Heard on the Tom/Toms

Stephen Frank, Exclusive to the California Political News and Views,  10/25/23    www.capoliticalreview.com

SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT

 The California Political News and Views website is being moved to a new site, starting sometime today or tomorrow. 

Sorry to say that the transition will cause a pause in the publication of the newsletter for just a few days.

It will come back as as always.  If you see a story or want to give me information for a story or a portion of HEARD ON THE TOM/TOMS (HOTT), feel free to call me at 805-795-1271 or at stephenfrank@sbcglobal.net

Don’t panic—we will be back quickly.

(Periodically the California Political News and Views will publish tidbits of political news, to keep you in the loop of what the pooh bahs know.  The phrase “tom/tom’s” comes from my mentor, Lorelei Kinder who never passed a rumor, just called to tell me what she heard on the “TomTom’s”.  This column is named in her honor.)

California is in collapse.  Here are the population numbers to prove it:

“The exodus from California accelerated in 2022, with 817,000 residents leaving the state in 2022 for an annual net loss of over three hundred thousand residents to other states, according to new U.S. Census data. Should outmigration continue, California could lose more than the five, already projected, congressional seats it’s expected to shed after the 2030 census.” 

How many people do you know are ready to go?

Nearly 1 million residents left California in 2022 fueled by cost of living

By Kenneth Schrupp | The Center Square, 10/23/23  https://www.thecentersquare.com/california/article_d8bf3158-7203-11ee-8f06-db29911d8bb8.html?a?utm_source=thecentersquare.com&utm_campaign=%2Fnewsletters%2Flists%2Ft2%2Fcalifornia%2F&utm_medium=email&utm_content=read%20more

(The Center Square) – The exodus from California accelerated in 2022, with 817,000 residents leaving the state in 2022 for an annual net loss of over three hundred thousand residents to other states, according to new U.S. Census data. Should outmigration continue, California could lose more than the five, already projected, congressional seats it’s expected to shed after the 2030 census. 

During the COVID-19 pandemic and switch to remote work, California lost population for the first time in its existence as a state, leading to the loss of a single congressional seat in 2021 during the nation’s reapportionment of census-based distribution of the nation’s 435 congressional representatives. With a smaller congressional delegation, the state would have less power to shape federal spending. 

While California Governor Gavin Newsom has not addressed the new numbers directly, when challenged by Fox News host Sean Hannity on California’s population decline in a June 2023 interview, he said, “.3% [population loss] during COVID. My gosh.” 

Just before the interview, Newsom’s Department of Finance estimated the state’s population had declined by 138,443 during 2022, making for a .36% population loss in a single year. Also using Department of Finance Data, the Public Policy Institute of California estimated a decline of 211,000 residents in 2022. Meanwhile, the latest Census data cited above, once accounting for a sharp rebound in immigration and decrease in deaths that offset the increase in outward immigration, estimates a population decrease of 113,000 for 2022. While the reason for the differences is not clear — the finance department notes that the discrepancy between its numbers and the Census reporting is due to different time frames being measured — the general trend of data demonstrating the state’s general population decline is consistent. 

According to PPIC polling, 45% of Californians are considering leaving the state due to the high cost of housing. Will Swaim, founder of the California Policy Center, acknowledges that housing is a major factor but that other costs, the lack of opportunity, and even the poor state of public education are leaving many Californians, especially parents, looking to move elsewhere.  

“There’s no question that housing costs are huge, but that really ignores the myriad other ways that California has simply destroyed business opportunity, especially for the working class,” said Swaim to The Center Square. “It is a very expensive state to live in and the poorer you are the more that housing cost number hurts. But how about gasoline? Every week people are putting almost double what our fellow Americans in other states are putting in their cars.”

Those leaving the state are disproportionately younger and lower income. For many families, buying property and raising children in the state is no longer a viable option.

“We are losing younger folks, and I think we will see people continuing to migrate where housing costs are lower,” Manuel Pastor, a professor of sociology and American Studies & Ethnicity at the University of Southern California, said in an interview with the Associated Press. “There are good jobs in California, but housing is incredibly expensive. It hurts young families, and it hurts immigrant families.”

Swaim, who raised his children in California, noted that his now-adult children are left looking elsewhere for alternatives. Sharing his children’s thoughts, he said, “We don’t want our children to be educated in California’s public schools, but we want them to be educated in private schools that we can’t afford.” 

The majority of students in California public schools do not meet the state’s moderate standards for math, science, and English. When combining all sources of funding, California public schools spend approximately $27,000 per student. The Education Data Initiative estimates the average K-12 private school tuition in California is $16,337.

If you really want to become a crime victim, visit Emeryville, in the Bay Area.

“Emeryville is also home to several prominent businesses like Pixar, Peet’s Coffee, and Clif Bar. Nevertheless, beneath the veneer of economic prosperity and cultural diversity, Emeryville harbors a darker side.

In 2020, Emeryville reported 1,124 instances of violent crime and 16,528 property crimes per 100,000 residents. This translates to a violent crime rate of 11.24 and a property crime rate of 165.71 per 1,000 residents, significantly exceeding state averages of 4.46 and 23.97, respectively.”

The good news?  Crime is up, arrests are down and Newsom is in China.  Note our Governor continues to ignore our crime problems.

This California City Has Been Named the Highest Crime Rate in the State

by ktoy1047, 10/21/23    https://ktoy1047.com/this-california-city-has-been-named-the-highest-crime-rate-in-the-state/#google_vignette

FacebookTwitterlinkedinPinterestGoogle+RedditMixTumblr

California, renowned for its sunny climate, diverse culture, and thriving economy, isn’t without its pockets of safety concerns. Some Californian cities grapple with high rates of crime, encompassing both violent and property offenses. This poses a real challenge to residents and visitors. In this article, we delve into the most hazardous city in California, as determined by the latest FBI crime data, and explore potential reasons behind its crime issue and strategies for improvement.

