text:
Tag Archives: democrats
Michigan's Slide on Israel
Posted on April 15, 2021 by First.One.Through
When Israel declared its new state on May 14, 1948, U.S. Senator Arthur Vandenberg (R-MI) supported Democratic President Truman's quick recognition of the Jewish State. In his capacity as the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he said:
"The prompt recognition of the provisional government as the de facto authority in the new State of Israel is the logical and proper step following the termination of the British mandate…. It responds to a basic decision taken at the United Nations at our instance. It is a positive actions after many months of critical and unhappy indecision."
The New York Times, May 15, 1948
The State of Michigan has changed a lot in its attitudes towards Israel since 1948.
In 2019, the state had the second highest total Arab population, just behind California, counting 221,631 persons, or about 2.2% of the state which perhaps changed the tone regarding policies towards Israel. In November 2018, the state elected Rashida Tlaib to Congress and re-elected her two years later. Born in Detroit, MI, she is the descendant of Palestinian Arabs and the most anti-Israel voice in Congress today. In January 2021 she said:
"I think it's important to understand that Israel is a racist state… they don't believe that [Palestinian Arabs] are equal human beings that deserve to live."
On March 12, 2021, Tlaib penned a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken that incorrectly called "Palestine" an actual entity and falsely claimed that Israel had an obligation to provide COVID-19 vaccines to people in Gaza, the neighboring strip administered by a U.S.-designated terrorist group committed to Israel's destruction.
The letter continued with lies denouncing "Israel's ongoing colonization of the Palestinian West Bank, including East Jerusalem," as if East Jerusalem was an actual place rather than a footnote related to a city once divided by war for the years 1949-1967. Further, the "Palestinian West Bank" is Area A which Israel handed to the Palestinian Authority in the Oslo Accords. There was never a "Palestinian West Bank" before then, and it is not "colonized" by Israel.
Tlaid wrote the letter with Mark Pocan (D-WI) and secured signatures from Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Betty McCollum (D-MN), Marie Newman (D-IL), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Jim McGovern (D-MA), Andre Carson (D-IN), Chellie Pingree (D-ME) and Hank Johnson (D-GA). All Democrats.
At the time of Israel's founding, a leading Republican senator from the state of Michigan worked with a Democratic administration to support the Jewish State. Unfortunately, 73 years later, we see far-left Democrats following a shrill Congresswoman from Michigan in aggressively trying to pull this Democratic administration from supporting Israel. As it relates to Israel, mainstream Republicans and Democrats have more in common than either party has with the Socialist fringe inside the Democratic party.
Related First One Through articles:
Omar and Tlaib's Antisemitic B.D.S.
Muslim Women Debate Anti-Semitism
The Palestinian-American You Never Heard Of: Issam Akel
Seeing the Holocaust Through Nakba Eyes
The Mourabitat Women of Congress
The Veil of Hatred
Conditional U.S. Support in The Middle East
"Occupation"-Washing Honor Killings
Palestineism is Toxic Racism
The Democrats' Slide on Israel
Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough
Posted in Israel | Tagged anti-Israel, anti-Zionism, democrats, progressives, Rashida Tlaib | 1 Reply
Follow the Money: Democrats and the Education Industry
Posted on November 26, 2020 by First.One.Through
Democratic Senators Chuck Schumer (NY) and Elizabeth Warren (MA) proposed that a new Joe Biden administration immediately cancel student debt upon taking office. They proposed cancelling $50,000 for all borrowers of federal student loans while Senator Bernie Sanders (VT) proposed cancelling all student debt.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren and House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn in July 2019, well before the pandemic. Photo: Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call
This initiative has great appeal to progressives whose economic mission is to transfer wealth to lower income people. It also goes directly to big Democratic donors.
The Education Industry is Democrats Big Money Donor
Democrat Joe Biden out-raised Republican Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election by 48% ($1.38 billion to $864 million). While the legacy liberal media lies that small donors made up Biden's base, according to the non-partisan OpenSecrets.org calculations, Biden was all about big money. Libertarian Jo Jorgenson had 68.6% of her donations come in small amounts followed by Trump with 45.0%. Biden was third with only 39.3% coming from small donors.
The big money to the Biden campaign came from the usual Democratic loyalists like lawyers and lobbyists ($83 million in total, almost all to Democrats). The Education sector was even bigger, with over $110 million being contributed to the presidential campaign, of which 94.2% went to Democrats. To give a sense of scale, the hedge funds and private equity industry gave a total of $55 million – HALF as much as the education sector. The oil and gas industry gave $16 million.
Why would the education industry pour so much money into a presidential campaign? Isn't it struggling to keep up? Don't they always ask for more money as though cash strapped? If money is so tight, how do schools "donate" more money to an election campaign than the hedge fund, oil and gas, casino and gambling industries combined?
The education industry gave more money to the 2020 presidential campaign than the hedge fund/private equity, oil and gas, and the casino/ gambling industries COMBINED.
source: opensecrets.org
Public Schools K-12
The giant and powerful teacher unions are the big contributors. According to Open Secrets, "two organizations account for practically all of the contributions made by teachers unions: The National Education Association (about $20 million in 2016) and the American Federation of Teachers (almost $12 million). Both groups — which compete for members, but also collaborate with each other through the NEA-AFT Partnership — are consistently among the organizations that contribute the most money to candidates and political groups." The NEA is seemingly transparent about their partisan spending, showing on its website that 96% of its funds go to Democrats. AFT is a 1.7 million member organization headed by Randi Weingarten who makes no bones about trying to use her influence to enact liberal priorities on matters like climate change and universal healthcare.
The payoff scheme is pretty straightforward: Democrats work to empower unions whether in committing to only hire union labor or the ability to collect fees from members. In turn, the union leaders give money to Democrats and push their members to vote for their candidates. These paid-for local Democratic politicians now negotiate the contracts of the people who just helped give them their jobs, a much more loyal base than exists among taxpayers. The Democratic politicians give the unions favorable pay increases and the best healthcare and pension benefits found in the country, far superior than non-unionized citizens.
The cost for K-12 public education has ballooned under this corrupt money transfer scheme where Democratic politicians pour taxpayer money into unions who in turn pour money back into their election campaigns.
According to the US Census Bureau, the per pupil cost to educate public school students consistently rises more than inflation. In 2016, the average cost for a pubic school student was $11,763 while in 2013 it was $10,724, a 10% increase in just three years. That's OVER THREE TIMES the 3.0% inflation of the consumer price index in that time period.
The ramp in expenses is due to a variety of items including building state-of-the-art facilities and professional-quality ball fields as well as a range of inclusion and enrichment programs for students who need more help. But the biggest costs are the teacher salaries and benefits. In 2016, 88% of the $665 billion of U.S. public school costs were in "Current Spending" of which 65% was for salaries and 35% for benefits.
Teachers' unions focus on their core constituents – the teachers – not the students. The unions protect even the weakest non-performing teachers, making it almost impossible to fire anyone. Employees of the public education system have health and retirement plans which are the envy of CEOs of large corporations. Teachers and administrators get to retire in their 50's with amazing benefits throughout retirement while fellow citizens must work into their 70's. Of course, there are summers off and the occasional sabbatical, unique to the education industry. It is estimated that between 2001 and 2018 the proportion of the educational budget that went to retired teachers grew from 7.5% to 14.4%. Those fixed liabilities keep growing and are crowding out funds for children. The teacher unions prioritize their own early retirees over children and the future.
Teacher unions prioritize their own early retirees over children and the future.
Free K-12 public school is not so free to taxpayers. It is one of the major wealth transfer schemes in America where the wealthier people who own homes shoulder 65% of the costs of public school via property taxes. The wealthy and religious, who are much more likely to send their children to private school, are effectively taxed twice by paying for the services for a second time.
Public and Private Colleges
The inflated costs for education do not stop at high school and Democrats' fingerprints are here as well.
From 1998 to 2018, the inflation for a vast range of items was 56%. The items with the highest inflation were hospital services (+211%) and colleges (+184%). A year of college today costs an average of $26,820 for in-state public college, $43,280 for out-of-state, and $54,880 for private colleges.
The cost for these degrees is beyond the budget of most people, so they apply for grants, scholarships and student loans. If it were not for the loans, many could not attend school or be forced to attend a lower cost community or in-state school.
The student loan market now stands at $1.6 Trillion. Roughly 66% of borrowers who attended public college have an average loan balance of $25,550. Graduates of private non-profit colleges have more debt, with 75% owing student loans averaging $32,300. The biggest borrowers are for private for-profit colleges where 88% of graduates have debt averaging $39,950.
Note the trend lines. The facts continue to paint an interesting story.
According to a Pew study, the number of poor and non-White people attending college increased significantly between 1996 and 2016, with the share of college students from poor households going from 12 percent to 20 percent over those 20 years, and non-White students jumping from 29 percent to 47 percent. The greatest growth occurred in private for-profit colleges, where 58 per cent of undergraduates were non-White in 2016.
The private for-profit colleges run a very different program than local colleges. As described in The Best Schools, "For-profit colleges often have higher acceptance rates than their non-profit counterparts. Many for-profit schools have an open admissions policy, meaning that they admit all who apply and meet specific, noncompetitive criteria, regardless of grades, test scores, etc. Typically schools with open enrollment only require that applicants have a high school diploma or GED certificate. For students who might struggle to gain admission to schools with competitive admissions requirements, a for-profit college might provide an open door that leads to further academic and career success." As students with poor grades want to be able to get good jobs that often come with a college degree, they buy their college degrees at these for-profit institutions.
More poor and non-White students attending these schools are increasingly defaulting on the loans they take out for tuition. According to a report by the U.S. Department of Education, "Looney and Yannelis (2015) found that, between 2000 and 2014, the substantial increase in borrowers and the doubling of loan default rates were associated with attending for-profit, and to a lesser extent, 2-year and other nonselective institutions. Among students attending 2-year institutions who borrowed, for-profit students borrowed four times the amount borrowed by their peers who attended public colleges (Belfield 2013)."
The higher default rates are not only associated with the more expensive tuition costs at the for-profit colleges. The same report noted "on average, employment and earnings are higher for students who attend public or nonprofit institutions (Liu and Belfield 2014; Deming, Goldin, and Katz 2012). Six years after beginning their programs, students who ever attended for-profit institutions were more likely than students who attended only public and nonprofit institutions to be unemployed or out of the labor market, and they earned less than students with similar student characteristics and school completion rates did (Liu and Belfield 2014)."
The private for-profit college industry is seemingly taking advantage of everyone: the poor and non-White communities by awarding degrees at a high cost with seemingly lower ultimate earnings, and the American taxpayers who fund the loans to these students which are not being paid back.
Enter Democrats.
Rather than fight to remove the accreditation of these private for-profit colleges which fail everyone or refuse to give student loans to students with poor grades (or cap the loan amounts at a minimum as the poor grades are the underlying reason many apply to the schools), Democratic politicians are making the grand generous offer – WITH YOUR MONEY – to bail out people with high student debt because most of them are non-White. Far-left Rep. Ayana Pressley (MA) was clear in that point when she argued that cancelling student loan debt will "close the racial wealth gap." The scheme also keeps these for-profit colleges afloat as they need the students and tax-payer funded student loans to pay their shareholders. Democrats need these institutions around to keep churning out degrees for people with poor grades who cannot get accepted to other colleges.
Knowing that the student demand is there and the loans are available, colleges have little incentive to cut costs including terminating the system of professor tenure and sabbaticals as well as renegotiating teachers' pension largess. There is also no reason to turn away applicants with poor grades as the American tax-payers fund the farce. Democrats join the joke as they hand-out money and college degrees to loyal constituents – the education industry, the poor and non-White communities.
The education industry is a runaway freight train and Democratic politicians are gleefully throwing away the brakes.
New York Times Reprints Union Manifesto
The New York Times Recognizes the Problem of Municipal Unions, Selectively
The Democratic Socialists Tell Lies and Half Truths About Lobbyists
Posted in Uncategorized, USA | Tagged college, democrats, public schools, public unions | 5 Replies
Progressives Judge Past American Actions and Ignore Today's Foreign Culture
Posted on June 30, 2020 by First.One.Through
Progressives in America have taken a liking to toppling statues of famous people who do not measure up to their views of purity. Statues of presidents like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are viewed as insulting to Black people because they owned slaves 250 years ago. They condemn their legacy and view them as racists who should be banned from the public sphere. So shall they be unwritten; so shall they be undone.
It is curious that these same progressives have no issue judging people who lived hundreds of years ago but cannot make a passing comment to criticize countries with racist, homophobic, misogynistic and antisemitic behavior, particularly those from Brown and Black societies.
Consider Iran, a country which progressives insist should have a legal pathway to nuclear weapons. The Iranians hang gay people in the streets and execute minors. No worries. Former President Obama said they will probably come around in ten years and may even drop from the leading state sponsors of terrorism list, so his nuclear deal had a sunset while it left the country's nuclear infrastructure intact.
Think of Ghana, home of the Khente cloth worn by the most powerful Democrats in Congress as they bent a knee in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement. No, George Floyd wasn't born in Ghana; he was American. But Ghana does imprison gay people for life. Seems like it's a logical country to honor.
Leading Democrats don Ghana Khente cloth and bend a knee
Somalia, birthplace of Ilhan Omar (D-MN), has public executions for adultery, usually by stoning. Gays are killed by the al-Shabab terrorists who roam the land. Yet Omar has defended Somalia.
Omar gave a pass to Turkey, one of the largest jailers of journalists every year. She refused to acknowledge and condemn Turkey's genocide of Armenians a century ago. Could it be because she wanted Turkey to provide aid to her old homeland of Somalia, as Turkey pushes its influence into the horn of Africa to confront Saudi Arabia?
Another member of the progressive wing of Congress, Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), has Palestinian parents and is proud of her heritage. Palestinian law excuses men who kill women who "shame" family honor. The Palestinians are also the most antisemitic people in the world, with 93% holding antisemitic views. They elected the terrorist group Hamas to 58% of parliament with an antisemitic charter which blends Hitler's Main Kampf and the forgery Protocols of the Elders of Zion. They elected a president who wrote his doctoral thesis on Holocaust denial and demands a country free of Jews. The Palestinian Authority has a law which calls for the death sentence for any Arab who sells land to a Jew. Tlaib ignores it all (or agrees with such sentiments).
Mauritania is a 100% Muslim country governed by sharia law which still has slavery. The United Nations didn't seem to care as it voted the country to the Human Rights Council. Yet progressives still believe that the opinions and rulings of the corrupt world body should carry weight.
Uzbekistan is considered among the worst countries in the world according to Freedom House and also has slavery today – as much as 4% of the population according to some counts. Obama awarded this tyrannical country the largest military donation ever to a country in central Asia.
The Clinton Foundation received millions of dollars from foreign entities, with more than 40 per cent of the large donors coming from outside the United States. Saudi Arabia gave Clinton $10 million, that same country that doesn't allow a woman to leave home without permission of the male head of household or to drive and that publicly beheads adulterers (including women accused of rape) and those who convert from Islam, a right guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The country hit a new record of executions with 184 in 2019, many of them religious minorities.
The South American country with the worst human rights is Venezuela according to Freedom House. No matter. The champion of progressives, Sen. Bernie Sanders, was the only Democratic candidate for president who would not condemn the far left Maduro government's corruption and failed socialist economic policies.
Amid the COVID pandemic, Senator Elizabeth Warren along with other alt-lefters like Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley and Barbara Lee singled out Iran as a country to get aid to fight the pandemic. A few days earlier Warren asked for money to be sent to the Palestinian Authority. Eventually, U.S. territory Puerto Rico showed up on her radar worthy of care.
Progressives defend and support some of the worst regimes regarding slavery and human rights abuses but cannot fathom seeing a statue of the founding figures of the United States on a pedestal. To suggest that the underlying reason is because the statues are of White men and that the offending countries are headed by Black and Brown people would let your privilege show, so no one utters the obvious.
Considering that much of the world has a human rights record today that falls short of America 250 years ago is too woke for progressives. We are in the midst of a purge, and it is not of relics and racism but the position of the patriarchy.
Related First One Through articles
Murderous Governments of the Middle East
Americans Welcome the Philosophy of ISIS
BDS is a Movement by Radical Islamists and Far-Left Progressives to Block Your Freedoms
Black Antisemitism: The Intersectional Hydra
The Media Cares Much More About Journalists Than Children
The Insidious Jihad in America
Rep. Ilhan Omar and The 2001 Durban Racism Conference
Related First One Through videos:
Drive in Saudi Arabia (music by The Cars)
The Crime of Being Gay (music by Boy George)
Fragile Beauty in the Far East (music by Bon Jovi)
Posted in USA | Tagged anti-gay, anti-Semitism, democrats, progressives, racism | 8 Replies
Adam Schleifer Shares His Positions on Israel
Posted on June 9, 2020 by First.One.Through
Adam Schleifer is running for Congress in New York's 17th District.
In response to the First One Through article posted on June 5 about the Israel positions of the various Democrats competing for Nita Lowey's seat, Schleifer's team updated the candidate's website with a section called "Strong, Sustainable US-Israel Relationship." The section contained over 1,000 words and covered Schleifer's Jewish background, the benefits to America from its relationship with Israel, thoughts about peace in the region and analysis of how best to deal with Iran and its threat to the region.
Schleifer also spoke with me directly about his positions on Israel which are shared in a condensed, summarized fashion below.
First One Through: Question on Jerusalem: As recently as 2008, the Democratic platform stated "Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel." The statement was contested at the Democratic convention floor of 2012 but approved. In 2016, President Obama let a United Nations Security Council resolution pass which declared that Israel's control of the eastern half of Jerusalem was "illegal." However, President Trump later recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital and moved the US embassy there. What is your position about the city? Would you move the US embassy out of Jerusalem or change the recognition of the city?
Adam Schleifer: Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. While I am not the president, I will take no action to undue the recognition of Jerusalem nor would I move the US embassy from the city.
FOT: Borders: President George W Bush wrote a letter to Ariel Sharon in 2004 that stated "it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949." Virtually identical language was used in the official Democratic platform of 2008 only to be removed under Obama's presidential tenure. For his part, Trump stated that "the establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se inconsistent with international law." What do you think should be the basis for the borders and how does it impact your view of Israelis living east of the Green Line?
AS: I will not dictate or opine where the borders should be. The goal of America should be to get two parties [Israel and the Palestinians] to start negotiating with each other. They need to figure out out a number of details about how to exchange various parcels of land, and how to accommodate the demographic realities of various areas versus the legal claims to the same, including how to get the disconnected occupied territories to become connected by a transit route.
Right now we don't have good parties in the mix. Arafat walked away from a historic opportunity in 2000 (I was in DC watching with sadness as the deal unraveled) and Hamas is terrible and not a partner for peace. I won't get into whether I think Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is a good guy or not; that's not our role. We just need to be constructive in getting the parties talking.
The reality is that under international law most legal opinions conclude that the territories are "occupied" in violation of that law, whatever the historical, moral and practical realities of the situation. It's also true that the Israeli government's actions of building settlements in far out places and areas that are almost certain to conflict with an orderly peace process and is a recipe for difficulty both for the Palestinians and Israel to ultimately dismantle.
FOT: Palestinian State: The UN Declaration of Human Rights states that all people should have self-determination, however, the UN declared that Palestinians also have a unique "inalienable right" to sovereignty, a sentiment that no other people in the world have. Do you believe that Palestinians have such inalienable right to have their own country, or just citizenship in some country, whether their own, Israel, Jordan or Egypt?
AS: That is not a useful question. The Palestinians operate and view themselves as having a unique culture and desire an independent state. The reality is that that aspiration will need to be accommodated as a pragmatic matter for a sustainable solution. Many other people similarly have aspirations for statehood, though, and one particularly legitimate additional example in the middle east appears to be the Kurds, who we have failed to stand by after they stood by us, and we should work to see them at least have autonomous regions permitting self-rule and determination of some form.
FOT: UNRWA: Refugees from around the world are managed by the UNHCR, taking care of over 60 million people fleeing war-torn areas, forced to resettle, build shelter and schools. Meanwhile, a distinct UNRWA handles grandchildren of Palestinian refugees who have a long-established infrastructure. UNRWA has bloated itself to provide services for people who are not even descendants of refugees and has arbitrarily extended its mandate to run until the establishment of a Palestinian State, rather than getting these descendants resettled. Do you think UNRWA should be dissolved or folded into the UNHCR?
AS: I have no opinion and would need to explore the issue further. It is clear that the UN has a very troubling double standard for all things related to Israel. Consider the UN Human Rights Committee which condemns Israel while ignoring the brutality of Libya, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Sudan.
FOT: USA as Moderator: Do you believe that the US should be the sole mediator of the peace process or should it be part of the "Quartet" of the European Union, UN and Russia? How should the America's role change in situations of it acting alone or in concert with others?
AS: The United States is now viewed as weak and ineffective on the world stage because of the current president. I am a big believer of multi-lateralism and will take the UN involvement whenever we can get it. It will lead to reigning in regional chaos and injustice.
The current president of the US unduly relies on personal relationships to manage foreign policy, but such approach cannot endure beyond his tenure. We need to map out policies beyond the particular individuals. We are in a situation now where the US has no credibility and to be effective, you have to have credibility.
Being effective also means being honest. When it comes to Israel, America is a strong friend but being a friend doesn't always mean being a non-critical friend.
We need to include other parties as part of the peace process and be an honest credible moderator to the parties.
FOT: Iran: What do you think of Iran and the Iranian nuclear deal and the withdrawal from it?
AS: The U.S. cannot allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. It is a malignant autocratic regime. We cannot allow such an autocratic regime to arm themselves. We need to drive a hard bargain for a new and better deal.
More so, the U.S. must get the whole world to empower the people of Iran. Through various means, the U.S. should push for hard sanctions to pressure the regime to make real change towards the rule of law.
FOT: Antisemitism: How do you plan on fighting antisemitism?
AS: Antisemitism is a thread that unites extremists around the world. All forms of extremism are inherently dangerous. In France they self-define as left-wing and in Poland and Hungary they self-define as far right. They are united only in antisemitism.
Education is key to fighting the hatred. Holocaust education is critical, as are instituting new laws like the Hate Crime Prevention Act. We need to be creative with actively fighting against all kinds of antisemitic attacks.
It is worth reviewing Schleifer's prepared AIPAC remarks which are now on his website.
Adam Schleifer on a trip in Israel
Subscribe to YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough
Join Facebook groups: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough
Posted in Israel, USA | Tagged Adam Schleifer, democrats, elections | 2 Replies
While Lying About Israel, Democrats Demand Nothing of Palestinians
Posted on May 8, 2020 by First.One.Through
Thirty Democratic politicians under the Obama and Clinton administrations sent a letter to the Democratic National Committee on May 4, 2020. The letter began by completely misleading its audience which led directly into slandering Israel and absolving Arabs of any responsibility.
The letter stated
"Past party platforms have rightly stated a commitment to Israel's security and included condemnations of threats and actions against our ally, in addition to embracing a two-state outcome. Those platforms have, however, also been nearly silent on the rights of Palestinians, on Israeli actions that undermine those rights and the prospects for a two-state solution, and on the need for security for both peoples."
The phrase "embracing a "two-state solution" completely misleads a reader to believing that the Democratic party platform as recently as 2008 (pre-Obama) supported the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative (1967 "borders"; Arab capital in "East Jerusalem," repatriation of "refugees"). IT DID NOT. It envisioned a completely different kind of two-state outcome.
Borders: The 2008 DNC platform stated ""All understand that it is unrealistic to expect the outcome of final status negotiations to be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949." Today, Democrats talk about the "1967 borders" as the natural orientation of the two-states, but that was not their historic vision because those "armistice lines of 1949" were never designed by the parties at that time or after to become borders.
Jerusalem: The DNC was clear in 2008 that "Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel." But the Democrats today are pushing for Israel to hand over half of its capital including the holiest sites for Judaism.
"Israeli actions" of living beyond the armistice lines including in eastern Jerusalem was something Democrats always supported until the Obama administration changed the party platform. These Obama employees who crafted the letter claim that Jews living freely somehow "undermines rights" of Palestinians. It does nothing of the sort.
The 2008 platform continued that the United States should isolate Hamas (Jimmy Carter still loves the terrorist group) and added that all "refugees" would be settled in a new Palestinian state, not in Israel. Under Obama, the statements were removed.
In 2012 and 2016, the Democratic platform became increasing less supportive and increasingly harsh in its treatment of Israel and has demanded less and less of the Palestinians.
Consider a simple desire from 2008: "a democratic, viable Palestinian state dedicated to living in peace and security side by side with the Jewish State of Israel." The new letter makes no requirement of Palestinians living in peace. Instead, it just holds up Palestinian rights:
"The 2020 platform should expressly state a commitment to a resolution of the conflict that ensures both Israel's security and future as a Jewish and democratic state with equal rights for all its citizens, as well as Palestinian rights, including self-determination, security and freedom. It should include clear opposition to ongoing occupation, settlement expansion and any form of unilateral annexation of territory in the West Bank as well as clear opposition to violence, terrorism and incitement from all sides."
Note that these Democrats seek an Israel that is "democratic with equal rights for all its citizens," but says nothing about a new state of Palestine and demands nothing.
No demand to abolish the Palestinian law which calls for the death sentence for any Arab selling land to a Jew
No call for Palestine to be a democracy and move away from sharia law
No call for allowing Jews to live throughout the land
No call for allowing Jews to pray at their holy sites
No call for striking the Palestinian law which allows for men to get a light sentence for honor killings of women in their families
Past party platforms never used the word "occupation" as Democrats once understood that international law for the past 100 years encouraged Jews to live throughout historic Palestine, understood that the 1949 Armistice lines were arbitrary and not meant to be a border, and that Israel retook the "West Bank" in a defensive battle. It was only under the watch of these same thirty Democrats who blessed the Arab demand for a Jew-free state and therefore enabled UN Security Resolution 2334 (2016) declaring Jews living peacefully in their ancient holy land as illegal. THEY MADE a basic human right illegal, and now chastise Israel for ignoring their antisemitic actions. #ResistUN
Not only are Democrats standing tall by the horrific Obama decision at the UN, but are pushing forward with attacking Israel and asking nothing of the Palestinians: a sharia-inspired Jew-free state for Palestinians and a state with full equality and no preferences for Jews in Israel which should absorb millions of additional Arabs. It's a two state solution based on 1.5 states for Arabs and 0.5 of a state for Israel.
Ben Rhodes, Former Deputy National Security Adviser in Obama administration
The letter penned by Obama's politicians which argued for "a commitment to security, democracy, and human rights," failed to seek democracy for Palestinians and human rights for Israeli Jews. It demonstrates that Israel is not becoming a wedge issue for American politicians but a symbol of Democrats abandoning the western world. Israel is just the first casualty of the their headlong embrace of non-Democratic antisemitic norms found in countries around the globe.
The United States Should NOT be a Neutral Mediator in the Arab-Israel Conflict
The Joy of Lecturing Jews
Trump Reverses the Carter and Obama Anti-Israel UN Resolutions
The Obama Administration Continues to Abandon Israel in Fighting Terror
J Street: Home for Pro-Palestinian, Pro-Peace Americans
International-Domestic Abuse: Obama and Netanyahu
Obama supports Anti-Semitic Palestinian Agenda of Jew-Free State
Related First One Through video:
The "1967 Borders" (music by The Kinks)
Posted in Israel, Palestinians | Tagged democrats, DNC, Peace process | 2 Replies
Posted on July 8, 2019 by First.One.Through
Yesterday's post called "Linda Sarsour as Pontius Pilate" got quite a bit of pushback. People wanted to know what was the point of attacking a Muslim woman who wasn't even elected to office. They asked why there wasn't an article written about President Trump and other calls of whataboutery.
Linda Sarsour is just one data point about an insidious jihad taking place in the United States.
On April 20, 2019, another Muslim woman – this one, an elected official, Ilhan Omar (D-MN) – posted a feed on her Twitter account that rebuked Christians for not realizing that Jesus was a Palestinian, the same sort of inanity produced by Sarsour on July 6.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) before Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
A few days later on May 9, the most power Democrat in office, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, invited Imam Omar Suleiman to give a prayer before Congress. Suleiman was the original source of Omar's retweet.
In reaction to Suleiman addressing Congress, Rep Lee Zeldin (R-NY) rebuked Pelosi for inviting such a divisive person to address the august body, stating.
"Totally unacceptable that @SpeakerPelosi had Omar Suleiman give the opening prayer yesterday in the House. He compares Israel to the Nazis & calls them terrorists, supports Muslim Brotherhood, incites violence calling for a Palestinian antifada & the end of zionism, etc. Bad call"
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) went into high gear with accusations of "Islamophobia," rather than address the issue that a national platform was given to a virulent basher of a strong American ally. As described in cnsnews.com:
"Ekram Haque, acting executive director of CAIR's Dallas-Fort Worth chapter, accused "anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian groups" of having "launched a smear campaign against yet another person of color and American Muslim leader in the hope of maligning and marginalizing our communities."
A brilliant continuation of lies whereby the anti-Zionists deflected the charge with charges of Islamophobia.
The CNS news site continued that Suleiman has 1.35 million followers on Facebook and 282,000 followers on Twitter where he posted comments like these:
Facebook post, May 15, 2018: "Apartheid Israel, with American funding and cover, continues to terrorize with impunity."
Facebook post, 10 August 2015: "Want to know what its [sic] like to live under Nazis? Look no further than how the Palestinians are treated daily by apartheid Israel. Sickening."
Twitter post, 30 October 2014: "A third intifada is near insha'Allah."
Facebook post, 3 August 2014: "How symbolic: 2 books buried in the rubble of a destroyed home in Gaza: One about Moses and the other about Muhammad (peace be upon them both). The Zionists are the enemies of God, His Messengers, sincere followers of all religions, and humanity as a whole."
Twitter post, 24 July 2014: "God willing on this blessed night as the 3rd Intifada begins, the beginning of the end of Zionism is here. May Allah help us overcome this monster, protect the innocent of the world, and accept the murdered as martyrs. ameen."
Suleiman/Omar/Pelosi are far cries from an innocuous and impotent "social activist" making silly remarks about Jesus being a Palestinian. This is a man calling for the destruction of Israel who is parroted by a congresswomen and speaking before Congress.
Sarsour herself has many other friends at the top of the Democratic Party that are furthering the demonization of Jews and the Jewish State.
Linda Sarsour and Cornel West, right, listen as Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders speaks in a roundtable discussion April 16, 2016, at the First Unitarian Congregational Society in the Brooklyn borough of New York. (Mary Altaffer / AP)
Sarsour has developed a very close relationship with one of the leading Democratic presidential candidates, Sen. Bernie Sanders. Sanders proudly posted her endorsement of his 2020 presidential run on his website. He clearly believes that her voice carries weight and will win him votes. (It should be noted that Sanders also posted the support of another loud anti-semite, former British MP George Galloway as well as Cornel West and James Zogby.)
Another 2020 Democratic Party presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand loudly and proudly complemented Sarsour for her role in the Women's March stating: "It was an honor to write about them." In addition to Israel-hater Sarsour, the other women Gillibrand wrote about were people like Tamika Mallory who is proud of her relationship with noted anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam. (Gillibrand has company in another Democratic presidential hopeful Senator Cory Booker who also stands with Farrakhan).
Sarsour is also close to current Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, a fellow Israel-basher (who happens to be Muslim) who was the Vice Chairman of the Democratic National Committee. The two back each other all the way.
In short, Sarsour is not some low-level un-influential community organizer. She has a loud platform and ears of the leaders of the Democratic party.
These pages have focused on far-left wing anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist elected officials including "The Democratic Party is Tacking to the Far Left-Wing Anti-Semitic Fringe," "Black Lives Matter Joins the anti-Israel "Progressives" Fighting Zionism," "An Open Letter to Non-Anti-Semitic Sanders Supporters" and "Farrakhan's Democrats" among others.
This problem is systemic and growing.
The "progressive" intersectionality movement is merging the radical Muslim jihadist sect like Sarsour/ Omar/ Ellison with the far-left Democratic leadership like Sanders, Booker and Gillbrand as well as Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris who both excused Ilhan's Omar's anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist comments. Rather than criticize the essence of the hateful American jihadists comments, the Democratic leadership is opting to condemn the targets of the smear attacks (including pro-Israel Republicans, religious Christians and and Jews) as racists. Appreciating the results, the jihadists do it again, further binding the alt-left to its cause, as the Democratic leadership seems unwilling or unable to pull itself out of the tailspin.
The insidious jihad is just getting started, and will roll over the Democratic Party should it elect a member of the far-left as its presidential nominee.
Considering Nazis and Radical Islam on the 75th Anniversary of D-Day
Bernie Sanders is the Worst U.S. Presidential Candidate for Israel Ever
#NeverGillibrand #NeverSanders #NeverHarris #NeverDeBlasio
Please Don't Vote for a Democratic Socialist
As Ilhan Omar Clearly Demonstrates, Not Every "First" is Jackie Robinson
Ilhan Omar Isn't Debating Israeli Policy, She is Attacking Americans
Politicians React to Vile and Vulgar Palestinian Hatred
Ben & Jerry's New Flavor: Milano Zio
Posted in Israel, Jews | Tagged anti-Israel, anti-Zionism, Bernie Sanders, democrats, Ilhan Omar, Linda Sarsour, Senator Bernie Sanders | 22 Replies
Farrakhan's Democrats
Posted on October 25, 2018 by First.One.Through
Louis Farrakhan is a vile person.
His long history of vilifying Jews and Judaism have long cemented his position as an anti-Semite. His recent comments referring to Jews as "termites" is not new.
Farrakhan's Twitter post October 2018
The media has long been silent about Farrakhan's repulsive attitudes and expressions. Despite the fact that his "Nation of Islam" group has tens of thousands of followers, and his marches have drawn hundreds of thousands of people, the liberal press thought that it would be better to focus their attention on a few dozen or hundred white racists than black and Muslim racists. Only CNN's Jake Tapper commented "The difference between Farrakhan and some members of the alt-reich whose heinous bigotry has received a lot of attention this past year: Farrakhan has a much larger following and elected officials meet with him openly."
The "elected officials" that Tapper referred to were all Democrats in Congress.
Keith Ellison, Democratic Representative from Minnesota and Deputy Chair of the Democratic National Committee has a long history with Farrakhan and has refused to condemn the evil in the man.
Maxine Waters, Democratic Representative from California warmly embraces Farrakhan.
The Republican Jewish Coalition called for these two congresspeople, as well as Gregory Meeks (D-NY), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Danny Davis (D-IL), Andre Carson (D-IN) and Al Green (D-TX) to resign because of their close ties to Farrakhan. Meeks and Lee opted to make clear their denouncement of Farrakhan after the RJC prompting, while the others did not. In response, the Nation of Islam called Meeks and Lee "modern-day Uncle Toms" who were doing the bidding of "Satanic Jews."
Overall, the Democratic leadership continues to be mum on Farrakhan, as they fear losing Black and Muslim voters, while they have no fear of ever losing the support of Jewish liberals.
Into the void rode the seasoned "non-politician" Chelsea Clinton who condemned Farrakhan on October 17, 2018 and called on fellow Democrats to stop being selective in condemning antisemitism:
"Comparing Jews to termites is anti-Semitic, wrong and dangerous. The responsive laughter makes my skin crawl. For everyone who rightly condemned President Trump's rhetoric when he spoke about immigrants "infesting our country," this rhetoric should be equally unacceptable to you."
How embarrassing for seasoned Democrats to be called out on something so blatantly obvious by a veteran newbie.
Think of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, a state with more Jews than any other, failing to comment on Farrakhan's hatred. He preferred to call out a political opponent as "silent on the rise of anti-Semitism," a false charge, even while he is guilty himself. Perhaps he learned the successful approach of Democrats in Westchester County who successfully tarred their opponents as "Nazis" without any ramifications.
Liberals have been arguing that someone can be against Israeli policies without being anti-Semitic. While arguably true, a unique focus on only Israel's policies and not any Arab or Muslim country's policies makes the argument flimsy. It falls apart completely when black and Muslim anti-Semites like Farrakhan are given a complete pass while white racists are loudly called out.
Keith Ellison, Maxine Waters, Danny Davis: We're talking about you.
Oh, in case you were wondering, J Street endorsed and raised money for them.
Covering Racism
NY Times Discolors Hate Crimes
Where's the March Against Anti-Semitism?
This July 4, I am Leaving the Democratic Party that Left Me Long Ago
The Democratic Party is Tacking to the Far Left-Wing Anti-Semitic Fringe
Black Lives Matter Joins the anti-Israel "Progressives" Fighting Zionism
Ramifications of Ignoring American Antisemitism
Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis
Posted in USA | Tagged antisemitism, democrats, Louis Farrakhan | 21 Replies
The U.S. is Stealing Real Choices from the Voters
The United States of America prides itself on its democracy.
Americans strongly believe that the country gives its citizens the right to choose the course of their lives, much as they can choose to elect a leader of their liking. It is a mantra that President Abraham Lincoln encapsulated in his prayer for at Gettysburg in 1863, about freedom in the USA, "that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from this earth."
Embedded in those words is the notion that ALL people have the ability to serve in the U.S. government for the benefit of ALL Americans.
But remarkably, there are some families that seemingly have a stranglehold on political office. They have names like Bush, Clinton, Kennedy and Cuomo. Brothers, sons, wives and cousins with the same last name show up as presidents, senators, governors and congressmen. Decade after decade.
The notion that any and all Americans have a shot at being a leader in government feels more like a fairy tale than a foundation principle of the country.
And it is rooted in corrupt mechanisms that those people in power use to cement their positions in government.
and the Women's Equality Party
Andrew Cuomo is the current Governor of the State of New York. He served as the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in the Clinton Administration from 1997 to 2001 (often accused of creating the foundational mess for the great housing and stock market collapse in 2008-9 due to encouraging banks to provide housing loans to people whom could not afford them) before becoming Attorney General of New York and then Governor.
Not coincidentally, his father Mario Cuomo also served as governor of New York.
But it is not just the famous name, lineage and connections that help cement Andrew Cuomo in power (his brother Chris Cuomo is a famous TV journalist). It is also very much about his gaming the system in his favor.
In 2014, Governor Andrew Cuomo – the most powerful Democrat in the State of New York – decided to launch another separate political party. If that sounds too outrageous to be true, you haven't looked into New York politics.
Noting how many women were voting Democratic, Andrew Cuomo created the Women's Equality Party. A new party, beyond his Democratic Party, solely focused on women's issues.
And who did the Women's Equality Party support for governor? A woman? Of course not. It backed its creator, Andrew Cuomo.
When an average New Yorker went in to the voting booth to elect a governor in 2014, did he or she get to choose from a wide array of candidates? There were many parties listed on the ballot including the Green Party and the Independence Party and the Reform Party…. so many choices beyond the major Democratic and Republican Parties.
But the long list of parties posted a fiction. There was no choice.
Andrew Cuomo was not only listed as a candidate by the Democrats, but by the Working Families Party, the Independence Party, and the Women's Equality Party. Rob Astorino of the Republican Party also showed up under the Conservative Party and the Stop-the Common-Core Party (now called the Reform Party).
Two individuals showed up seven times to voters!
How impressive these candidates must have been that so many parties endorsed them! And the Women's Party endorsed Cuomo too! He must be extremely pro-women, even if no voter could recall anything he did for women as the sitting governor. (Of course there was no footnote on the voting form that Cuomo himself created and named this new party to ensnare those single-issue voters).
But the Cuomo machinations were not done.
You see, New York State has some funky rules for getting on the Voter Registration Form. A party must have at least 50,000 votes in the governor contest to appear as an "official party" over the next four years. For Cuomo's new entity to get staying power, he needed to funnel some of the votes that would normally come to him via the Democratic, Working Families and Independence Parties to come through the Women's Equality Party to establish it for the next several years.
And wouldn't you be shocked to learn, that of the over 2 million votes that Cuomo received in 2014, just over 53,000 – barely enough – came from the Women's Equality Party. Just enough to be on the New York Voter Registration Forms. What a happy coincidence! Wink.
Not only did New Yorkers have few choices for governor despite the multiple parties in the race, they were deceived and manipulated by Cuomo and the New York Board of Elections.
Libertarians – The Invisible Third Party
In the 2014 New York governor contest, the Green Party and Libertarian Party each promoted a distinct candidate not named Cuomo or Astorino. The Green Party candidate won almost 5% of the vote, but the Libertarian candidate only gathered 17,000 votes. Due to New York State rules of needing 50,000 votes to be an "official party," the Libertarians are now invisible on New York State Voter Registration Forms.
VoterRegistration2015
The Libertarian Party had the third greatest number of votes in the 2016 presidential election. The Libertarians won more votes than all of the minor parties COMBINED.
But if you want to register as a Libertarian in New York, you have to skip over eight other choices and go to the "Other" category and type in "Libertarian."
Don't think there's an impact? Here are the totals of registered voters in New York as of April 2018:
Democrat 6,201,033
Republican 2,823,758
Independent 481,831
Conservative 155,500
Working Families 46,453
Green 29,787
Other 7,329 (including Libertarian)
Women's Equality 4,675
So how does the Women's Equality Party get 53,000 votes when fewer than 5,000 people are registered with the party? Well there are over 2.6 million people that didn't affiliate with any party. And of course, there's Cuomo's influence that helped make it happen.
It would have been so much easier to just be a politician from royalty and cook up your own political party…
The Majors at the Margins
and the Minors at the Edges
Voters are increasingly disillusioned by the Democratic and Republican Parties, which have become more and more extreme as they fight to appeal to the excited base at the margins through their respective primaries. As of 2017, Liberals accounted for 48% of the Democratic Party, dwarfing the middle of the road Conservative Democrats which are down to just 15% of the party (and shrinking). The Republicans' situation is not better. To review the Republicans on the Judicial Committee which approves judges, is to look at a cast of characters that are all almost exclusively Conservative purists (only three of eleven members had a GovTracks rating of under 0.85 – Chuck Grassley; Lindsay Graham; and Ben Sasse).
Meanwhile the small niche single-issue parties like the Green Party continue on their extremist ways. They either push an extremist candidate like Jill Stein (Green Party), or endorse the Democrat or Republican candidate, to stay relevant and on the voter registration forms. Ideological purists on one hand, or tools of the establishment and election committees on the other.
The dynamic has led to a false array of choices which have become more extreme, and single issue marginal candidates. You can either binge watch Law & Order on Netflix or three different cable channels OR you can watch SproutTV and wait for the cable channels to drop it from the visible universe.
Needed Overhaul
It is time to dramatically overhaul our election system to bring genuine mainstream choices back to voters.
Any political party that wins at least 2.5% of the votes in the last presidential election should be on every state's voter registration form
If a political party does not field a distinct candidate from the other parties for two consecutive election cycles, it gets removed from the state's voter registration form
If a political party does not field a distinct candidate from the other parties for three consecutive election cycles, it does not appear on the election form
The threshold of reaching the voter registration form should be 1.0% of the gubernatorial election, not 50,000 (in New York). An absolute number is unfair, especially if few voters turn out, and it should become a standard for all states.
Any candidate from any party that calls for violence against a U.S. citizen must be removed from the ballot. It is time to bring back the most basic level of civility.
The founding fathers of the United States imagined a country based on the principles of freedom and liberty and feared the abuse of power and the coercive nature of people who played games with election process, money and judges. President James Madison may have had Andrew Cuomo (and his family, appointees and political parties) in mind when he said:
"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
Americans are being robbed of quality moderate choices for leadership positions, and the runaway train seems to be just gathering steam.
Naked Democracy
Let's Make America VOTE Again
Libertarian Validation and Absolution
In Defense of Foundation Principles
Losing Rights
A Country Divided
"Coastal Liberal Latte-sipping Politically-correct Out-of-touch Folks."
Is Calling Someone a 'Nazi' Simply a 'Poor Choice of Words?' Ask a Westchester Democrat
Posted in USA | Tagged Andrew Cuomo, democracy, democrats, Republicans | 11 Replies
The Democratic Party of No Takes on the Supreme Court
There was a time when bipartisanship had a place in Washington, D.C., especially as it related to nominations to the Supreme Court.
In July 1993, Democratic President Bill Clinton nominated Ruth Bader Ginsberg to be an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court. She was approved unanimously by both the Democrats and Republicans on the Judicial Committee, even though she was – and continues to be – an extreme liberal in her rulings.
The following year in July 1994, Bill Clinton nominated Stephen Breyer to be an Associate Justice. Like Bader Ginsberg, he was approved by an 18-to-0 margin. Every Republican approved his nomination.
All of that changed a decade later under a Republican administration.
When Republican President George W. Bush nominated Stephen Roberts in September 2005 to be Chief Justice, he was only approved by a 13-to-5 margin. All ten Republicans on the committee approved him, but only three of eight Democrats approved the nomination (Patrick Leahy of Vermont; Herb Kohl of Wisconsin; and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin).
Samuel Alito's January 2006 nomination was even more contentious. While all ten Republicans approved his nomination, none of the eight Democrats voted in favor of him. Zero percent.
The Republicans have never uniformly voted against Democratic presidential Supreme Court nominees including Sonia Sotamayor in July 2009 (6-to-1 against) and Elana Kagan in July 2010 (6-to-1 against). But the Democrats would be absolutists and do it again under Republican President Donald Trump in April 2017, with all nine Democrats opposing Neil Gorsuch.
The Democratic Party of No has promised to take a similar stance for the replacement for Justice Anthony Kennedy. Left wing-radical Senator Elizabeth Warren has been calling on Republicans to vote against an "extremist" Trump nominee. Quite a bizarre and telling comment from an extreme liberal senator and after Justice Gorsuch proved himself to be a more moderate than either Bader Ginsberg and Sotamayor.
The Democrats have become so disoriented in the far left fringe, that even moderate Conservatives are considered unacceptable extremists. Democratic President Barack Obama noted that his party had run off the rails after the 2016 presidential loss saying that "Democrats are characterized as coastal liberal latte-sipping politically-correct out-of-touch folks." It is not a characterization. It has become a fact.
Here are the Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee (and their GovTracks ideological score, with 0.0 being the most extreme liberal, 0.5 being a perfect moderate and 1.0 being a full conservative) who will consider the nominee to replace Justice Kennedy:
Diane Feinstein (0.18)
Patrick Leahy (0.23)
Dick Durbin (0.17)
Sheldon Whitehouse (0.19)
Amy Klobuchar (0.38)
Christopher Coons (0.39)
Richard Blumenthal (0.16)
Mazie Hirono (0.18)
Cory Booker (0.21)
Kamala Harris (0.14)
As seen above, almost all of the Democrats on the committee are extreme liberals with the exceptions of Senator Chris Coons of Delaware and Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota. They are the the keys to a rationale bipartisan review of the Supreme Court nominee. Contact Senator Coons and Senator Klobuchar to let them know of your desire to have a thoughtful – not knee-jerk – review of this most important position.
"I am part of First.One.Through, a group of people dedicated to a thoughtful and honest review of issues in the hopes of bettering our society.
I am writing in regards to your role on the Judiciary Committee. Republicans have NEVER unanimously rejected a Democratic president's nominee, while the Democrats have done that for each of the last two Republican nominees. I ask that you fight the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic Party of No and give a thoughtful hearing to the Supreme Court nominee. My sincere thanks."
I Love 5-to-4
Magnifying the Margins, and the Rise of the Independents
Liberal's Protest Bubble Harms Democracy
A Deplorable Definition
American Hate: The Right Targets Foreigners, The Left Targets Americans
Posted in USA | Tagged democrats, Republicans, Supreme Court | 1 Reply
New York Democratic Committee Doubles Down Calling Pro-Israel Republican Candidate an Anti-Semite
Politics has always been an ugly business. It would appear that the Democratic machine in New York will stoop to new lows in broadcasting disgusting libelous lies to protect the shortcomings of their candidates.
In August 2017, the senior Democratic politician in Westchester County called County Executive Rob Astorino a "clever Nazi." Almost no Democrats condemned the heinous remark of the staunchly pro-Israel Republican.
And no one seemed to care. So the entire Democratic machine got into the game.
Just two months later – two weeks before the election – the New York State Democratic Committee sent out a mass mailing to residents in Westchetser. The revolting text accused Astorino of placating anti-Semites.
Referring to an incident in November 2016 when a swastika and "White Power" were painted on a bike path, the Democratic committee claimed that Astorino said that the perpetrators had a point. That is a complete lie. The fact is Astorino stated that the graffiti was "vile," "disturbing," and would be prosecuted as a hate crime.
It is understandable that the Democratic political machine would need to lie to support George Latimer who owes over $40,000 in back taxes, who is challenging Astorino in the November 7 election. That is why one of the flier's many lies claims that Astorino wants to raise taxes (even though he has never raised property taxes in his eight years in office, while Latimer wants to raise taxes) is not a surprise. Lying to cover the shortcomings of your own candidate while pulling down your opponent has a long history in politics. Have a problem with paying taxes and being on record for wanting to raise taxes – lie that your opponent raised taxes!
But to call your opponent a Nazi and anti-Semite? What could the Democrats be trying to conceal? Is Latimer a Nazi? Are Astorino's pro-Israel credentials simply too much to overcome?
Did Astorino visit too many area synagogues where he stated his pride in representing such an ethnically diverse and Jewish county? Are Democrats nervous about Astorino's trips to the Republican Jewish Coalition where he met with hundreds of like-minded pro-American and pro-Israel people?
Maybe it is because anti-Israel groups like WESPAC and Jewish Voice for Peace despise Astorino and actually like Democrat George Latimer. George Latimer visited and was welcomed at WESPAC events, while WESPAC protested against Astorino often.
Westchester is the eighth most Jewish county in the USA and voted for Rob Astorino, a pro-Israel Republican for County Executive two times in a row. So the New York State Democratic machine has opted to brand him as an anti-Semite. A Nazi. With outright and outrageous lies.
"Dear New York State Democratic Committee,
Is there no floor to vile slander? Don't some red herrings reek even too much for you? Are your candidates that weak that you need to call pro-Israel Republicans "Nazis" and "anti-Semites?"
When I think that the Democratic party can stoop no lower, you are there to depress me again.
Sincerely – and definitely not faithfully,
A fading Democrat"
Liberals' Biggest Enemies of 2015
Posted in Jews, USA | Tagged democrats, Rob Astorino | 2 Replies
A Unique Evil: Jenin And Holocaust Remembrance Day
Rudoren Unhinged
Samuel L. Jackson As Princess Diana On 'The Crown'
Pro Israel Advocates Should Stop Using "Judea and Samaria"
The United Nations' Sinister Attack On The Jewish State As Part Of Holocaust Event
Jews (293)
Judaism (65)
Middle East Analysis (173)
New York Times (194)
Operation Protective Edge (33)
Palestinians (342)
Political music videos (8)
Political music videos of the Middle East (39)
West Bank (29)
FirstOneThrough YouTube Channel


text:
Selinexor Improves PFS in Advanced Unresectable Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma
Gina Mauro
Editorial Director, OncLive
Gina Mauro is your lead editorial contact for OncLive. She joined the company in 2015 and has held various positions on OncLive; she is also the on-air correspondent for OncLive News Network: On Location. Prior to joining MJH Life Sciences, she worked at Gannett as a full-time reporter with the Asbury Park Press. Email: gmauro@onclive.com
Selinexor demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival compared with matching placebo in patients with advanced unresectable dedifferentiated liposarcoma, following at least 2 prior treatments.
Selinexor (Xpovio) demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) compared with matching placebo in patients with advanced unresectable dedifferentiated liposarcoma, following at least 2 prior treatments, according to results of the phase 3 portion of the SEAL trial (NCT02606461) that were presented at the CTOS 2020 Annual Meeting.
Findings showed that the median PFS was 2.83 months with selinexor compared with 2.07 months in the placebo arm, leading to a 30% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death (HR; 0.70; P = .023). Additionally, the 6- and 12-month PFS rates were 23.9% and 8.4% with selinexor compared with 13.9% and 2% with placebo.
"Dedifferentiated liposarcoma is a particularly aggressive cancer that arises in the body's fat tissue and is typically associated with high rates of metastatic recurrence and mortality. Unfortunately, there are few effective treatment options available for patients with advanced disease," said lead study investigator Mrinal M. Gounder, MD, attending physician, Sarcoma Service and Developmental Therapeutics Service, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. "The data presented at CTOS 2020 demonstrated that patients treated with Xpovio experienced a statistically significant improvement in median PFS compared to placebo in patients with at least 2 prior therapies. Extending PFS is an important clinical goal for these patients because the rapid progression of this disease often translates into early mortality."
In the double-blind, placebo controlled, cross-over SEAL study, investigators evaluated oral selinexor versus matching placebo in 342 patients with advanced unresectable dedifferentiated liposarcoma following at least 2 prior therapies.
To be eligible for enrollment, patients must have been at least 12 years old along with a body surface area of at least 1.2/m2, histologic evidence of dedifferentiated liposarcoma at any time prior to randomization and current evidence of disease requiring therapy, measurable disease per RECIST v1.1 response criteria, and radiologic evidence of disease progression within 6 months prior to randomization, and must have had at least 2 prior lines of systemic treatment. Patients on prior systemic therapy must have received their last dose must have been at least 21 days prior to randomization.
Those with well-differentiated liposarcoma, myxoid/round cell, or pleomorphic histology; known active hepatitis B, hepatitis C, or HIV infection; or known central nervous system metastases were excluded from enrollment.
Results also showed that 7.5% of patients on selinexor had a 15% or greater reduction in their disease burden, as measured by target lesion size, compared with 0 patients on placebo arm.
Cross over was also permitted on the trial in patients who experienced disease progression on placebo. The median overall survival for patients who received selinexor was 9.99 months compared with 9.07 months for patients who did not cross over to selinexor (HR, 0.69; P = .122).
Regarding safety, the most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were cytopenias, along with gastrointestinal and constitutional symptoms, all of which were found to be consistent with prior studies of selinexor. Most AEs were manageable with dose modifications and/or standard supportive care measures.
Moreover, the most common non-hematologic treatment-related AEs were nausea (81%), decreased appetite (60%), fatigue (51%), and vomiting (49%) and were mostly grade 1/2 events. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs were anemia (19%), hyponatremia (11%), thrombocytopenia (10%) and asthenia (10%).
"We are delighted to share these significant results from the phase 3 portion of the SEAL study, the first, late-stage clinical data for Xpovio in a solid tumor indication," said Sharon Shacham, PhD, MBA, president and chief scientific officer of Karyopharm, the developer of selinexor. "We believe these data strongly support our goal of developing twice-weekly XPOVIO as an effective, convenient, novel oral therapy that can extend PFS for patients with advanced unresectable dedifferentiated liposarcoma. We are especially excited by these data because Xpovio is the first oral therapy to show activity in patients with previously treated liposarcoma."
Karyopharm also stated that it expects to submit a new drug application to the FDA in the first quarter of 2021 for the SEAL patient population studied. Should the agent be approved for this indication, selinexor would be the first oral, non-chemotherapy agent available for patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma.
Selinexor is currently indicated by the FDA as a treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma and relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Karyopharm also previously submitted a supplemental new drug application to the FDA to expand selinexor's label to include patients with multiple myeloma after at least 1 prior line of therapy. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, the FDA will decide on the application by March 19, 2021.
Gounder M, Razak AA, Somaiah N, et al. A phase 2/3, randomized, double blind, cross-over, study of selinexor versus placebo in advanced unresectable dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Presented at: CTOS 2020 Annual Meeting; November 18-21; 2020; virtual. Abstract 20.
News | Sarcomas/TGCT
Frontline Pembrolizumab Improves PFS2, HRQoL in Patients With MSI-H/dMMR mCRC
Frontline Bemarituzumab/mFOLFOX6 Combo Improves Survival in Advanced FGFR2b+ Gastric/GEJ Cancer
Lenvatinib and Pembrolizumab Combination Safe, Effective For Multiple Gastrointestinal Cancer Types

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Eight is Great! Our handsome little guy was Baptized April 18, 2009 at 6pm. We had a great turn out for his big night. Grandpa and Grandma Beyeler drove up from Utah along with great grandpa and grandma, and Grandpa Vance also was able to come up. Conner had family from othello as well as moses lake attend; and some good friends. We appreciate them all for traveling such a ways to support Conner. It was a special night for him and he was so excited to have his grandparents there. I think I was more nervous than him!
They do baptisms by stake here, and there were quite a few kids, but it went smoothly, and Conner did great. He even made everyone laugh when he came up out of the water and shook his head like a fish and blubbered on about the water. He always seems to make everyone laugh one way or another. We have so many pictures from when grandparents were here and will be posting them soon. We love Conner and are greatful he has made this decision in his life.
Way to go Conner! Congratulations! So glad to see you back Jenica, I have missed you!


About 450 years ago, on August 24, 1572 the capital of France literally drowned in rivers of blood that appeared on its streets on the eve of St. Bartholomew's Day. A wave of violence swept through Paris, and later in other towns and villages. The carnage lasted for several weeks. St. Bartholomew's night became a radical change in the religious wars in France and left an indelible mark in the minds of Protestants.
In the XVI century, Europe was torn by religious strife. Catholics fought against Protestants, although, both of them were Christians. But the Protestants did not recognize the saints, the angels, the cult of the Virgin. They did not worship icons and relics. Protestants did not have monks, and they did not give the clergy celibate. But the most important was the fact that Protestants refused to recognize the authority of the Pope. They preferred receiving divine grace directly from God, without the mediation of the Catholic clergy.
Many active participants of the religious wars of that time weren't very religious. Most of them fought because of their friends, countrymen, their lords.
Charles IX and his mother, the Dowager Queen Catherine de Medici were on the side of the Catholics. Thanks to the Queen the Peace of Saint-Germain-en-Laye was signed on August 8, 1570. It put an end to three-year civil war between Catholics and Protestants, however, most radical Catholics refused to accept it. Guise family sought to avoid the presence of Coligny at court. However, Catherine de 'Medici and her son Charles IX were trying to cool down the militant mood of their co-religionists. In addition, they were accompanied by financial difficulties that forced to maintain peace and to have friendly relationships with Coligny. Huguenots had well-armed army and controlled the fortified towns of La Rochelle, Cognac and Montauban. To consolidate the peace between the two warring parties, Catherine de Medici had planned the wedding of her daughter Marguerite de Valois and the Protestant Henry of Navarre (future King Henry IV) on August 18, 1572. But neither the Pope nor the Spanish King Philip II shared the policy of Catherine.
A large number of eminent Protestants gathered in Paris to accompany Prince Henry at the marriage ceremony. But the vast majority of Parisians were Catholics, and they were against the presence of the leaders of the Huguenots. Ordinary citizens were frustrated because of poor harvests, increased taxes and increased prices, so, they were outraged by the luxury of the royal wedding.
Catherine de Medici did not get the permission of the Pope to the marriage. She persuaded Cardinal Charles de Bourbon (the only Catholic in Bourbon family) to marry a couple.
Governor of Paris, Francois de Montmorency, saw an explosive situation and left the city a few days before the wedding.
On August 22 Admiral Gaspard de Coligny was wounded in the street. At the time of the shot, he bent down to fix shoes, so he was only wounded. Suspicion fell on the royal family. Charles IX promised to punish the guilty and sent his best doctor, the famous Ambroise Pare, the father of modern surgery. However, it was impossible to resolve the situation politically. A new war was going to break out anyway. It was necessary to decide something.
So, they decided to kill the limited number of Protestant leaders to weaken their movement as an organized military force on August 24, 1572, St. Bartholomew's Day. At about 2 am Henry Guise's people and the royal guard came to the Hotel de Betizi. They killed Admiral Coligny and threw his body under the feet of Guise. Then the church bell rang. Guise and the Duke of Anjou's detachments of began to break into the houses, where the Huguenots were placed. Protestants were beaten and killed. Their actions were seen as a signal for the massacre for the Parisians. Massacre in Paris lasted a week. In twelve French cities, including Rouen, Troyes, Orleans, Angers, Bourges, Lyon, Bordeaux, Toulouse it lasted six weeks. According to some reports, the number of victims was 25 thousand people.


text:
The US assured that an invasion by Russia of Ukraine would be "horrifying" and would produce "many victims"
A drone, the best friend for the extreme 4×4 of the future
River's pass market numbers: how much did he pay for each reinforcement?
Río Negro vaccinates from today with third dose to adolescents and children
Driven by Apple and other tech companies, Wall Street closed with gains and snapped a three-week losing streak.
Simeone's moving tearful talk with his children in the Cholo documentary: the phrase that moved everyone
The Biden family has a new pet in the White House: Willow
Bonds in dollars were reborn after the agreement with the IMF: they flew up to 9.5%
Why the Monumental lawn will not be in good condition for River vs. Platense
International scholarships for the strategic development of the country
Home/News/Jennifer Lopez: What have been JLo's partners (besides Ben Affleck)?
Jennifer Lopez: What have been JLo's partners (besides Ben Affleck)?
HELEN HERNANDEZJuly 27, 2021
The so-called "Bronx Diva," Jennifer Lopez, just celebrate your 52nd birthday and she did it accompanied by the actor Ben Affleck, with whom she apparently resumed her romance of 19 years ago; but this is only one chapter of the JLo sentimental story.
Below we tell you what jennifer lopez's loves have been:
Ojani Noa
Tommy Mottola
Sean Combs (P. Diddy)
Cris Judd
Casper Smart
This man was Lopez's first love, she met him when she was 15 and he was 16, and they maintained a courtship relationship of a decade, that is, Cruz accompanied the superstar hour in his first steps in the artistic environment, but their relationship ended in 1994, a couple of years before she achieved fame. Sadly he passed away in March last year from a heart condition.
It was 1995 and Snipes was emerging as one of the most popular actors in Hollywood, it was then that Jennifer coincided with him in the filming of the film "Assault on the Money Train", but although the actor showed interest in her and even tried to steal some kisses, as Lopez would recall in an interview for the portal Remixes; JLo always made it clear to him that he wasn't interested in that way.
Jennifer Lopez's heart was captivated by a young waiter, who was also an actor and model, five years her junior and who she met in a Miami bar, when they began to treat each other they realized they had a lot in common and a few months later (February 1997) they got married, which lasted only eleven months and was followed by a fractious separation.
Before the music mogul met Thalia and was recently divorced from another music diva Mariah Carey, he had a short romance with JLo in 1999, when his musical career was beginning to take off; she has denied the relationship but the entrepreneur he has claimed that there was great chemistry between them.
EFE / ARCHIVE
It's perhaps Lopez's most outrageous relationship, which even led to her being arrested on a night out in 1999, when the rapper shot himself with another subject at a nightclub and they were arrested for fleeing the scene with a gun in the trunk of his car. For two years they were the couple of the moment, especially when JLo appeared hand in hand with Diddy wearing his iconic green Versace on the red carpet of the 2000 Grammy Awards; their relationship ended because of the musician's infidelities.
It was the year 2000 when Cris was hired as a dancer for the video of the song "Love Don't Cost a Thing", there was the crush and by September 2001 they were giving the yes, in a ceremony that years later Judd would qualify as a circus, for the attempts of the paparazzi to capture some image of the wedding; the marriage broke up in 2003 and he confessed that being married to someone like Jennifer was extremely complicated and exhausting, because there was no privacy and Lopez prioritized his career.
The stars coincided in the filming of the film "Gigli" (2002), which both starred and the romance that began in fiction, soon passed into reality becoming the couple of the moment, it took little time for them to get engaged and were about to reach the altar twice, in 2003 and 2004, but a few days after the celebration the actor canceled everything breaking with JLo. Nearly two decades later Hollywood stars they decided to resume their romance, to the extent that their respective children have already met and there is even talk of a new wedding.
His story began in 2008, when the Puerto Rican was performing on Broadway, this meeting was followed by two collaborations with the songs "No me conoces" and "No me ames", although from that moment there was already talk of a romance, it was until 2004 when the friendship passed to love and on June 5 of that year they joined their lives in a surprise wedding, held at Lopez's house in Beverly Hills. In February 2008 their children Max and Emme were born, and renewed their marriage vows in Las Vegas, but the love story ended in July 2011 when they announced their separation, but this materialized until 2014, but their relationship is of best friends and they have even lived with JLo's new partners.
Again the Bronx Diva found love between sus dancers, this time one 18 years her junior, was Casper, with whom she remained in a relationship until 2016. Some time after their separation the choreographer confessed on the show "Despierta América", that the cause of their breakup was their immaturity, in addition to having had ignorant and silly attitudes towards the pop star.
