text is here, "State of the Union GOP response: Cathy McMorris Rodgers (text, video)."

Obama Pledges 'Year of Action' on Economy and Jobs

At ABC News, "In State of the Union 2014, President Obama Pushes for Year of Action on Economic Opportunity" (via Memeorandum).

And at the New New York Times, "Obama Vows Solo Action on Economic Gap":

WASHINGTON — After five years of fractious political combat, President Obama declared independence from Congress on Tuesday as he vowed to tackle economic disparity with a series of limited initiatives on jobs, wages and retirement that he will enact without legislative approval.

Promising “a year of action” as he tries to rejuvenate a presidency mired in low approval ratings and stymied by partisan stalemates, Mr. Obama used his annual State of the Union address to chart a new path forward relying on his own executive authority. But the defiant “with or without Congress” approach was more assertive than any of the individual policies he advanced.

“I’m eager to work with all of you,” a confident Mr. Obama told lawmakers of both parties in the 65-minute nationally televised speech in the House chamber. “But America does not stand still — and neither will I. So wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that’s what I’m going to do.”

The president’s appearance at the Capitol, with all the traditional pomp and anticipation punctuated by partisan standing ovations, came at a critical juncture as Mr. Obama seeks to define his remaining time in office. He touched on foreign policy, asserting that “American diplomacy backed by the threat of force” had forced Syria to give up chemical weapons and that “American diplomacy backed by pressure” had brought Iran to the negotiating table. And he repeated his plan to pull troops out of Afghanistan this year and threatened again to veto sanctions on Iran that disrupt his diplomatic efforts.

The most emotional point of the evening came with the introduction of Sgt. First Class Cory Remsburg, an Army Ranger the president had met both before and after he was ravaged by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan. As Sergeant Remsburg, blind in one eye and having to learn to walk again, made it to his feet in the first lady’s box, lawmakers of both parties gave him an extended ovation.

But Mr. Obama’s message centered on the wide gap between the wealthiest and other Americans as he positioned himself as a champion of those left behind in the modern economy. “Those at the top have never done better,” he said. “But average wages have barely budged. Inequality has deepened. Upward mobility has stalled.

“The cold, hard fact is that even in the midst of recovery, too many Americans are working more than ever just to get by, let alone to get ahead,” he added. “And too many still aren’t working at all. So our job is to reverse these trends.”

To do so, the president announced an executive order raising the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour for future federal contract workers and the creation of a new Treasury savings bond for workers without access to traditional retirement options. He proposed incentives for trucks running on alternative fuels and higher efficiency standards for those running on gasoline. And he announced a meeting on working families and a review of federal job training programs.

Mr. Obama was gambling that a series of ideas that seem small-bore on their own will add up to a larger collective vision of an America with expanded opportunity. But the moderate ambitions were a stark contrast to past years when Mr. Obama proposed sweeping legislation to remake the nation’s health care system, regulate Wall Street, curb climate change and restrict access to high-powered firearms.

Republicans responded by blaming Mr. Obama for the country’s economic problems, but the party’s leaders avoided the language of last year’s government shutdown and hoped to present what Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington called “a more hopeful, Republican vision” intended to appeal particularly to women in a midterm election year...

More at the link.

'America's Most Successful Communist' Trending at Memeorandum

Pretty funny when an almost 10-year-old article on a depraved folk-rock Communist gets linked up by enough bloggers to get a thread on Memeorandum. Heh.

.@RSMcCain Heh. This 2005 piece on Pete Seeger is trending at Memeorandum: "America’s Most Successful Communist." http://t.co/6r0Qn2kg6x

— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) January 28, 2014

PREVIOUSLY: "Communist Folk Singer Pete Seeger Dies at 94," and "On Cue, Far-Left Partisans for Pete Seeger Bring the Hate."

Lolo Jones Makes the U.S. Olympic Bobsled Team

At USA Today, "Lolo Jones handles the heat over bobsled selection."

I haven't been very impressed with Ms. Jones, but I guess she's got some supporters out there. Still, making the bobsled team on your fame is kinda unfair to those who worked years at the sport.

Here's the video from 2008 in Beijing, where Jones clipped the second to the last hurdle and lost an Olympics gold medal: "Athletics - Women's 100M Hurdles - Beijing 2008 Summer Olympic Games." She's never gotten over that.

More at CBS News, "Lolo Jones' selection to Olympic bobsled team criticized."

Sabine Jemeljanova for Nuts January 2014

At Egotastic!, "Sabine Jemeljanova Topless Secretary Nuts Shoot in January 2014."

University of North Carolina Apologizes for Fake Classes, Promises Real Change

At Business Week (via Instapundit).



