Category: ideological culture

Categories
Accountability ideological culture

No Vacation from Antisemitism

Yoni Birnbaum, antisemitism, Israel, Judaism, blacklist, discrimination

Is it possible to discriminate against a Jew for being a Jew without knowing that this is what one is doing?

Yoni Birnbaum, a Jewish man and rabbi, reports on what happened after he reserved a vacation rental in France.

The property owner emailed to say that he had noticed the word “rabbi” in Birnbaum’s email address and therefore felt it necessary to inquire whether Birnbaum was sufficiently critical of Israel before letting the booking stand. If not, the reservation would be cancelled.

This wasn’t a litmus test to which all prospective renters of the property were being routinely subjected. The owner acknowledged that only because he had noticed that Birnbaum was Jewish was he demanding to know his views on Israel.

Birnbaum replied, in part: “No doubt, you wrote your email to me out of some kind of twisted sense of virtue. But it seems clear to me that what lies at the heart of your demand for me to declare my views on the conflict in the Middle East, is that to you, before anything else, I am a Jew. Therefore, at the very least, you feel you have to test me and family. . . .

“In other words, you wished to subject me to a purity test. Am I one of the ‘good Jews’ or one of the ‘bad Jews’?”

Not the worst thing that can happen to somebody. But it has something in common with the very worst that can happen.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
ideological culture U.S. Constitution

Constitutional Tourism

birthright citizenship, China, Constitution, foreign policy

“I would like to congratulate President Xi, and the Great Country of China, on their massive Birthright Citizenship WIN!” President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social last week, after the Supreme Court struck down his executive order, which declared that children born of mothers in the country illegally or on a temporary visa were not covered by the “birthright citizenship” clause of the 14th Amendment.

Mr. Trump was referring to “birthright tourism,” pregnant women traveling to this country with the sole purpose of giving their child automatic U.S. citizenship. In his new book, The Invisible Coup: How American Elites and Foreign Powers Use Immigration as a Weapon, Peter Schweizer charges that the Chinese government has “created a system whereby it’s happening on an industrial scale,” that in the last decade more than a million Chinese mothers have traveled to America to give birth.

How can we be untroubled that more than a million kids growing up in Communist China today have a legal right to come to the United States at any time?

In his concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh argued that, “consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment,” Congress could “enact new legislation establishing exceptions to birthright citizenship . . .”

The president cheered the idea: “No long and unwieldy Constitutional Amendment is necessary!”

Yet, none of the other five justices in the majority left that statutory door open; it likely will require a constitutional amendment. And that should not be impossible, but in the last half-century not even one has been both introduced and ratified.

Sen. Rand Paul introduced an amendment back in April on birthright citizenship. Sen. Tom Cotton has one, too. 

Constitutions exist to keep government under citizen control. If we can never alter a word in that compact, we lose that control.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 

Note: Even more so, we need amendments to prevent court-packing, establish term limits on Congress, and secure that only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
ideological culture national politics & policies partisanship

The States Fair

Great American State Fair, Donald Trump, Pennsylvania, July 4

I’m usually suspicious of business-government partnerships. But some occasional and low-level efforts are inevitable and at worst anodyne.

Take the Great American State Fair in the District of Columbia. This was an effort conceived by Donald Trump in 2023, and “enacted” (?!?!) by the president’s executive order once he resumed office in 2025. The idea was to celebrate the semiquincentennial in the capital with booths from each state. It was all very huzzah-hooray-USA-oriented, and sounds like good clean fun.

I did not attend, and it reached its natural conclusion without me last Saturday, on the Fourth of July.

Interestingly, a number of states pointedly did not participate. One gets the feeling that this was all about hating on Trump, but maybe not. Be that as it may, Pennsylvania’s Democratic governor wouldn’t fund or organize the Pennsylvania booth, saying that he couldn’t whip up any business sponsors.

That is unlikely, for when Pennsylvania’s Republican senator, Dave McCormick, heard about it, he called his state’s senator from across the aisle, John Fetterman, and the two decided to do it all themselves. “I started to call businesses, and they came out of the woodwork,” said the Republican.

