Mercedes Schneider writes in her blog that Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson is in hot water because of a CNN exposé of his lewd and unhinged posts on porn sites. CNN admitted that some of his posts were so XXXX-rated that it would neither post them nor even link to them.

Mercedes, no less fastidious than CNN, decided that the public should know why this man is morally and ethically unfit to be the Governor of North Carolina.

She posted the links to posts by Robinson that demonstrate his lack of character, decency, and morality.

A reader of the blog, who shall remain nameless, sends comments repeatedly to justify or minimize the massacre of Israeli civilians by Hamas terrorists. Her comments are so offensive to me that they are in moderation, meaning I read them before approving or deleting them.

The reader believes that the terrorists intended to attack only military targets and kill only soldiers. She suggests that Israel overstated the number of civilian deaths to win sympathy. She argues that only “one baby” was killed. She also has claimed that most civilian deaths were caused by Israeli fire. She has also written, in comments I did not publish, that women were not raped by the terrorists: anyone who says so is lying. Even the hundreds of young people gunned down at the Rave, the all-night dance party, were killed by IDF helicopter fire, not Hamas.

Her “evidence” is found in an article that makes most of these assertions. Her reading seems to be confined to sources that hate Israel’s very existence and look forward to it being eliminated or dissolved, as Israelis “go back where they came from.” How will that work for the millions who were born in Israel or were expelled by Arab nations?

The article was written by a British journalist, Robert Inlakesh, who loathes Israel. He has written many anti-Israel articles. Here is a quote from one of them:

Whether we look at the Israeli political elite, military, police, intelligence, society or media, we see genocidal mania. This is because their narcissistic supremacist ideology is collapsing before their very eyes, they are beginning to realize that maintaining apartheid is no longer viable.

The opportunity for the Israelis to implement the only solution that would have enabled them to continue their existence has passed. If the Zionist regime was actually serious about the Oslo Accords and simply accepted international law as the consensus for a so-called two-state solution, they could have perhaps proceeded and actually maintained their regime. However, allowing the Palestinian people to gain access to basic human rights in only 22% of historic Palestine was not possible for them under their racist expansionist ideology.

We are now reaching the final phase of this settler colonial project and the Israelis have come to the realization that maintaining their ethno-supremacist regime of absolute privilege will mean exterminating and ethnically cleansing everyone in their way. They are so immersed in their own collective form of narcissism, in which they view themselves as both the victim and hero of the story, that stopping now is impossible. This is also why Israeli society is split down the middle on the question of what kind of ethno-supremacist regime they seek: whether that will be a secular or religious regime going forward.

Therefore, with full US backing they are slowly committing national suicide. This may be a process that is somewhat delayed if a ceasefire is reached in Gaza that prevents the immediate end of the regime by military means, but the war will continue in other ways. The West Bank will likely end up becoming their punching bag until they can again escalate elsewhere and the only promise that can be made to their own people is a future of perpetual war.

In reading his articles, I can’t find anywhere that he calls Arab nations “ethnostates,” although by his definition they are.

I have been clear on this blog about my desire for a ceasefire, for peace, and for a two-state solution. I have strongly condemned Benjamin Netanyahu for his unwillingness to seeek peace. But I have also condemned Hamas, not only for the October 7 attack, but for their unwillingness to seek peace and for hiding their quarters under the cover of schools, hospitals, and other civilian facilities. It’s not as if my opinion matters to world leaders. It doesn’t.

Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, in full knowledge that their attack would trigger an overwhelming Israeli military response. They were willing to sacrifice Gazan civilians because Hamas had secure underground hiding places for themselves

How do I know about the brutality of Hamas on October 7? I watched the videotapes made by the terrorists. I watched them murder people in their homes, their cars, their gardens, their bomb shelters. How do I know women were raped? Not only eyewitness testimony, but an indelible memory of a young Israeli woman lying in the back of a pickup truck, the bottom of her pants stained with blood, as terrorists sat around her, smiling broadly.

One house, to my knowledge, was hit by fire from an Israeli tank, and 13-14 Israelis who were sheltering there died.

Most of the carnage happened before the IDF arrived. The attack began about 6:30 am, and the Israeli forces did not get there until 3-4 pm. Why the long delay? An official inquiry will one day explain but Netanyahu won’t allow the inquiry until the fighting is over. Another despicable, self-serving action on his part. An impartial inquiry will surely fault him for failing to protect the peaceable kibbutzim that bordered Gaza, as well as the inexplicably slow response by the IDF to stop the attack.

As far as the number of children killed, UN sources say it was 29, not 1. At least 3,000 children in Gaza have died, but the number has doubtless multiplied since the story was written last November.

A site called Factcheck.org reported:

At least 29 children were killed when Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. In addition, about 30 children were taken hostage by Hamas, the Associated Press reported…

There has been extensive news coverage of the Oct. 7 attack and the war, including stories on video footage from that day showing “Hamas gunmen cheering with apparent joy as they shot civilians on the road, and later stalking the pathways of kibbutzim and killing parents and children in their homes,” as BBC reported. 

As we have written, Israel’s National Center of Forensic Medicine has been working to identify the remains of those killed on Oct. 7. Forensic pathologist Chen Kugel, the head of the center, said the ages of those killed ranged from 3 months to 80 or 90 years, according to The Media Line, an American news outlet that covers the Middle East.

Kugel also told the Los Angeles Times that initially most of the bodies could be identified through DNA. Now, the staff’s work involves “reassembling and reconnecting pieces” of remains found in the landscapes where the killings occurred.

For example, what initially appeared to be a piece of charcoal was examined through a CT scan, Kugel said. The scan revealed, “These were people who were hugging one another and burned while they were tied together. It might be a parent and a child.”

Who is Factcheck.org?

Prior to fiscal 2010, we were supported entirely by three sources: funds from the Annenberg Public Policy Center’s own resources (specifically an endowment created in 1993 by the Annenberg Foundation at the direction of the late Walter Annenberg, and a 1995 grant by the Annenberg Foundation to fund APPC’s Washington, D.C., base); additional funds from the Annenberg Foundation; and grants from the Flora Family Foundation.

We currently receive support from the APPC endowment, which includes funding from the Annenberg Foundation and from the Annenberg School for Communication Trust at the University of Pennsylvania.

See its website for other funders.

Indiana has followed the lead of Florida, Arizona, Ohio and other states, starting a small voucher program, expanding year by year until almost every child in the state is eligible for a voucher. Voucher advocates in Indiana hope that the only remaining limits are soon removed so that all students in the state, rich and poor alike, will qualify for a voucher.

Most of the students who use vouchers were already enrolled in private schools. The same is true in every other state with vouchers. The voucher program creates an entitlement for parents who can already afford private school.

The cost of the voucher program is near $500 million. About 70,000 students use vouchers. The public schools of Indiana enroll one million students.

Chalkbeat reports:

Voucher use has soared in Indiana since lawmakers made nearly every student in the state eligible, with more than 90% of students at more than half of all participating schools using a voucher during the 2023-24 school year, a Chalkbeat analysis found.

That was true in just 11% of private schools before lawmakers made the Indiana Choice Scholarship available to nearly every student in Indiana by relaxing income eligibility and removing other requirements to participate in the program.

Since lawmakers approved the expansion last year, the number of schools where 100% of students receive a voucher rose from just one in 2022-23 to 28 in 2023-24. Last year, in 178 of the 349 private schools that accept vouchers, more than 90% of students enrolled used a voucher to pay for tuition.

The recent growth in the share of students using vouchers has remade the scope of Indiana’s school choice program. Instead of being limited initiatives allowing students to leave struggling public schools, it’s increasingly a means for all families to choose their preferred educational settings.

Among supporters of choice, there is disagreement about the shift. Some say it proves just how popular and justified vouchers are.

“It’s phenomenal. In some ways, it’s predictable,” said Betsy Wiley of the Institute for Quality Education, a school choice advocacy group in Indiana, about the growth in voucher use. “In the years where eligibility has been expanded, you’ve seen greater growth.”

But others worry about costs and say the program has moved too far from its original purpose.

“A few of us feel strongly that this movement is about leveling the playing field for low income kids and working class kids. There’s an argument that these are taxpayer funds and we should limit that to a purpose that’s necessary, for kids who could not make those choices without it,” said Michael Petrilli, president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative education policy think tank. “I do think I’ve lost that argument.”

Meanwhile, critics of vouchers say the result isn’t just that Indiana is subsidizing tuition for families who can afford it without state funds, but that the state is doing so at the expense of up to hundreds of millions in funding for public schools.

“It’s the legislature’s obligation to provide for the common school system,” said Cathy Fuentes-Rohwer of the Indiana Coalition for Public Education. “You’re taking the pie and slicing it up.”

Another big change to Indiana school choice could be coming soon. Some Republican leaders are pushing to merge the state’s three voucher tracks into one universal program that would give parents free rein over where to spend state funding.

Universal education choice through incremental expansion

Data from the state released earlier this year indicated that voucher use grew faster than enrollment, suggesting that vouchers were going to families already enrolled at private schools.

A Chalkbeat analysis comparing enrollment data to voucher use data at individual schools shows voucher use has grown at a faster rate than enrollment at the vast majority of schools. (One caveat: Many private schools have populations of just a few dozen students, meaning changes in enrollment and voucher use lead to large jumps in percentages.)

Statewide, around 70,000 students out of the 92,000 enrolled at private schools used a voucher to attend, receiving either the cost of the tuition and fees at their school, or 90% of the per-pupil funding the state gives to their local public schools — whichever is less.

More students receive a voucher worth 90% of their public school funding rather than the full cost of tuition and fees.

At only 13 schools statewide, less than half of all students received a voucher in 2023-24. Not every private school in Indiana participates in the voucher program.

Though private school enrollment has grown, it remains far below that of public schools in Indiana, which enroll over 1 million students…

Average ILEARN scores for the last year show that students at private schools performed better on the tests than students in public schools. But several years of broader studies of vouchers’ effects on student achievement — and other outcomes — show mixed results.

Christopher Lubienski, director of the Center for Evaluation and Education Policy at Indiana University, said his research has shown that when socioeconomic factors are controlled, public school students outperform their private school peers…

But critics like Fuentes-Rohwer of the Indiana Coalition for Public Education say the $439 million price tag for the program in 2023-24 represented a costly diversion of public resources from public schools that the state is constitutionally obligated to fund.

According to the state’s 2023-24 voucher report, if all 70,000 students receiving vouchers had attended public schools, the state would have added over $500 million in public education funding. But most voucher students receiving vouchers have never attended a public school.

“There are so many things you have to go through as a public school system to be transparent,” Fuentes-Rohwer said. “We are very concerned that funding leaves public schools that have the obligation to educate everyone.”

With a rise in the number of schools that have a large voucher population, some predict that private schools may seek the same per-pupil funding as public schools in the future.

Lubienski noted that charter schools were once thought to be able to deliver greater achievement with less funding and regulation, but now are seeking equitable funding.

Petrilli of the Fordham Institute agreed: With less funding, charter schools ultimately couldn’t compete with traditional public schools on teacher salary.

Please open the link to finish reading the article.

Jennifer Rubin is a columnist for The Washington Post. She was hired to be a conservative voice. Trump flipped her.

She writes here about Kamala’s specific economic proposals:

The media, political insiders, former Republicans and even members of Harris’s own party have underestimated her abilities to carve policy positions and reconsolidate the Democratic base.

Most prominently, she has been consistently criticized for failing to articulate her economic vision. However, in two speeches — one in Raleigh, N.C., last month and one in Pittsburg on Wednesday(where she identified herself as a capitalist seeking “bold, persistent experimentation”) — as well as numerous campaign events, she has delineated a set of serious, concrete policies. These include: restoring the child tax credit; creating a $6,000 credit for the parents of newborns in their baby’s first year; stimulating the housing market; subsidizing first-time home buyers; eliminating unnecessary college degree requirements for federal jobs; subsidizing child care (thereby limiting child-care costs to 7 percent of lower-wage earners’ income); raising the corporate tax rate to 28 percent; and expanding the tax credit for start-up businesses to $50,000 (with the goal of 25 million new business applications by the end of her first term). In Pittsburgh, she added new economic policy positions: become the global leader in everything from artificial intelligence to clean energy to aerospace to biomanufacturing; double the number of paid apprenticeships; reform tax laws to allow more employee profit-sharing; incentivize investment in factory towns; and cut red tape in permitting for construction.

This week, the White House announced that “the economy has grown by 3.2 percent per year during Biden-Harris administration — even stronger than previously estimated — and better than the first three years of the previous administration.”

Harris has managed to reduce former president Donald Trump’s polling edge on the candidate most trusted with the economy. And frankly, she has left those complaining about her “lack of details” with egg on their faces.