Emeryville: The Most Dangerous City in California

According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, Emeryville claims the dubious distinction of being California’s most dangerous city. Nestled in Alameda County, this city boasts a population of just over 10,000 residents and sits in close proximity to Oakland and Berkeley. Emeryville is also home to several prominent businesses like Pixar, Peet’s Coffee, and Clif Bar. Nevertheless, beneath the veneer of economic prosperity and cultural diversity, Emeryville harbors a darker side.

In 2020, Emeryville reported 1,124 instances of violent crime and 16,528 property crimes per 100,000 residents. This translates to a violent crime rate of 11.24 and a property crime rate of 165.71 per 1,000 residents, significantly exceeding state averages of 4.46 and 23.97, respectively.

To contextualize these figures, it’s worth noting that Emeryville’s crime rates surpass those of notorious cities like Detroit, St. Louis, and Baltimore. In fact, Emeryville ranks as the 12th most dangerous city in the United States. The most prevalent crimes in the area include larceny-theft, burglary, motor vehicle theft, robbery, aggravated assault, rape, and homicide.

Why is Emeryville So Dangerous?

Explaining the high crime rate in Emeryville isn’t straightforward. Crime is a multifaceted issue influenced by various factors, including poverty, culture, education, drugs, mental health, law enforcement, and more. However, several possible explanations for Emeryville’s crime problem include:

1. Location: Emeryville is geographically sandwiched between cities with high crime rates, such as Oakland and Berkeley. This geographical proximity creates a spillover effect, as criminals from neighboring areas might target Emeryville for its wealth and opportunities. Additionally, its accessibility via major highways and public transportation makes it an appealing target for criminals.
2. Demographics: Emeryville has a diverse population, encompassing people of various races, ethnicities, religions, and backgrounds. While diversity can be a strength, it can also lead to challenges in social cohesion and integration. Some groups might experience marginalization or discrimination, fostering resentment and conflict. Moreover, the city has a transient population, including tourists, students, workers, and homeless individuals, who might have less commitment to the city and its norms.
3. Economy: Emeryville’s robust economy attracts numerous businesses and investors. However, this economic prosperity exacerbates the disparity between the affluent and disadvantaged residents. Economic inequality and limited opportunities may drive some to resort to crime as a means of expressing frustration or fulfilling their needs.
4. Policing: Emeryville’s police department is relatively small, comprising only 37 sworn officers. This results in an insufficient police presence for patrolling the city and responding to calls for assistance. Additionally, the police department may struggle to build trust and cooperation with the community due to historical and contemporary issues like racial profiling, excessive force, corruption, and misconduct.

How Can Emeryville Reduce Its Crime Rate?

Addressing Emeryville’s crime rate necessitates a comprehensive and cooperative approach involving multiple stakeholders and sectors. Potential strategies for enhancing public safety in Emeryville include:

1. Prevention: Prioritizing crime prevention programs to address the root causes and risk factors of criminal behavior. These programs can offer education, employment opportunities, healthcare, housing, counseling, mentoring, recreation, and other services to individuals and families at risk in the community.
2. Intervention: Implementing intervention programs that aim to curb ongoing criminal behavior by providing alternatives or consequences for offenders. These initiatives can encompass diversion programs (such as drug treatment or community service) or rehabilitation programs (such as counseling or vocational training) for individuals willing to change. They should also bolster enforcement and prosecution for those who resist rehabilitation.
3. Partnerships: Establishing partnerships between different agencies and organizations involved in crime prevention and intervention. These collaborations facilitate information sharing, resource allocation, joint operations, and problem-solving among law enforcement, the justice system, social services, healthcare, businesses, media, and community groups.
4. Community Involvement: Encouraging community programs to empower and engage residents and stakeholders in crime prevention and intervention. These initiatives can promote civic participation, neighborhood watch, volunteerism, mediation, restorative justice, and other forms of collective action and dialogue.

Conclusion

Emeryville boasts numerous positive attributes, including its economic vitality, cultural diversity, and artistic creativity. Nonetheless, the city grapples with a serious crime issue that threatens safety and quality of life. To regain its reputation as a desirable place to live, work, and visit, Emeryville must urgently implement comprehensive, collaborative approaches involving prevention, intervention, partnerships, and community programs. This concerted effort can help Emeryville overcome its crime challenge and transform into a safer and more appealing city for all.

California via Guv Newsom and the National Socialist Democrats lie—and the people of Pennsylvania lose jobs and the nation gets inflation.

“Too bad for him and other Pennsylvania truck owners, because Pennsylvania’s Environmental Quality Board decided their state will automatically copy California regulations.

California’s rules will raise the price of a new truck by about one-third. Trucks that once cost $190,000 will now cost about $260,000.

California regulators said this new air-pollution regulation is needed because the trucks Wanner drives “contribute greatly to … serious health and welfare problems.”  That’s ridiculous, says Wanner. “We have come so far in the last 40 years. In 1980, one truck produced as much (pollution) as 60 trucks today.”

California is a danger to the people of the U.S.  The government lies, creates laws killing jobs, creating poverty—and many other States go along with it.  This is suicide by government.

JOHN STOSSEL: Leave It To The ‘Experts’ To Follow California Off A Cliff

JOHN STOSSEL, Daily Caller,  10/21/23  https://dailycaller.com/2023/10/21/opinion-leave-it-experts-follow-california-off-a-cliff-john-stossel/

Pennsylvania’s Peter Brothers Trucking delivers goods all across America. Owner Brian Wanner says Pennsylvania bureaucrats now are driving him out of his home state.

“We have no say,” complains Wanner in my new video. “We can’t do anything about it.”

