THE TYGRRRR EXPRESS

Three explanations for Thomas Friedman’s war on Bibi Netanyahu

With Israel fighting for survival, an influential politically liberal Jew is waging a verbal war on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In a blistering New York Times op-ed, Thomas Friedman launched an all-out assault on Mr. Netanyahu. While offering standard tepid criticisms of Hamas, Friedman saved his toughest punches for Bibi and his war.

“But no fair-minded person can look at the Israeli campaign to destroy Hamas that has killed more than 30,000 Palestinians in Gaza and not conclude that something has gone terribly wrong there.”

What has gone terribly wrong is too many liberal Jews parroting the Gaza Ministry of Health, which Hamas controls. The 30,000 figure is unverified and unverifiable. The GMH does not distinguish terrorist deaths from civilian deaths. The GMH does not categorize deaths by gender or age. Children and adult deaths are lumped together. Most importantly, the GMH does not separate Gazans killed by the Israeli Defense Forces from Gaza deaths inflicted by Hamas.

Statistician Abraham Wyner brilliantly shows “How the Gaza Ministry of Health Fakes Casualty Numbers.” https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers

The IDF claims to have killed 13,000 Hamas terrorists. A staggeringly low percentage of civilian deaths proves exceptional IDF restraint and compassion. Far from terribly wrong, Netanyahu and the IDF got much right.

Friedman doggedly casts Netanyahu as darkly as possible, empowering Hamas by trusting their numbers over IDF numbers. Friedman is not a Jihadist sympathizer. In certain circles his words carry significant weight.

There are three explanations for why a grown liberal Jewish man like Friedman would cite Hamas death tolls to attack the Israeli leader.

Friedman may believe what he says. Conservatives may dismiss this explanation, but Friedman could be genuine. Lazy investigative journalism and a misguided world view are not contra to sincerity. Lenin referred to Western liberals as “useful idiots.” Friedman’s argument is emotional, not logical. A statistical analysis exposed Hamas’s numbers as preposterous. Friedman offered them anyway, perhaps due to ideological blindness.

Friedman could fear losing liberal friends. The American left is trying to implement a Chinese-style social credit score system on Americans. Companies are judged less on profitability than on Environmental Social Governance (ESG) and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI). Keeping up appearances and spouting supposed morally correct platitudes supersedes taking tough but correct positions. Political correctness and cancel culture ruined plenty of people who strayed from liberal orthodoxy. Lifelong liberal Democrat Professor Alan Dershowitz’s social credit score plummeted when he defended former President Donald Trump against impeachment. Dershowitz is now persona non grata at many Martha’s Vineyard social events. Friedman is a New York liberal. Planning for the Hamptons Summer party season is already underway. Friedman could be offering Grade D intellectual analysis in a desperate attempt to remain an elite A-Lister. Many liberal Jews who defended Israel were suddenly ostracized by leftists who they thought were their friends. Supporting Netanyahu or the IDF, would remove Friedman from the elite liberal social circuit. For some upper class liberals, that is death. They need People Magazine to find them beautiful and fellow elites to label them caring.

Friedman could be terrified of a conservative being proven right. The late Dr. Charles Krauthammer in 2003 coined the term “Bush Derangement Syndrome” to describe “the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency—nay—the very existence of George W. Bush.” Some liberals opposed the Iraq War on principle, but others could not accept the possibility that Bush was right. Reflexive opposition to anything a conservative says, does or breathes puts ideology over rationality. Friedman is a liberal. He prefers soft power diplomacy worshiped by Barack Obama, John Kerry, and others among the liberal intelligentsia. Bibi is a conservative. He is fine with the hard power approach embodied by Dick Cheney and Neoconservatives. Bibi being proven right would shatter Friedman’s entire world view. It is a shock to the system to discover that everything you believe is wrong.

Whatever the reason, Friedman and his fellow liberals obsess over appearances and global approval. This puts their options in a straitjacket. It may seem counter-intuitive, but conservatives being hated no matter what we say or do is liberating. We might as well kill all the bad guys and win the war. In war, it is often better to ask for forgiveness than seek permission. Police prefer to be judged by 12 than carried out by six.

Netanyahu’s war approach is legally, morally and ethically right. The IDF must finish the job, even if this means losing the approval of those who never approve of Jews anyway. Liberal Jews prostrating themselves in front of anti-Jewish critics need their come to Moses moment. Hamas is the enemy, not Bibi. Attacking Bibi during wartime harms Israel, especially since Netanyahu and not his critics occupy the military and moral high ground.