From the accounts I’ve read, the event was either a self-serving (Trump-o-centric) failure or a moderate success — not a blowout — with the Pennsylvania booth standing out, featuring antique flags and a replica of the Liberty Bell.

This is old-time patriotic fun, a way of celebrating the good stuff of our states and the union.

A cynic might say it’s all bread-and-circuses, a distraction, but the answer to that is: enjoy but don’t be distracted.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
ideological culture regulation too much government

Air Conditioners — Threat or Menace?

U.K., Great Britain, global warming, climate, regulations

Is it selfish, asks Good Morning Britain, to want air conditioning?

Yes, it’s selfish to want to live and prosper and be comfortable in 90 degree heat. 

And this “selfish” cooling is bad because . . . ?

According to “the experts” queried by the Good Morning Britain presenters — which broadcasts using “non-green” energy — it’s bad because “we know” that the cooling of indoor air will heat up the outdoors — and therefore the planet.

Catastrophically, of course.

But we don’t know.

It’s one of many unproven assertions about the future of weather that get tossed around to make us feel guilty about not wanting to live in caves and eat dandelions. 

We do know that people deal capably with often extremely variable weather and other problems by using manmade food, shelter, clothing, and transportation — as well as cooling and heating. All highly suspect in the minds of Europe’s climate catastrophists. Who even attack farming.

Some climate autocrats in the UK are now actually making Brits take out their air conditioning units. Catastrophically, of course. One North London resident “was forced to ‘permanently remove’ two air-con units from the back of their home.” Council members ordained that there was “no justification” for the units. Another resident ordered to rip out his AC prevailed after appealing to a Planning Inspectorate — because he had solar panels.

“Air-con engineers told The Telegraph that they had been called out to remove perfectly operational units worth thousands of pounds across London.”

It’s a Blitz that the Brits are doing to themselves. Soon we’ll have to airlift the few who are still sane out of there. Think of it as a civilizational Dunkirk.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
defense & war general freedom ideological culture

These Difficult States

I’ve been a U.S. citizen for more than a quarter of the 250 years that there has been a United States.

Proud to be an American? Yes. Not because my country, or more specifically our government, has always been spectacular, or even in the right. I’ve taken a few lumps battling against the government. 

More than “proud to be an American,” which was admittedly an accident of birth, I’m proud of America. Even with all its faults, this country has been the greatest force for good, for freedom, for peace, for human dignity in the entire history of the world. 

Certainly, I get no personal credit for the revolution. I wasn’t around. I had no hand in writing the Declaration of Independence or the First Amendment. But I can recite parts. 

And defend them against modern foes. 

No blame goes to me for slavery — or any glory for ending it. Likewise, I didn’t storm the beaches of Normandy or plant the flag at Iwo Jima. I’m honored, however, to know men who did. Without those American kids, Europe and Asia would have been completely conquered by regimes of unspeakable evil. 

Those GIs were billionaires . . . saving truly billions of lives, physically and spiritually.  

We Americans — and the whole world — owe a grand debt to the ideals of the American Revolution and the blood and courage of Americans of yesteryear. One we can never fully repay. 

But we can pay it forward. By fighting to keep the Republic alive and well.

I think we all sense that these current times are those “that try men’s souls.” There are internal forces ripping at the fabric of our culture as well as militarized authoritarian forces on the march abroad. 

The first 250 years proved difficult; the next 250 may even be more so. But we say “The United States of America,” not “The United States of Easy.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
general freedom ideological culture

Where Independence Happened

Semiquincentennia, July 4, Independence Day, United States

The semiquincentennial of the United States could be celebrated today, July 2, 2026.

It was on the Second of July in A.D. 1776 that the Continental Congress decided to remove itself from the sovereignty of the king in Great Britain, George III. The representatives from the breakaway colonies did this in the affirmative with Richard Henry Lee’s “Resolution of Independence.” Congress appointed a “Committee of Five” to draft a Declaration, which was accepted on July Fourth — the day we have come to celebrate Independence Day. 