“No say” because Pennsylvania’s new rules don’t come from Pennsylvania. They come from California.

“I don’t want to be anything like California!” complains Wanner.

Too bad for him and other Pennsylvania truck owners, because Pennsylvania’s Environmental Quality Board decided their state will automatically copy California regulations.

California’s rules will raise the price of a new truck by about one-third. Trucks that once cost $190,000 will now cost about $260,000.

California regulators said this new air-pollution regulation is needed because the trucks Wanner drives “contribute greatly to … serious health and welfare problems.”  That’s ridiculous, says Wanner. “We have come so far in the last 40 years. In 1980, one truck produced as much (pollution) as 60 trucks today.”

“So to reduce pollution, we want people to buy new trucks,” I point out.

“But if you put these costs on us that we cannot afford, we’re going to just run the older trucks!” responds Wanner.

“The regulators don’t think about that?” I ask.

“They do not!” Wanner replies. “They do not see the consequences of what they’re doing.”

Now truckers like Wanner will just buy trucks in neighboring states.

“We can go to Ohio and get cheaper trucks,” he says.

So there won’t be any pollution reduction. The new rule will just hurt Pennsylvanians who sell trucks.

Who are these regulators? Pennsylvania’s Environmental Quality Air Board is mostly made up of people from unrelated departments, like the Fish and Boat Commission, the Game Commission, the Historical & Museum Commission. I doubt that many know much about air pollution.

“The whole idea of having a regulatory board like this is, ‘Oh, these people are experts,’” says attorney Caleb Kruckenberg of the Pacific Legal Foundation, “‘They know what they’re talking about. They’re smarter than the lawmakers.’ But if you look at the board, that’s not true.  These are just random bureaucrats who work in the government, and they say, ‘I don’t know. Let’s follow California.’”

Kruckenberg is suing Pennsylvania on behalf of truckers like Wanner, arguing that what Pennsylvania does violates the Constitution.

“Nobody in Pennsylvania has ever voted for the standards that now control Pennsylvania.”

I push back. “So what? California seems to have a lot of money. I could see a state saying, ‘Yeah, let their regulators figure out how we reduce pollution, and we’ll save money doing what they do.’”

“If people want something,” Kruckenberg replies, “their legislature is supposed to pass it.”

California’s rules will soon get still more expensive because Gov. Gavin Newsom has decreed that soon, all new vehicles must be electric. 

“But electricity comes from fossil fuels!” Kruckenberg points out. In Pennsylvania, some comes from coal, and most comes from natural gas.

So to power all-electric trucks, Pennsylvania will burn more fossil fuels.

Still another problem: electric trucks are heavier.

“That’s harder on the roads,” says Wanner. Also, “electric trucks have a very low mileage radius, so you can’t work all day. It’s nothing that you can take across the United States.”

Pennsylvania’s regulators don’t seem to care. They just want to do what California does.

“Why would we allow our state to give away their lawmaking procedures to California?” asks Wanner. “That’s not the American way. If we want to follow California, we can move there! I don’t want to be anything like California.”

We should follow the advice of Fascist Fauci, we should follow the science.

“Statistics Norway, the government agency that produces official statistics for that country, released a report last month titled “To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?” The report concludes:

[T]he results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations. In other words, our analysis indicates that with the current level of knowledge, it seems impossible to determine how much of the temperature increase is due to emissions of CO2.

The report looks at the last 400,000+ years of Earth’s climate history:

Yup, Norway studies show how big a cam Greta, Gore, Biden and Newsom are.  They are killing our economy based on ideology, not scientific facts.  But, we all knew this but have been silent.

ANOTHER NAIL IN THE GLOBAL WARMING COFFIN

JOHN HINDERAKER, Powerline,  10/22/23  https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/10/another-nail-in-the-global-warming-coffin.php

Statistics Norway, the government agency that produces official statistics for that country, released a report last month titled “To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?” The report concludes:

[T]he results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations. In other words, our analysis indicates that with the current level of knowledge, it seems impossible to determine how much of the temperature increase is due to emissions of CO2.

The report looks at the last 400,000+ years of Earth’s climate history:

The preceding four interglacial periods are seen at about 125,000, 280,000, 325,000 and 415,000 years before now, with much longer glacial periods in between. All four previous interglacial periods are seen to be warmer than the present. The typical length of a glacial period is about 100,000 years, while an interglacial period typically lasts for about 10-15,000 years. The present inter-glacial period has now lasted about 11,600 years.

So sometime relatively soon, the Earth is going to start getting really, really cold. This accompanying chart shows that history, based on ice cores:

Similarly, on the time scale of recent millennia, current temperatures are nothing unusual:

Kobashi et al. (2011) have reconstructed Greenland surface snow temperature variability over the past 4,000 years (until 1993) at the GISP2 site (near the Summit of the Greenland ice sheet) with a new method that utilizes argon and nitrogen isotopic ratios from occluded air bubbles (Figure B4, Appendix B). These data indicate that warmer temperatures were the norm in the earlier part of the past 4,000 years, including century-long intervals nearly 1°C warmer than the decade (2001-2010). Therefore, it appears that the current decadal mean temperature in Greenland has not exceeded the envelope of natural variability over the past 4,000 years. Schönwiese (1995) has reconstructed temperatures from ice cores in Greenland for the last 11,000 years (Figure B5, Appendix B). These reconstructions show that during the past 10,000 years temperatures over long periods were higher than they are today. The warmest phase occurred 4,000 to 8,000 years ago and is known as the Holocene Climate Optimum or the Atlantic Period.