Eric Golub is a retired stockbrokerage and oil professional living in Los Angeles.

State of the Useless 2024: More Biden Build Back Blather

The man who began his 1988 presidential run plagiarizing Neil Kinnock began his 2024 State of the Union plagiarizing Karl Marx. President Joe Biden’s 2024 annual address was a State of the Useless. For 68 minutes, he screamed at Americans. He rallied his base while demonizing political opponents. His dark, angry, divisive speech starkly contrasted his carefully crafted nice guy image.

Even many Americans who like Mr. Biden personally lament his inability to improve their lives. Rather than calmly address real voter concerns, Biden rehashed the worst elements of his 2023 SOTU speech. The four categories of Biden’s remarks were divided between unmentioned issues, factually false statements, partially true statements lacking context, and highly questionable policy proposals.

The unmentioned is self-explanatory. Biden failed to show empathy regarding Laken Riley, a young woman murdered by an illegal immigrant. He confused her with football coach Lincoln Riley. Biden then pivoted to the loss of his own children. On the foreign policy front, Biden again ignored the global existential threat of Iran building a nuclear bomb and calling for Israel’s destruction. He did not mention Houthis murdering American soldiers. Biden’s stubborn refusal to mention radical Islam reflects his 9/10 mentality. Domestically, Biden did not mention the price of eggs, beef or gasoline. He did not mention social media companies engaging in mass censorship.

His factually false statements were easy to spot. He claimed that former President Donald Trump added more to the national debt than any other American president. Former President Barack Obama holds that record. Biden spoke about corporations paying zero taxes. This is false. Inflation is a devastating tax that affects corporations and consumers alike. Also, corporations risk their own money investing billions of dollars in research and development.

Biden’s claim that billionaires pay a lower tax rate than teachers is also false. He conflates lower capital gains rates with higher ordinary income rates. His proposed solution to raise capital gains rates would disincentivize investment. Lowering ordinary income rates would help the struggling middle and working classes. Biden’s talking point that Republicans want to eliminate Social Security and Medicare was debunked in 1995. That would be political suicide, and no political party wants to self-immolate. Biden’s implication that Republicans want to deny black suffrage has been untrue since the GOP passed the 15^th Amendment in 1869.

Biden’s talk of hiring more border workers is contradicted by his own presidential actions. He fired border workers and other professionals for being unvaccinated, accelerating the supply chain breakdown. He claimed that America stood up to Putin when Russia invaded Ukraine. In reality, we dragged our feet and offered too little,e too late as the war rages on with no end in sight. Biden claimed to have stood up to Chinese aggression. In actuality, China’s government steals our intellectual property, floods our nation with drugs including Fentanyl, and spies on us with few if any noticeable consequences.

Biden’s most insulting falsehood was when he claimed that America has never fully lived up to her ideals. Americans shed the blood of thousands of our citizens to free slaves and defeat Nazism, Communism and fascism. We feed, clothe, protect and defend the world. We get the biggest things right, Biden’s slander of America’s character notwithstanding.

Biden’s most egregious falsehood was his vow to restore our freedoms. His entire government has been dedicated to restricting individual freedoms he disagrees with. He has used executive and regulatory power to restrict guns, oil, sugary beverages, red meat, and older but more efficient household appliances. 

Biden’s partially true statements lacked proper context. He bragged that inflation dropped from 9% to 3%. While this metric is better than last year, inflation is still worse than three years ago when Biden took office.

Biden’s highly questionable policy ideas were numerous.

Price caps on prescription drugs reflect a lack of understanding of how companies work and what they do. Companies lose money on every failed product. They use the profits from their winners to offset their losers. Price controls were tried in the 1970s and failed.

Free pre-school is a budget-busting counter-productive boondoggle. Unilaterally canceling student loans is a financial time bomb for taxpayers that has been ruled unconstitutional and might be illegal. His two-state solution would gut Israel and reward those who murdered Jews including Americans on October 7^th, 2023.

Banning assault weapons is demagogic. There is no such thing as an assault weapon. The 1994 ban was useless since criminals disobey laws. The book “More guns, less crime” is one of many detailed studies that show concealed carry laws reduce crime while strict gun control laws increase crime.

His speech was a useful reminder that for America to get back on track, the 2025 State of the Union address must be delivered by Trump and not Biden.

Eric Golub is a comedian, author and retired stockbrokerage and oil professional living in Los Angeles. His interests include football, politics, Judaism, the stock market, and Angela Lansbury’s “Murder, She Wrote.”