PREVIOUSLY: "Universities Admitting Illiterate Athletes," and "UNC Professor Mary Willingham Receives Death Threats After Bombshell Research on College Athlete Illiteracy."

Also, "University of North Carolina Suspends Athlete Illiteracy Research by Mary Willingham," and "Illiterate Athletes a Symptom of Nationwide Problem."

On Cue, Far-Left Partisans for Pete Seeger Bring the Hate

It's still early, but I expect it's going to be an interesting day of leftist hatred.

At Alicublog, Roy Edroso calls me an "asshole":

http://t.co/997UgzFeS7 RT @elongreen Look forward to reading @edroso on Seeger.
— edroso (@edroso) January 28, 2014

Then this idiot tells me to "fuck off" on Twitter:

@AmPowerBlog @MsEBL I say this without malice, but "Fuck you!" #PeteSeeger did more for social justice in one day than Repubs did in 50 yrs

— Peggy Brava (@PeggyBrava) January 28, 2014

Here's disgusting hate-troll Repsac3 spewing the pro-Communist propaganda:

Pete Seeger: This Man Surrounded Hate and Forced it to Surrender | The Nation http://t.co/oaBHiPjAle

— J. Casper (@repsac3) January 28, 2014

And Bird Dog takes the heat in the comments at Maggie's Farm:

I saw him perform several times. Grew up middle class, went to prep school and Harvard, affected a working class style but I doubt any working class people were ever interested in him. A likeable old commie, naive and innocent to the end.

*****

No, he was a totalitarian monster and a fraud, and his so-called folk music was also a fraud. He should have died 90 years ago, instead he polluted America for decades. As did all the other so-called folk artists, all of whom were Communist frauds.

*****

Good grief! The guy was an old Commie geezer who never found an enemy of this country he couldn't find a way to support.

He championed the Soviets (you might remember them) during the"nuclear freeze" in the 80's and was an outspoken liar and propagandist about the motives of Ronald Reagan, one of the finest American's who ever swore the office of President.

Obummer probably had to bite his lip and choke back a tear.

My earlier entry is here, "Communist Folk Singer Pete Seeger Dies at 94" (with, so far, one hate-addled apologist for Communism in the comments).

BONUS: Da Tech Guy links, "If only Leni Riefenstahl was a Communist like Pete Seeger…" Thanks!

Communist Folk Singer Pete Seeger Dies at 94

A long obituary at the New York Times, "Pete Seeger, Songwriter and Champion of Folk Music, Dies at 94." This passage is telling:

In 1955 he was subpoenaed by the House Un-American Activities Committee, where he testified, “I feel that in my whole life I have never done anything of any conspiratorial nature.” He also stated: “I am not going to answer any questions as to my association, my philosophical or religious beliefs or my political beliefs, or how I voted in any election, or any of these private affairs. I think these are very improper questions for any American to be asked, especially under such compulsion as this.”

Mr. Seeger offered to sing the songs mentioned by the congressmen who questioned him. The committee declined.

Althouse likes that as well, "'I am not going to answer any questions as to my association, my philosophical or religious beliefs or my political beliefs, or how I voted in any election, or any of these private affairs'." (Via Memeorandum.)

Here's Seeger's entry at Discover the Networks:

In 1945 Seeger became the national director of People's Songs, Inc, an organization designed to “create, promote and distribute songs of labor and the American People.” Within a few years, the California Senate Fact-finding Committee reported that:

"People's Songs is a vital Communist front … one which has spawned a horde of lesser fronts in the fields of music, stage entertainment, choral singing, folk dancing, recording, radio transcriptions and similar fields. It especially is important to Communist proselytizing and propaganda work because of its emphasis on appeal to youth, and because of its organization and technique to provide entertainment for organizations and groups as a smooth opening wedge for Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist propaganda."

Seeger parted ways with the Communist Party in 1950 and eventually renounced strict Stalinism, in favor of socialism and pro-labor activism. "I realized," says Seeger, "I could sing the same songs I sang whether I belonged to the Communist Party or not, and I never liked the idea anyway of belonging to a secret organization."

In 1955 Seeger was subpoenaed by the House Un-American Activities Committee, whose questions about his past Communist ties he answered evasively or not at all. The following year Seeger was indicted for contempt of Congress. In 1961 he was found guilty of that charge and was sentenced to ten years in prison, though in 1962 his conviction was overturned on a technicality.

In the 1960s Seeger was deeply involved in the civil rights movement and its hallmark demonstrations. His musical interpretation of an old spiritual, which he called We Shall Overcome, became a signature song of the movement. The song was played at the founding meeting of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) in 1960. In subsequent years, Seeger would perform benefit concerts on SNCC's behalf.

Historian Ronald Radosh writes: "Throughout the 1950’s and 1960’s, Seeger called for peace, peaceful co-existence between the United States and the Soviet Union, singing songs like Put My Name Down, Brother, Where Do I Sign? -- a ballad in favor of the Soviet Union’s phony international peace petition that favored unilateral disarmament by the West while leaving the Soviet atomic stockpile intact. He would sing and give his support to peace rallies and marches covertly sponsored by the Soviet Union and its Western front groups and dupes -- while leaving his political criticism only for the United States and its defensive actions during the Cold War."

Seeger was an opponent of America's involvement in the Vietnam War. He similarly opposed the U.S. military campaigns and weapons buildup during the Reagan years of the Cold War. He supported the Nuclear Freeze Movement of the 1980s -- a Soviet-sponsored initiative that would have frozen Soviet nuclear and military superiority in place and would have rendered Reagan unable to close that gap to any appreciable degree. Seeger has used his status as a folk icon to lend support to a number of leftwing causes and initiatives.

I don't see it yet, but I expect far-left historian Erik Loomis to post a glowing obituary at some point, at Lawyers, Gays and Marxists. (See Robert Stacy McCain for Loomis' background, "He’s a Lumberjack, and He’s OK: The Wobbly Scholarship of Erik Loomis, Ph.D.")

Expect updates. It's going to be interesting to see the leftist bloggers salivate over Seeger's anti-American legacy.

What Purpose International Holocaust Remembrance Day?

From Caroline Glick, at JPost, "International Holocaust Remembrance Day’s fatal flaw":

On the surface, it is very moving to see half of the members of Knesset at Auschwitz marking International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

But in a larger sense, it is not at all clear why this is necessary.

The Jewish people have Yom HaShoah V’Hagevura, our own national day of mourning for the genocide of our people in Europe.

More importantly, we carry the legacy of the Holocaust inside of us.

Every day, at some level, we experience the ulcerative loss of a third of the Jewish people in the hell of Europe, because we feel the hollow absence of the victims.

The six million murdered have become 10 million descendants who were never born. And we miss them.

We remember them too, every day, when we look at our children and thank God we can protect them.

Israel does not need this extra Holocaust memorial day. And before we send another delegation of elected officials to Auschwitz next January 27, we need to ask whether this extra day serves any positive purpose.

In November 2005, Israel was one of the co-sponsors of the UN General Assembly resolution that made January 27, the day Auschwitz was liberated, International Holocaust Remembrance Day. At the time, Israeli politicians and American Jewish leaders extolled the resolution as signaling a new era of UN relations with the Jewish state.

Consider for instance that a week before its duly mandated International Holocaust Remembrance Day, the UN ushered in 2014 as the Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. The occasion was marked among other things, by the January 20 opening of a yearlong exhibit at the UN Headquarters in New York portraying Israelis as Nazis and Palestinians as Jews.

Since 2005, anti-Semitism has risen throughout Europe, as have levels of anti-Semitism among Europhilic Americans.

Jews throughout Europe feel under assault, and unprotected. The situation is so bad that Jews don’t even bother reporting most of the anti-Semitic attacks they suffer.

The more closely we consider events the more clearly we see that ironically and obscenely, Holocaust memorializing in Europe is enabling anti-Semitism.

Europeans use the focus on the Holocaust to pretend that European anti-Semitism began with the Nazis’ rise to power in 1933 and ended with their defeat 12 years later. In truth, the Nazis’ rise to power was a natural consequence of 1,600 years of European Jew hatred.

From the time of Roman Emperor Constantine, persecution, expulsion and massacre of Jews was the norm, not the exception, in European life.

Hitler and his colleagues were adored not despite their hatred of Jews and their organization of German politics around the dehumanization of Jewish people. They were supported by the Germans, and by the majority of the people in the European lands they conquered because of their anti-Semitism and their dehumanization of Jews.

This Jew hatred did not die in Auschwitz.

As Ruth Wisse explained in August 2010, political anti-Semitism was resuscitated immediately after the war ended with the establishment of the Arab League. The League’s sole purpose was to reorganize anti-Semitic politics around denying the Jewish people their legal right to establish a sovereign state in their homeland.

In other words, with the establishment of the League in March 1945, the just-ended physical annihilation of European Jewry was replaced by the campaign to deny Jews political freedom and independence in our land.

Rather than combat this affront to international law and to the Charter of the United Nations, Europe, along with the rest of the world, sought to appease, and so facilitated and encouraged Arab anti-Jewish aggression.

Continue reading.

PREVIOUSLY: "Historians Uncover Scale of 'Holocaust by Bullets'."