This chart, included in the report, shows the last 4,000 years, based on Greenland ice cores:

There is much more in the report, although it is not very long. It criticizes the models on which climate alarmism is based; there is nothing alarming in the observational record:

In the global climate models (GCMs) most of the warming that has taken place since 1950 is attributed to human activity. Historically, however, there have been large climatic variations. Temperature reconstructions indicate that there is a ‘warming’ trend that seems to have been going on for as long as approximately 400 years. Prior to the last 250 years or so, such a trend could only be due to natural causes. The length of the observed time series is consequently of crucial importance for analyzing empirically the pattern of temperature fluctuations and to have any hope of distinguishing natural variations in temperatures from man-made ones.

This is another interesting point about the models:

[Global climate models] are typically evaluated applying the same observations used to calibrate the model parameters. In an article in Science, Voosen (2016) writes; “Indeed, whether climate scientists like to admit it or not, nearly every model has been calibrated precisely to the 20th century climate records – otherwise it would have ended up in the trash”. Unfortunately, models that match 20th century data as a result of calibration using the same 20th century data are of dubious quality for determining the causes of the 20th century temperature variability. The problem is that some of the variables representing sources of climate variability other than greenhouse gases are not properly controlled for during the calibrations. The resulting calibration of the climate sensitivity may therefore be biased. Further critical evaluations are given by several authors, such as Essex (2022).

Most of this is not new. The fact that the Earth’s climate has changed many times over the millennia for reasons that are not understood, and that the Earth’s climate history is replete with periods that were warmer than what we are experiencing now, has long been known. What is noteworthy, I think, is that a government agency is willing to say out loud what skeptics have been saying for years.

The Norwegians’ defection is important because climate alarmism can survive only if it is deemed an official “consensus,” so that people who point out inconsistent facts can be censored. Once the purported consensus is punctured, it rapidly becomes clear that the Climate Emperor is unclothed. Western governments (not, of course, China, India or the third world) have rushed to embrace the “consensus” because the supposed climate crisis is an endless excuse for extending government power over everything, from the largest power plant to your gas stove. And governments like power.

But the Europeans, in particular, are having second thoughts. The de-industrialization of Germany has been shocking, and millions of Europeans are wondering how, exactly, that continent will retain its prosperity when energy is so expensive that nothing can be manufactured there, and everything that Europeans do is vastly more costly than at present, with zero incremental production to balance the increased costs, and frequent non-existence, of inefficient energy.

Which is why I think last month’s Norwegian report is one more nail in the coffin of climate hysteria.

Hollywood was created by Jewish innovators.  Now the Jewish leaders in Hollywood are basically silent about Hamas.  How could this happen?

“In the days since the Hamas attacks in Israel, the powerful and the rich have truly exposed themselves.

Maha Dakhil, co-head of motion pictures at CAA and agent to Tom Cruise, Madonna, Reese Witherspoon, Olivia Wilde, and American Israeli Natalie Portman, this week accused Israel of “genocide.”

She re-posted, “You’re currently learning who supports genocide,” before adding her own caption: “That’s the line for me.” 

John Cusack, that one-time 80s heartthrob, wrote on X: “I was out at the Palestinian march in Chicago. What I DID hear is – we must free Palestine from a brutal occupation – people concerned for their loved ones, in a hell zone, stuck without food, water, and power.”

Marvel superstar Mark Ruffalo word-saladed on Instagram: “Concerning the tragic events unfolding in Israel and Gaza, I am grief-stricken for the unspeakable suffering and loss of life and loved ones. This horrific violence must end.

Would you sopend money on folks who supported Hitler or the KKK?  Why give any money to Hollywood?

Hollywood’s Jewish founders knew exactly what a pogrom is. So why is its elite silent on Hamas now?

By  Sara Nathan, NY Post,  10/21/23  https://nypost.com/2023/10/21/hollywood-was-founded-by-jews-but-it-ignores-hamas-pogroms/

Do you know who Hirsch, Abraham, Schmuel, and Jacob Wonsal were? Shmuel Gelbfisz or Wilhelm Fried Fuchs? And what about Herschel and Bryna Danielovitch, for that matter?

When these Jews fled Eastern Europe, they found refuge from pogroms in America, changed their names — and created Hollywood.

The Wonsols became the Warner Brothers; Gelbfisz became Sam Goldwyn and started MGM; Fuchs founded the Fox Film Corporation; and the Danielovitchs’ son, Issur, became Kirk Douglas.

Between them, a group of Jews whose families had lived in constant fear of persecution gave America, and the world, the golden age of cinema. 

Classics from “The Wizard of Oz” and “Singin’ in the Rain” to “Ben Hur” and “Gone with the Wind” exist because of them.

So why, after the most heinous mass murders of Jews since the Holocaust, is Hollywood incapable of recognizing its own history — and why does it have such a Jew problem?

In the days since the Hamas attacks in Israel, the powerful and the rich have truly exposed themselves.

Maha Dakhil, co-head of motion pictures at CAA and agent to Tom Cruise, Madonna, Reese Witherspoon, Olivia Wilde, and American Israeli Natalie Portman, this week accused Israel of “genocide.”

She re-posted, “You’re currently learning who supports genocide,” before adding her own caption: “That’s the line for me.” 

John Cusack, that one-time 80s heartthrob, wrote on X: “I was out at the Palestinian march in Chicago. What I DID hear is – we must free Palestine from a brutal occupation – people concerned for their loved ones, in a hell zone, stuck without food, water, and power.”

Marvel superstar Mark Ruffalo word-saladed on Instagram: “Concerning the tragic events unfolding in Israel and Gaza, I am grief-stricken for the unspeakable suffering and loss of life and loved ones. This horrific violence must end.

“I have no answers obviously, but I feel it is absolutely necessary to focus on our shared human existence and reality. The sanctity of our common humanity will hopefully serve to heal the unimaginable wounds of division.”

There was the bizarre letter signed by more than 2,000 actors, artists, and musicians — including Tilda Swinton, Steve Coogan, and Charles Dance — which condemned Israel without any mention of the slaughter by Hamas terrorists that started the war.

Can you see what we’re missing here? No mention of the babies burned alive by Hamas terrorists, the women raped, the Holocaust survivors ripped from their homes and senselessly killed.

As Dakhil — who later apologized after deleting the posts — and her fellow travelers wore out their fingers posting online, Jewish actress Julianna Margulies told a raw truth about Hollywood’s silence on antisemitism.

Speaking at the Variety Hollywood & Antisemitism Summit, Margulies said that she’s “trying to understand and work around why every single person in our industry isn’t standing up. I don’t understand. It is shocking.”

“Maybe they are afraid?” Margulies, star of of “ER” and “The Good Wife” mused, “I don’t know what they are afraid of. Losing followers?”

And she told how she regrets letting the costume designer place a cross necklace on her for her role as news anchor Laura Peterson in AppleTV+ drama, “The Morning Show.”

“On TV, characters are not ever wearing the Star of David. I regret that. I am sorry about that. It’s so easy to put on a cross. Why isn’t it just as easy to put on a Star of David?”

As one very high-profile — and yes, Jewish — Hollywood producer told me Friday: “This business has always had a fraught opinion, or trope-y opinion of Jewish people. 

Margulies said that she now thought the cross her character wears on “The Morning Show” should be a Star of David. “Why isn’t it as easy to put on a Star of David?” she said.Apple TV+

“At first, there was a total outpouring of support for Jews, now there is a ton of misinformation. There is a really strong side of this business that is supporting Hamas by proxy, while people would of course never say they are condoning terrorism or violence.

“Everyone is hurting.”

Even before the horror unleashed by Hamas, Hollywood had been doing its best to forget its Jewish founding fathers.

Producer John Goldwyn — Samuel Goldwyn’s grandson — turned down his invite to the September 2021 opening gala of the $500M Academy Museum of Motion Pictures, furious that the immigrant pioneers weren’t addressed.

Haim Saban, who donated $50 million to the institution (its single largest gift), told Rolling Stone: “As I walked through, I literally turned to the person I was there with and said to him, ‘Where are the Jews?’” 

The museum went on to announce a permanent exhibit called Hollywoodland, which would focus on its early founders.

Maybe Dakhil, Ruffalo, Cusack and so many more should visit — and learn the reality of the genocidal hatred the Wonsals, the Gelbfisks and the Danielovitchs knew all too well.

We Jews say “Never Again” to remind the world not to forget the 6 million Jews who lost their lives in the Holocaust, along with millions of others. 

Israel and anti-semitism are not the fashionable cause nowadays — hello, Gigi Hadid — but we must never forget what humankind is capable of. 

And Hollywood should never forget why it exists — and what its founders stood for. 

Want to buy an EV for lots of money?  This is what you will face:

“Granholm embarked on her four-day July trip through the Southeast to promote EVs and the jobs their production will create, a key selling point of the wider “Bidenomics” agenda, according to NPR. However, her journey faced several challenges related to EV charging: the vehicle she drove for the trip had a hardware issue that complicated charging, and one of her staffers raced ahead of her to reserve a spot at a charging station using a gas-powered vehicle.

The staffer would not get out of the spot when requested by a family, which had a crying infant in tow, looking to use the charging station before Granholm showed up, according to NPR. Eventually, the police were called to sort out the situation.”

Note this was done by a Biden Administration official—they feel entitled, like being a member of the Politburo.

‘Not Ready For Primetime’: EV Proponents Keep Going On Road Trips And Proving A Point, Just Not The One They Expected

•  

NICK POPE, Daily Caller,  10/21/23  https://dailycaller.com/2023/10/21/electric-vehicle-proponents-road-trips-proving-point-shortcomings/

Proponents of electric vehicles (EV) keep going on long drives believing the vehicles will perform as reliably as gas-powered cars, but end up encountering problems while on the road.

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, Ford CEO Jim Farley and New York Times reporter David Gelles all embarked upon EV road trips using the vehicles that the Biden administration is seeking to impose on American consumers in the coming decade. However, each of these trips ran into significant reliability and performance challenges that suggest the EV transition may not be as smooth as advocates anticipate it will be.

Common gripes that American consumers have with EVs include inadequate charging infrastructure, higher costs, worse performance in cold weather, battery degradation and inconsistent range, according to Top Speed. EVs can cost as much as $10,000 more than internal combustion engine vehicles, according to CBS News.  Granholm embarked on her four-day July trip through the Southeast to promote EVs and the jobs their production will create, a key selling point of the wider “Bidenomics” agenda, according to NPR. However, her journey faced several challenges related to EV charging: the vehicle she drove for the trip had a hardware issue that complicated charging, and one of her staffers raced ahead of her to reserve a spot at a charging station using a gas-powered vehicle.

The staffer would not get out of the spot when requested by a family, which had a crying infant in tow, looking to use the charging station before Granholm showed up, according to NPR. Eventually, the police were called to sort out the situation.

Gelles rented an EV from Hertz over the summer to make the 154-mile drive from Minneapolis, Minnesota, to a farm near the state’s border with South Dakota to gather information for a story about agriculture. He documented his experiences on the open road in a Thursday piece for the Times, observing that his trip was, in theory, emblematic of “the kind of long drive through sparsely populated farmland that is a hallmark of American car culture.” “The nation’s EV infrastructure is not ready for prime time,” Gelles wrote. “I recently found this out the hard way.”

Gelles described having to charge his vehicle while en route, gaining just 2% of the battery life back after 30 minutes of charging. Upon reaching his destination, he plugged in his EV to charge overnight with the cable kept in the vehicle to ensure that he would have sufficient power to make it back to Minneapolis the next day.

The next morning, the EV he had rented did not have enough power to make it back to Minneapolis, so he had to call the rental company to arrange for a tow truck to provide a ride for himself and for his otherwise-stranded EV. He made it back in time to catch his flight out, but the rental company billed him more than $700 for the services rendered.

Farley, whose company is set to lose $4.5 billion on its EV production this year, remains confident in their longer-term profitability. He embarked on a Route 66 road trip in August in Ford’s F-150 Lightning electric pickup truck, noting that “there are things you can’t learn in an office or from a PowerPoint,” in a LinkedIn post announcing the trip.

While on the road, Farley encountered inconsistencies in available charging. Some of the EV chargers he used were effective and provided a painless experience, while in another case, he had to use a low-speed charger that juiced up his truck’s battery to 40% in 40 minutes because there were no high-speed chargers available, he said on X, formerly Twitter. “It was a really good reality check,” Farley said of his experiences with EV charging, which he also described as “pretty challenging.”

The Biden administration, recognizing the up-front costs for both EV producers and consumers, has spent billions of dollars and aggressively regulated markets to facilitate its EV push. President Joe Biden is aiming for 50% of all new vehicle sales to be EVs by 2030, according to the White House.

The administration has committed $12 billion to allow manufacturers to retrofit their plants for EV production and $7.5 billion from the bipartisan infrastructure law to develop a national charging network, while the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) contains $12.5 billion worth of tax credits to entice consumers into switching to an EV, according to UtilityDive.

It is now out in the open.  The WOKE crowd has decided to expose themselves as supporters of discrimination, hate, bigotry and terrorism.

““White people are a genetic defect of blackness. Whiteness is not humanness. In fact, white skin is sub-human. White people [have] recessive genetic defects. … Black people, simply through their dominant genes, can literally wipe out the white race if we had the power to. Please, Allah, give me the strength to not … kill these … white folks out here today.” — Yusra Khogali, co-founder of Black Lives Matter Toronto.

White people “are closer to animals … they lack compassion. Melanin comes with compassion. Melanin comes with soul. Melanin connects us. So, the people that don’t have it, and I’m going to say this carefully, are a little less.” — Nick Cannon, rapper, actor and former co-host of “America’s Got Talent.”

“Jews are responsible for the majority of wickedness that goes on across the globe.” — Richard Griffin, lecturer and former member of the rap group Public Enemy.

Please note the NY Times, the Washington Post, CNN, the LA Times and the rest of the legacy media have not discussed this—nor condemned it.  Their silence is support of the hatred.

‘Woke’ liberals aren’t hiding their hatred anymore

By Everett Piper, Washington Times,  10/22/23  https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/oct/22/woke-liberals-arent-hiding-their-hatred-anymore/

OPINION:

Last week, in this column, I argued, “What happens in Israel will not stay in Israel.” I went on to warn that “the next shoe to drop may be in Galveston rather than Gaza.”

Is this warning a bit over the top, or is there a reason to take it seriously?

Well, if Solomon was right when he said, “As a man thinketh, so he is,” let’s consider what the people who fancy themselves the moral conscience of America and the West actually think and say.

Here’s a short summary.

“White people are a genetic defect of blackness. Whiteness is not humanness. In fact, white skin is sub-human. White people [have] recessive genetic defects. … Black people, simply through their dominant genes, can literally wipe out the white race if we had the power to. Please, Allah, give me the strength to not … kill these … white folks out here today.” — Yusra Khogali, co-founder of Black Lives Matter Toronto.

White people “are closer to animals … they lack compassion. Melanin comes with compassion. Melanin comes with soul. Melanin connects us. So, the people that don’t have it, and I’m going to say this carefully, are a little less.” — Nick Cannon, rapper, actor and former co-host of “America’s Got Talent.”

“Jews are responsible for the majority of wickedness that goes on across the globe.” — Richard Griffin, lecturer and former member of the rap group Public Enemy.

Whites are “barbaric devils [and] savage people [who] pump drugs and guns into the Black community, pack Black people into the squalor of segregated urban ghettos, and continue to be bloodsuckers in our community.” — Nichole Hannah-Jones, author of the 1619 Project.

“[Whites are] goblins who smell like dogs. [We need to] cancel all white people.” — Sarah Jeong, writer for The New York Times.

“I think killing the little Romanov children was justified.” — Bhaskar Sunkara, founder and publisher of the Jacobin magazine.

“Me-first capitalists … are going to be the first people lined up against the wall and shot in the revolution. I’ll happily provide video commentary.” — Dick Costolo, former Twitter chief executive officer.

“I hope [former President Donald Trump] dies. … We are waiting for [his] death.” — Zara Rahim, Hillary Clinton’s former communications adviser.

Just anomalies, you say. Well, no. Not even close.

Remember in 2020, when Black Lives Matter rioters from Minneapolis to Miami were chanting, “Death to Israel, death to America, from Gaza to Minnesota, globalize the intifada!”

Or in 2015, when BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors proudly asserted, “If we don’t step up boldly and courageously to end the imperialist project called Israel, we’re doomed.”

Or in 2012, when Rep. Ilhan Omar tweeted: “Israel has hypnotized the world. May Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.”

And how about Rep. Cori Bush equating Palestinian grievances to those of Black Lives Matter by saying, “As we march in defense of black lives … we’re saying that our own government is funding a brutal and militarized disposition towards our very existence — from Ferguson to Palestine.”

Or Rep. Jamaal Bowman, who recently posted, “As a Black man in America… my experience of systemic injustice … informs my view of what’s happening right now in Israel and Palestine.”

The list could go on and on.

Now, it is important that we not forget all of this has a broader political context. All this hate is built upon a rhetorical foundation of class conflict. Don’t forget that it was Michael Bloomberg who told us that America’s farmers “lack gray matter,” and Mrs. Clinton, who called conservatives a “basket of deplorables.”

