What’s With?

What’s with, Part I.

What’s with all the women arrested in the storming of the library at Columbia? Of the 80 arrests, 61 are women. Fifty are students at Columbia. Many of them rich and entitled. The masked keffiyeh-wearing protestors disrupted students who were studying for finals and injured two university security guards. The university’s reaction was in contrast to its earlier nonresponse. This time the university handed down at least 65 interim suspensions and another 33 were barred from campus. My hopes are that the university will expel all the students and bar them from ever graduating from Columbia. 

These are supposedly intelligent women. Isn’t it a bit strange that they support Hamas which enforces strict sharia law which regards women as second class citizens and treats LGTQs even worse? Have they ever been to Palestine? Have they ever lived under sharia law? Do they hate Jews so much that they endorse the killings and rapes of October 7? Don’t misunderstand, I believe that the Israeli response was in many instances an over the top act of revenge against anything and anyone Palestinian. Yet this does not excuse the shameful behavior or the radicals on our campuses. Did they see the appalling video of the five female Israeli soldiers taken captive on October 7? “Fearful and bloody, the women begged for their lives while Hamas fighters milled around and alternately threatened to rape and kill them. The State Department is reviewing the cases to see if any of the protestors were noncitizens. It so, they will be deported hopefully to Palestine into Hamas’ loving arms.

In my last lecture, I talked about Fintech. One of the innovations is crowdfunding. I told the difference between crowdfunding a protest on a northern campus versus one on a southern campus was that in the north the students would be chanting “Free Palestine!” while in the south the students would be chanting “Free beer!”

What’s with, Part II.

What’s with all these black politicians supporting illegals? Ras Baraka, the mayor of Newark and three minority congressmen stormed the ICE detention center in Newark. Baraka was arrested for trying to force his way into the center. Charges against Baraka were dropped but congresswoman LaMonica McIver will face charges in her involvement at the detention center. She was charged with “assaulting, impeding and interfering with law enforcement.” ICE had said that the center contained illegals who were criminals and rapists. Baraka said that they were there to conduct “oversight” to ensure the facility was not violating any building safety ordinances. Sure they were. The US attorney for New Jersey who charged Baraka is Alina Habba who said that Baraka “committed trespass and ignored multiple warnings from Homeland Security Investigations to remove himself from the ICE detention center”. The Department of Homeland security said that the group of protesters, which included the Democrats, “stormed the gate and broke into the detention facility” as a bus containing illegal migrants was being brought inside the fenced perimeter. Why isn’t this an impeachable offense? Surely at a minimum, the three from congress should be censured.

Mayors such as New York City’s Eric Adams, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson served as cheerleaders for President Biden’s border crisis, even as resources are diverted from their black constituents. All members of the Congressional Black Caucus voted against the Secure the Border Act. What’s with this? The government pie is limited and black Americans have competed with illegal aliens for resources ranging from housing to medical care. But nowhere has the competition been more intense than in the jobs market. Recent research shows that illegal immigration accounted for a significant relative decline in black wage and employment rates. Employment rates for black males in low-skill job categories dropped by as much as 7 percent while wages dropped by up to 9 percent. Also illegal immigration has aggravated the competition between blacks and illegal aliens for government and social services. So why do their politicians act against their interests?

Vocal supporters of illegal immigrants include Maxine Waters, Lauren Underwood, Jasmine Crockett and Rep. Adriano Espaillat of New York who said “New York City is welcoming and compassionate. As a right to shelter city, we have a moral and legal obligation to provide asylum seekers the right to seek refuge—and we will never turn anyone away, whether they are fleeing authoritarian regimes like that of Maduro or violence in Ukraine, our city and this nation will and must welcome refugee families,” Espaillat along with Rep. Deborah Ramirez co-authored legislation to try to shelter illegals at locations like schools, churches, and hospitals “amid the rise of vicious targeting and attacks by ICE”.

Rep. Jasmine Crockett defended the illegals by claiming the United States needs them to pick cotton. Seriously. “So I had to go around the country and educate people about what immigrants do for this country, or the fact that we are a country of immigrants. The fact is ain’t none of y’all trying to go and farm right now. OK, so I’m lying? We’re done picking cotton. We are. You can’t pay us enough to find a plantation.”

Crockett also said this about the deportation of illegals “As far as I’m concerned, you randomly kidnapping folk and you throwing them out of the country against their civil rights, against their constitutional rights. And, frankly, how would they feel if some other country decided that they were gonna just start throwing people randomly in our country? Like that is absolutely insane.”

Her fellow black representative Lauren Underwood of Illinois also chimed in that “Since America’s founding, immigrants have been vital to our cultural vibrancy and economic success. Our immigration system must honor and recognize the value and dignity of all of our immigrant communities.” Underwood then said that the deaths of five immigrant children in a detention facility was “intentional”. She refused to apologize.

It was only when their cities became overrun with illegals that some politicians like Eric Adams changed their tune. Adams called for changes to the city’s sanctuary policies by endorsing that illegals who are accused of a crime in New York should be released Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. In Chicago, black residents expressed frustration with the mayor’s policies especially his allocating $51 million for migrant care. However, their mayor is steadfastly unrepentant. What we now have is the pro-immigration views of the black elite clashing with those of the black dissenters who have to deal with the illegals deposited in their neighborhoods and competing for resources.

But a century ago, overwhelming majorities blacks supported voting for the Immigration Act of 1924, which dramatically cut immigration. The editors of black newspapers and magazines across the country backed these reductions. Some even advocated for deeper cuts.  W.E.B. DuBois said that the “stopping of the importing of cheap white labor on any terms has been the economic salvation of American black labor.” Times have changed.

Speaking of changing times this is from the 1996 Democrat party platform: 

“Today’s Democratic Party also believes we must remain a nation of laws.  We cannot tolerate illegal immigration and we must stop it. In 1992, our borders might as well not have existed. The border was under-patrolled, and what patrols there were, were under-equipped. Drugs flowed freely. Illegal immigration was rampant. Criminal immigrants, deported after committing crimes in America, returned the very next day to commit crimes again.”

These democrats supported border security. Today’s democrats not so much. It is obvious that black politicians are democrats first and blacks second. It remains to be seen if black voters will keep returning these politicians to office despite their views on illegal immigration.