But independence was not mere congressional fiat. It had been brewing in the states; at least six of the colonies’ royal governors had fled or been sent packing in the revolutionary summer of 1775.

In 1775, most colonies possessed

  • functioning legislative bodies making domestic policy decisions;
  • militias organized without royal direction;
  • courts operating with locally appointed judges;
  • trade regulation occurred despite Parliamentary acts.

And some colonies even raised taxes and spent money sans royal approval.

By late 1775, several colonies had taken major steps toward self-government. Virginians had created a new form of government, the “constituent convention,” independent of the Crown, in 1774. Colonial New Hampshire became the first to adopt a written constitution. South Carolina had adopted an interim constitution in March 1776. Weeks later, the Halifax Resolves explicitly authorized a vote for independence. On the Fourth of May, Rhode Island publicly rejected the King.

There’s a lesson here. The groundwork was not laid in Congress — much of it conceived and brought to fruition by men and women who are not in the history books. 

If we want to Make America Free Again, we have to lay a foundation.

In the states.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
general freedom ideological culture social media voluntary cooperation

World Loving Cup

World Cup, America, patriotism, National Pride, American Dream, American People

“I am loving that the World Cup has brought to our shores all these people,” comedian Bill Maher told his Real Time audience on Friday, “who are doing Americans the service of reminding us — just when we needed it on our big 250 birthday — that actually this place is kind of awesome.”

What Maher celebrated could be seen on social media, mostly. One German fan — and the first many American X users have encountered — is @FreddyLA7; his success is instructive, saying that he hasn’t “met a single unfriendly person.” If you follow his account, or many others like his, you’ll see a lot of stadium shots and talk of soccer wins and losses, but the real gems are among the many about American culture, vistas, and (of course) the food. 

And because the World Cup is being held in 16 cities across the continent, Freddy and his fellow across-the-water fans have seen a lot.

“I’m absolutely in love with small town America,” he says in a post about “Island Pond in Vermont. They have a population of 750 people but there was quite a lot going on. They had a flea market, a nice deli, and a beautiful lake with people out on their boats.”

His enthusiasm has hit the television news shows, too, one quoting his ten-out-of-ten rating of Waffle House, and his pledge to return.

Maher shared numerous stories from foreign visitors, including one Australian man who complained, “I feel like I’ve been lied to my entire life about America . . . if you log onto the news everything’s bad, everything’s terrible. It’s not. It’s absolutely f*cking amazing.”

Yes, the “news” is a problem — especially the national sources, biggest stations and papers. But bracket out politics. Then what you see is a diversity of geography, still-vibrant markets, and friendly people in cities, towns, and rural communities all over. 

And the sneaking idea that America is still great.

Again.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration: Youtube Screenshots

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
ideological culture national politics & policies political challengers

The Kill Western Civilization Caucus

democrat, socialism, communism, democratic party, elections, democracy

“These are not social democrats,” President Trump declared on Truth Social. “These are hardcore, godless communists.”

Unfortunately, the president is on target. 

He was referring to the three members of the Democratic Socialists of America who won Democratic Party primaries last week in deep-blue New York City congressional districts.

November’s General Election being a mere formality in the Big Apple, the trio will undoubtedly be joining the next Congress. All three — State Assemblywoman Claire Valdez (NY-7), former City Comptroller Brad Lander (NY-10), and professional “left-wing activist” Darializa Avila Chevalier (NY-13) — were endorsed and assisted by Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

They’ll be just three out of 435 members of Congress, while the mayor is in a position to do more harm. Still, sprinkling a few Stalinists into Washington’s brew won’t help. 

Darializa Avila Chevalier worries me the most. Before launching her political campaign, CNN reports that she deleted “thousands of posts and reposts expressing support for abolishing police, prisons and borders, as well as seizing private property and nationalizing major industries and calling into question Israel’s right to exist.”

Her pursuit of a surely democratic-no-doubt-benevolent dictatorship of the proletariat to, you know, seize the means of production is . . . mighty concerning. What’s worse, however, is her hatred. 