Don’t forget it was Barack Obama who smirked at patriotic Christians for “clinging to God and guns” and that Don Lemon laughed at us for being ignorant “rubes.” And never forget that President Biden called American traditionalists the “dregs of society.”

Our country’s thought leaders have come out. They aren’t hiding their hatred anymore. They have literally told you who they are and what they think.

They have pulled back the curtain to their soul and shown you they are violent racists and arrogant classists, that they are antisemites, and that they believe those who literally rape, pillage, and behead babies are morally equivalent to those who don’t.

Jesus said, “For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.” Solomon also taught that “the mouth of the wicked conceals violence.”

Richard Weaver wrote that “ideas always have consequences.”

Maybe we should start taking these people at their word and stop excusing their foolish fixation on race, class, color and nationality as hyperbolic. With leaders like this controlling our colleges, media, courts and Congress, Galveston might not be that far from Gaza after all.

Hamas now has its own TV station and journalist on American television.

“Mehdi Hasan and his disproportionate disdain for the world’s only Jewish-majority state are once again front-and-center at MSNBC.

After a brief hiatus, Hasan, who previously worked at Al-Jazeera, the de facto mouthpiece of the Qatari government, has returned with his typically misleading rants — buoyed only by his British accent — in tow.

Reacting to President Joe Biden’s Oval Office address on Chris Hayes’ show late last week, Hasan rejected Biden’s comparison between Hamas and Russia, instead submitting that the real similarities lie between Israel and Russia.”

Hope the NBC stockholders understand their money is being used to promote Hamas and terrorism.

MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan Is Back on Air and as Anti-Israel as Ever

Isaac Schorr, Media-ite,  10/23/23    https://www.mediaite.com/opinion/msnbcs-mehdi-hasan-is-back-on-air-and-as-anti-israel-as-ever/

Mehdi Hasan and his disproportionate disdain for the world’s only Jewish-majority state are once again front-and-center at MSNBC.

After a brief hiatus, Hasan, who previously worked at Al-Jazeera, the de facto mouthpiece of the Qatari government, has returned with his typically misleading rants — buoyed only by his British accent — in tow.

Reacting to President Joe Biden’s Oval Office address on Chris Hayes’ show late last week, Hasan rejected Biden’s comparison between Hamas and Russia, instead submitting that the real similarities lie between Israel and Russia.

“It’s interesting that he decided to do a whole thing about Hamas and Russia, and linking them together. It was slightly Axis of Evil-y, putting them together, cause they’ve really got very little in common just when you look at them,” argued Hasan. “Because a lot in the rest of the world would say ‘Okay, if you’re gonna compare Ukraine and Israel,’ Biden and a lot of people in America may see Ukraine and Israel as the same. A lot of people around the world see Russia and Israel the same.”

“Israel is the occupier of the West Bank and Gaza,” he insisted, apparently unaware that Israel unilaterally pulled out of Gaza in 2005.

Hasan’s alternative comparison is strained.

The unquestioned aggressors in the two conflicts are Russia and Hamas, both of which launched brutal attacks with the explicit goal of bringing about the total destruction of their victim states, and have used the indiscriminate torture, rape, and slaughter of civilians as a means to that end.

Moreover, while Israel and Ukraine are both tolerant, multiethnic democracies that largely — if imperfectly — protect the rights of their own citizens, Hamas’ Gaza and Vladimir Putin’s Russia are two of the most notorious human rights abusers on the planet.

Likening Israel to Russia because the former has responded militarily to a ghastly terrorist attack isn’t just morally backward victim blaming, it’s intellectually embarrassing.

Hasan continued along these lines during a monologue on his own show Sunday night.

“The line that stood out on Thursday came not from Joe Biden’s Oval Office speech. It came from one of Israel’s top officials, a senior member of Netanyahu’s security cabinet speaking to reporters,” said Hasan.

He continued:

‘Hostages and civilian casualties will be secondary to destroying Hamas, Economy Minister Nir Barakat told ABC News. Even if it takes a year.’ Hold on, saving the hostages is secondary to destroying Hamas? Shouldn’t that be the main mission? There are still around 200 people being held by Hamas, according to the Israeli military, despite the freeing of two American hostages on Friday. And avoiding civilian casualties is also secondary to destroying Hamas? Isn’t making sure civilians don’t get unnecessarily killed in conflict a key part of international humanitarian law? So tonight, with an Israeli ground invasion of Gaza still looming, is this the kind of war, a year long war, perhaps, according to Israel’s own top minister, that the Biden administration has really signed up for?

It’s hard to tell if Hasan is playing dumb in this attempted indictment of Israel.

Of course, Israel will do what it can to extract the hostages taken earlier this month, but it cannot reward Hamas by sacrificing its strategic objectives to do so. The entire purpose behind Hamas’ hostage-taking was to compel Israel to negotiate after the massacre of hundreds more of its citizens. To allow the hostages’ plight to take precedence over the more important objective of eliminating Hamas would be to reward Hamas for its war crimes, encourage hostage-taking in the future, and endanger the safety of all of its citizens moving forward.

Hasan is also twisting the meaning of Barakat’s pronouncement on civilian casualties in Gaza to the benefit of Hamas. Barakat is not celebrating Israel’s intentional targeting of civilians because Israel is not intentionally targeting civilians. In fact, to the extent it can, Israel has been warning civilians to evacuate areas it intends to bomb and has issued an advisory asking civilians in the north to move south.

Hamas is attempting to stop them.

Why? Because incurring civilian casualties is a key part of Hamas’ strategy. Its perverse hope is that it can limit the consequences it suffers for its purposeful murder of Israeli citizens by sacrificing Palestinian citizens and blaming Israel for their tragic deaths. That’s also the transparent reason for its placing of missiles and other military equipment within schools, hospitals, and other ostensibly civilian infrastructure.

The use of human shields, it should be noted, is explicitly outlawed by international law. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court states that “utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations” is a war crime. But neither Hamas’ use of human shields, nor the human rights violation that constitutes merited mention from Hasan. Nor does the continued targeting of Israeli civilian centers by Hamas’ rockets, another war crime.

Hasan’s online activity has been no less biased. Last Friday — well after it became clear that an explosion at a hospital in the Gaza Strip was caused by a misfired rocket aimed at Israel by Palestinian terrorists — Hasan was peddling a report from an NGO with terrorist ties purporting to prove that Israel was responsible.

There is nothing inherently wrong with debating the merits of individual actions taken by the Israeli government over the course of the coming months. There’s little doubt that it will make costly mistakes; that’s among the prices it will pay for being dragged so cruelly and unwillingly into a war.

But Hasan’s misleading commentary, anchored as it is by grievous omissions, can only be explained by a blinding myopia.

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.

Currently, Californians on average use 87 gallons of water a day.  In seven years, 2030, you will be forced to live on 42 gallons of water a day—more than half your current usage!  How many jobs will be lost, businesses forced to leave.  Send your kids to school without a bath or shower?  This is how they will force people to leave California—ration water.

“The California State Water Board held a hearing last week to discuss how to implement Senate Bill 1157, passed by the legislature in 2022, which lowers daily indoor water use standards to just 47 gallons per person starting in 2025 and 42 gallons in 2030. The title of the hearing was “Making Water Conservation a Way of Life,” but rationing would be a more apt description of what’s coming for California’s households.

It isn’t as if conservation hasn’t been a way of life in California for decades. Despite the state’s population growing to over 39 million today, total urban water consumption in the state has been falling each year since the mid-1990s. At just over 7 million acre feet per year in 2022, urban water consumption hasn’t been this low since 1985, when the population of the state was only 26 million.”

California on track for extreme water rationing  California Policy Center,  6/22/23  https://mailchi.mp/calpolicycenter/join-us-for-cpcs-parent-union-legislative-summit-june-22-376993?e=57726d6b66 The California State Water Board held a hearing last week to discuss how to implement Senate Bill 1157, passed by the legislature in 2022, which lowers daily indoor water use standards to just 47 gallons per person starting in 2025 and 42 gallons in 2030. The title of the hearing was “Making Water Conservation a Way of Life,” but rationing would be a more apt description of what’s coming for California’s households. It isn’t as if conservation hasn’t been a way of life in California for decades. Despite the state’s population growing to over 39 million today, total urban water consumption in the state has been falling each year since the mid-1990s. At just over 7 million acre feet per year in 2022, urban water consumption hasn’t been this low since 1985, when the population of the state was only 26 million. Yet, California’s water bureaucrats continue to steamroll ahead with SB 1157. The officially stated goal is to reduce total urban consumption by 400,000 acre feet per year by 2030. Put into the perspective of California’s total water withdrawals per year, this is very small potatoes.  Water diversions for agriculture average 30 million acre feet per year, more than four times the urban use, and diversions — captured rainfall that is released from reservoirs during the summer and fall — to maintain ecosystem health range between 20 million acre feet in dry years to over 60 million acre feet in wet years. A 400,000 acre foot reduction in urban water consumption represents barely more than one-half of one percent of the amount of water California diverts and manages even in its driest years. So what will Californians be asked to do to meet SB 1157’s targets?  Imagine having to report how many people live in your home in order to qualify for your 42 gallon per person per day water allocation.  Imagine having to justify your “outdoor water budget” in order to keep your outdoor landscaping healthy.  Imagine having to decide what you are going to have to give up — showering, laundry, washing dishes or flushing your toilet — to stay under the 42 gallon cap each day.

How We Use Water

But guess what? This kind of extreme water rationing is completely unnecessary. Cost-effective supply-side solutions are plentiful.  In the water season that just ended in California, over 25 million acre feet of water passed through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and out to the Pacific. This is more than twice what is required for the health of Delta ecosystems, and if that water had been stored, it would have offered enough supplemental supply to easily withstand several years of drought.  There are many ways to store this water that fulfill reasonable environmentalist concerns. For example, channels cut into Delta islands can have gravity-fed French Drains that move water without harming fish. Engineering studies indicate that a 200 acre site could move 15,000 acre feet per day during storms, and this water could be stored in vacant underground aquifers that are, just in the San Joaquin Valley, estimated to have a capacity of 75 million acre feet. Other ways to realize massive increases in urban water supplies were described in detail last year in a study released by the prestigious Pacific Institute. They estimated that just through capturing urban runoff, up to 3 million acre feet could be stored each year, and that by recycling urban waste water, capturing another 2 million acre feet per year is possible. Even if these figures are optimistic, they accurately identify two additional paths to water abundance that are necessary investments anyway. Harvesting rainfall through daylighting streams and diversions into aquifers will prevent flooding and will help mitigate toxic runoff from urban surfaces. Recycling and reusing urban wastewater will eliminate the nitrogen pollution still present in treated outfall. And what also ought to be on the table to increase water supply are additional reservoirs as well as desalination.  There are plenty of ways to achieve water abundance in California. Water rationing will not achieve the resilience that Californians are going to need in the future, whether it’s to adapt to prolonged droughts and bomb cyclones, or to cope with other potential disruptions to the state’s precarious network of pipelines, pumping stations and aqueducts. Precisely the opposite policy should be California’s legislative priority. Water agencies need to be incentivized to increase their supply capacity, not reduce it to a fragile minimum that lacks any margin for error. At what point will California lawmakers abandon scarcity fearmongering and instead pursue common sense strategies to secure water abundance? The 47 gallon per person indoor water use standard is set to begin in 2025 and the 42 gallon limit only 5 years later.  How will you allocate your 42 gallons a day?