At the end of 2016 the stars confirmed their relationship with various posts on their social networks, where they can be seen in romantic situations, there was even an expensive gift of 100 thousand dollars, a necklace of Tiffany of platinum and diamonds, even appearances together in events, but this idyll lasted only two months, in which the closest ones assured, it was a relationship without commitments and fun.
The two met thanks to Marc Anthony, who was JLo's husband at the time, but it wasn't until March 2017 that rumors of a romance between the player and the singer began, but made it official on the red carpet at The Met Gala in New York. In 2018 they bought a property valued at 15 million dollars, to start their home in NY and the family coexistences, with her and him children. Even though there was a romantic request for marriage on the beach, Rodriguez and Jennifer ended their four-year relationship in April 2021.
"We realized that we are better as friends and we hope that will continue to be the case. We will continue to work together and support each other in our joint ventures and projects," reads the statement announcing their separation.
If you were interested in this news and want to know more, then download and discover INFORMAPlus, the digital application of EL INFORMADOR, where we have exclusive content, selected by our editors, to give a more complete experience to readers.
Download the app and try it free for thirty days.
For iOS: https://apple.co/35jaVgb
For Android: https://bit.ly/3gwVSEV
HELEN HERNANDEZ
Helen Hernandez is our best writer. Helen writes about social news and celebrity gossip. She loves watching movies since childhood. Email: Helen@oicanadian.com Phone : +1 281-333-2229
Angelina Jolie visits the White House to denounce gender violence
Addison Rae reacts to terrifying rumors of her death and presumed pregnancy
his daughter Zahara exudes elegance with a trouser look
LIKE YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN IT! Mia Khalifa steals Tik Tok by singing reggaeton song | VIDEO
Ben Affleck referred to the filming of "The Justice League" as "the most awful experience" – Showbiz


display_theme Prints a theme on the Install Themes pages.
display_themes Display theme content based on theme list.
install_themes_dashboard Display tags filter for themes.
install_themes_feature_list Retrieve list of WordPress theme features (aka theme tags).
install_theme_information Display theme information in dialog box form.
install_theme_search_form Display search form for searching themes.


text:
Home » Conference Coverage » ESMO 2021
Superior Efficacy With Copanlisib Plus Rituximab vs Placebo Plus Rituximab in Patients With Relapsed Marginal Zone Lymphoma
Lauren Dembeck, PhD
Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to copanlisib plus rituximab or placebo plus rituximab. Source: Getty Images
The following article features coverage from the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2021. Click here to read more of Hematology Advisor's conference coverage.
Copanlisib plus rituximab demonstrated superior efficacy relative to placebo plus rituximab in patients with relapsed marginal zone lymphoma (MZL), according to the results of a subgroup analysis of the CHRONOS-3 trial. These findings were presented by Muhit Özcan, MD, of Ankara University School of Medicine in Turkey, during the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2021.
CHRONOS-3 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02367040) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study that previously demonstrated a 48% risk reduction in disease progression/death with the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitor copanlisib plus rituximab compared with placebo plus rituximab in patients with relapsed indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL).
The study included patients with relapsed iNHL who were progression- and treatment-free for 12 months or longer after rituximab-based therapy or 6 months or more if unwilling/unfit to receive chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to copanlisib plus rituximab (C+R) or placebo plus rituximab (P+R). Copanlisib (60 mg) or placebo was administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 (28-day cycle); rituximab (375 mg/m2) was administered intravenously on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 3, 5, 7, and 9. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).
Of 458 participants in CHRONOS-3, 66 patients with MZL were randomly assigned to the C+R arm and 29 to the P+R arm, with median ages of 66 years (range: 37-91) and 63 years (range: 46-76), respectively. MZL subtypes included nodal (39%), extranodal (37%), and splenic (24%).
At a median follow up duration of 18 months, C+R significantly reduced the risk of disease progression/death relative to P+R (median PFS, 22.1 vs 11.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.47; 1-sided P =.012). Objective response rate was significantly higher with C+R (76%, with a complete response rate [CRR] of 39%) compared with P+R (41%, with a CRR of 10%; P <.001). These findings appeared to be consistent across subtypes; however, the sample sizes were limited.
Median duration of response was 25.4 months for patients in the C+R arm and 9.3 months for those in the P+R arm, and median time to progression was 33.2 months and 11.5 months, respectively. The median overall survival was not evaluable.
The safety profile of C+R was consistent with that of each agent as monotherapy. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; all grade/grade 3+) in the C+R arm were hyperglycemia (65%/54%), hypertension (54%/45%), diarrhea (32%/1.5%), and pyrexia (25%/5%). The most common TEAEs in the P+R arm were hyperglycemia (24%/10%), cough (24%/0%), and upper respiratory tract infection (24%/0%). TEAEs considered related to C/P included hyperglycemia (63%/24%) and hypertension (54%/17%). Pneumonitis was evaluated as an AE of interest and occurred in 9% of the C+R arm and 5% of the P+R arm. No grade 5 AEs occurred.
"In conclusion, copanlisib is the first PI3 kinase inhibitor to be safely combined with the rituximab in a phase three setting in patients with relapsed MZL, representing a potential new therapeutic strategy," said Dr Özcan.
Disclosure: This research was supported by Bayer AG. Some study authors declared affiliations with biotech, pharmaceutical, and/or device companies. Please see the original reference for a full list of authors' disclosures.
Read more of Hematology Advisor's coverage of ESMO 2021 by visiting the conference page.
Özcan M, Jin J, Szomor Á, et al. Copanlisib plus rituximab vs placebo plus rituximab in patients (pts) with relapsed marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) treated in the phase III CHRONOS-3 trial. Presented at: European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2021 ; September 16-21, 2021. Abstract 826O.
ESMO 2021 Lymphoma
Next post in ESMO 2021
Technology-Based Psychosocial Program Effective for Adolescent Leukemia Survivors
Close more info about Superior Efficacy With Copanlisib Plus Rituximab vs Placebo Plus Rituximab in Patients With Relapsed Marginal Zone Lymphoma


text:
Boris Could Agree Reheated Version of May's Deal, Showdown with 'Spartans' Looms
Mounting that evidence that Prime Minister Boris Johnson is willing to sign up to Theresa May's withdrawal treaty with the European Union minus its contentious "backstop" may lead to a showdown with Tory Brexiteers on his backbenches.
The former prime minister's thrice-rejected Withdrawal Agreement with the EU is not a final deal, but merely secures a so-called "transition" period of around two years — able to be extended — in which the United Kingdom leaves the European Union in name but retains all aspects of full membership, minus representation in EU institutions.
This period is supposed to be used to negotiate a final relationship, with an indefinite "backstop" incorporating the British province of Northern Ireland into the EU's Customs Union and Single Market and mainland Great Britain into an EU-controlled "single customs territory" if this cannot be achieved.
Boris Johnson's


Today's top GoDaddy coupon: Extra 30% Off Any Service. Get 12 coupons for 2018.
Are You Looking for Godaddy renewal coupon, We have few renewal coupons which will save you huge amount of money. Save 30% on all products and new products.
Get exclusive GoDaddy promo codes and coupons for the best savings and discounts on domain names, web hosting and more. Start saving today!
Best GoDaddy Coupons – GoDaddy Hosting Coupon & GoDaddy We check daily & try our best to remove expired codes & update this page with working .
Summary. Are You Looking For GoDaddy Renewal Coupon or Discounted Codes? Here You Can Get Up to 82% Discount on Domain, Hosting, SSL, Webmail Products.
These gives you a 40% off on new orders, $1 web hosting, $0.99 .Com domain, $1/year domain privacy, save 20% on renewals and more!!!
How to Save at GoDaddy. Look for GoDaddy coupon codes that meet your needs. This page updates regularly with new GoDaddy coupons, promo codes, and deals!
Not sure which promo code to use? The free Honey extension will try all 9 available GoDaddy coupons and apply the best money-saving deal to your cart.
Get 35% Discounts GoDaddy Promo Codes. handpicked the Latest Domain Names | The World's Largest Domain Name Registrar and web Hosting, Vps Online Coupon Codes and deals for godaddy.com. Make a name for yourself on the Web with Go Daddy.
Click to save big with 735 latest 2018 Godaddy promo code & coupon codes. Check out the best Godaddy promo code & coupon codes of June 2018 now.
Get GoDaddy offers & coupons code that 100% works. Grab special discount & additionally get the highest cashback from CouponDhaba on all purchases.
We update the godaddy renewal coupon each week to make sure they always work. The most recent update ensures that you will get up to 20% on renewals.
TechBargains has great deals, coupons and promo codes for GoDaddy.Today's best deal is Up to 59% off Microsoft Office 365.
Click and save big with latest 3262 Godaddy.com Promo Codes & Coupon Codes. Today's top deal: 93% off.
Click to view 3 latest Godaddy.com Renewal Top coupon & promo codes. Today's best offer is: 62% off.
Let Groupon Coupons help you save on building a web presence and blog using promo codes and deals at GoDaddy, which has more than 12 million customers and manages more than 57 million domains.
Get exclusive GoDaddy coupon codes & discounts when you join the GoDaddy.com email list. Please allow up to 3 days for coupon delivery via email from GoDaddy.
Godaddy renewal coupon latest active 30% off on all products. Special Saving for Domain, website builders, hosting, email.
© Free location coupons Incorp coupon | Promo Codes & Deals 2018 Godaddy coupon codes.