Of America. 

In a 2019 tweet, Chevalier posted a smiley face emoji to say loud and proud: “I forgot to get napkins so I just wiped my hand on the American flag behind me.” 

“We are Westerners fighting for the total eradication of Western civilization,” explained a group she co-founded, Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD). 

Shouldn’t we take them at their word?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
fraud ideological culture Internet controversy political economy

X Marks the Success

Elon Musk, grift, government contract, private enterprise, taxes, technology

Yesterday, I defended the honor, so to speak, of Elon Musk against Eric Peters’s charge — published, on his website — that the high-tech magnate is a “grifter.”

I focused only on the free speech angle. But Mr. Peters (“the libertarian car guy”) didn’t limit himself to criticizing X. He also criticized Tesla, SpaceX and DOGE.

Musk, Peters notes, “has just become a trillionaire by dint of the IPO of his Space Xcrement grift.” Folks bought into SpaceX, he says, because “they believe there is a Tesla roadster in orbit around the Earth and that we’ll soon be able to buy tickets for a trip to Mars.”

Is Peters suggesting that Musk did not send a Tesla Roadster into space? Is this some new sort of (forgive me) “conspiracy theory”? Truth is, the Roadster orbits the Sun, coming back from beyond the Martian orbit.

What does he think is really going on here? What Musk’s investors “have bought into is the grift of government contracts,” he says, “which are paid for with dollars fleeced from the tax sheep. People who buy Space Xcrement stock can share in the grift, of course. But it does not change the nature of the grift.”

While the bulk (but definitely not the whole) of SpaceX’s clients are government agencies, most importantly NASA, remember something that one might forget while reading Peters’s fun rant: Musk is indeed putting objects into orbit, with new and astounding technology of amazing efficiency, and NASA has announced that SpaceX’s biggest and best will soon take astronauts back to the Moon.

As for Tesla, these cars are on the road. They work. I wouldn’t buy one, but I wouldn’t call it a grift a million times, or even once. And Musk himself has said he’d happily produce cars without the subsidies. But he continues to use the system set up for more than just him — the usual businessman rationale.

Criticizable? Yes. Wholly a grift? No.

And as for DOGE, it’s not as if Musk did not try. He just got little support from Congress . . . or the President. Too bad. Still not a grift.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Grok and Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
ideological culture individual achievement social media

X Marks the Grift?

Elon Musk, X, free speech, censorship, freedom

Most of the calumnies against Elon Musk come from people who are either envious or completely unaware of the basic principles of economics. Or both.

That being said, not everyone “in my camp” admires or defends the South African-American tech magnate. On Sunday, Eric Peters — “the libertarian car guy” — published, on his website, “Xcrement Is Just That (and more).”

“I have written a number of articles critical of Elon Musk’s ‘free speech’ social media grift,” Mr. Peters asserts, “which I say is just that because it isn’t free. . . .” 

Since I pay nothing for X, I was surprised. What?

Peters is “assuming you want more than a few people to know you’ve spoken.” That’s how he put it. “You must pay a recurrent fee for what is styled ‘reach.’ Even then, your ‘reach’ is subject to being limited via completely obscure parameters known only to Elon and his algorithm.”

And the complaint is . . . ?

The Twitterverse prior to Elon’s acquisition of the platform, asserted, with some perspicacity, that “freedom of speech is not freedom of reach.” The “freedom of reach” part was nothing other than “freedom of the press” — and the technological and business platforms that make up “the press” have never been “free of price.” Someone must pay for getting ideas out there far and wide.

Yet Mr. Peters seems to think that “Free ought to mean not just without cost but open. As in everyone can use it and no one is limited in any way from using it. Xcrement does not work like that.”

Well, the telephone system in days of yore was indeed open to everyone, but that did not mean “free.” And if you wanted to make a long-distance call, you had to pay the phone company.

While old-time telephony isn’t equivalent to modern-day social media, the parallel is close enough to show that this specific case against Elon is without merit.

Still, I wouldn’t call it excrement.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts