Cheapening ‘genocide', strip the NEA of its charter and other commentary
'There is a glaring dissonance to the charge that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza,' contends The New York Times' Bret Stephens. 'Why isn't the death count higher?' After all, 'it's not that Israel lacks the capacity to have meted vastly greater destruction.' The answer: 'Of course' Israel is 'manifestly not committing genocide,' and the deaths in Gaza are just a side effect of war. 'What is unusual,' though, 'is the cynical and criminal way Hamas has chosen to wage war': embedding itself in civilian areas and hoarding food aid. 'The war in Gaza should be brought to an end in a way that ensures it is never repeated. To call it a genocide does nothing to advance that aim, except to dilute the meaning of a word we cannot afford to cheapen.'
Education beat: Strip the NEA of Its Charter
The National Education Association is facing a move 'to revoke [its] national charter,' enthuse Daniel Buck & Anna Low at National Review. Though federal charters are 'largely symbolic,' they're not 'powerless.' Charter holders have a 'special national distinction' that helps them raise money. But today's NEA is 'a lobbying and funding juggernaut with almost 3 million members,' and though ostensibly an educational organization, 'its real purpose is political.' Over 97% of the 'millions' it spends on lobbying and donations goes to Democrats, and its 'calls to action' are always for liberal causes. If Congress chooses not to revoke the charter, it could still at least 'place limitations on the NEA's lobbying and political activity.'
Foreign desk: Ukrainian Unity Is Unbreakable
'Russia wants to break the Ukrainian will as it seeks to dismantle Ukrainian identity,' thunders The Wall Street Journal's Jillian Kay Melchior, noting Vladimir Putin's relentless 'missile and drone attacks on the Ukrainian capital and other cities.' Yet instead of the attacks breaking their will, many 'enraged' civilians 'donate to support the military,' and 'the raids could boost voluntary enlistment.' Bottom line: Ukrainians are 'becoming more united.' There's little doubt that, 'Putin wants to erode the American and European will to arm Ukraine' by 'promoting the myth that Russian momentum is unstoppable and Russian victory is inevitable.' Zelensky adviser Mykhailo Podolyak admits, 'We're not winning right now' — but he also adds: 'Moscow isn't winning either.'
Advertisement
From the right: Dem Hypocrisy on ICE Agents' Masks
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and her fellow Democrats are hypocrites for saying ICE agents 'spread fear in immigrant communities,' thunders the Washington Examiner. That's because Dems like them are the ones who 'amplify hoaxes and demonize law enforcement officers' — by saying that 'masked men in unmarked cars' are 'kidnapping people.' ICE agents who wear masks have genuine security concerns. Considering that 'activists in Portland have been posting ICE agents' addresses in officers' neighborhoods,' officers' 'desire for anonymity' is 'understandable.' If Bass is so concerned about calming people's nerves, she 'could start by not spreading illegal immigrant hoaxes.' Her labeling of federal law-enforcement officers as 'outrageous and un-American' puts them 'in danger and makes donning a mask a necessary precaution to protect their families.'
Libertarian: Bleak Path to Fixing Social Security
'With neither Democrats nor Republicans appearing willing to reduce benefits or increase the retirement age, the only way to make Social Security solvent is to increase revenue,' reports Reason's Jack Nicastro. 'While this can be done, it will come at the great financial detriment of young people entering the work force.' Calculations show that 'to eliminate Social Security's projected $25 trillion deficit over the next 75 years while maintaining planned benefits,' payroll taxes would need to be increased from 12.4% percent to 16.05%. Other options would be 'lifting the income ceiling on the payroll tax and borrowing to cover deficits.' The latter could 'precipitate a systemic debt crisis in the U.S.' and 'massive inflation . . . resulting in another situation in which working-age people are forced to subsidize the retirements of the elderly.'
— Compiled by The Post Editorial Board
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
3 minutes ago
- USA Today
Republicans, Democrats are held captive by extremes. Americans need a new party.
Does America need a viable third political party? Republicans and Democrats alike sound off – and actually agreed on something – in our latest Opinion Forum. In June – which yes, feels like a lifetime ago – billionaire and former first buddy Elon Musk began floating the idea of an "America Party" on the social media platform he's colonized. Originally a response to President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Musk viewed as an "insane spending bill," this new third party would "actually represent the 80% in the middle" and give voters back their "freedom." It's an interesting idea – and not necessarily new. America, as we're reminded every general election, does have more than two political parties, but those splintered factions rarely result in anything of consequence. Instead, our politics are an endless ping-pong match between Republicans and Democrats – which many Americans increasingly view as two sides of the same coin. So is a true multiparty system the way forward? And is Musk, as divisive as he is, the one to lead it? Those were some of the questions we asked USA TODAY readers for our latest Forum. We heard people from each political party and found some surprising consensus. Read their responses below. A third party isn't enough. America needs an entirely new system. America doesn't just need a third party – it needs a full-spectrum awakening. The system we're living in isn't just outdated ‒ it's misaligned with the reality of who we are today. Tradition has its place, but clinging to it out of habit keeps us locked into patterns that no longer serve us. The problems we face now are wildly different from those of the past, so why are we still trying to solve them with yesterday's blueprints? We need more than another political faction; we need a radical reimagining of how representation works. For too long, our politics have been stuck in black-and-white thinking: left or right, red or blue, us versus them. The idea that one person – usually male, usually from a singular political perspective – can fully represent an entire nation is outdated. Lived experience matters. And no matter how well-intentioned he may be, a man cannot truly fight for women the way a woman can. The same goes in reverse. Each brings something vital to the table, and that's why America needs more than just a third party – it needs a shared leadership model. Your Turn: President Trump, I supported you. Release the Epstein list – or resign. | Opinion Forum Imagine a presidency not defined by solo power but co-led by two individuals with contrasting yet complementary identities ‒ say, a woman and a man from different ideological spaces. Together, they could challenge groupthink, broaden empathy and offer layered approaches to complex issues. Conflict wouldn't be avoided ‒ it'd be used as a strength to build deeper solutions. Our most marginalized voices wouldn't be tokens ‒ they'd have champions on both sides. Sure, this idea may cause some readers to flip their lids. But history has shown us that progress doesn't come wrapped in comfort. It comes when someone says 'What if?' and dares to sketch it out loud. As for Elon Musk? He didn't build with a brain ‒ he built with money. He footed bills and took credit. He couldn't hold a thought together or support his own child for being themselves. That's not genius. That's cowardice. Power without empathy is a threat, not a solution. We don't need leaders who smile for the cameras while people suffer. We need firewalls, not figureheads. If you can't fight for people without cash behind them, you don't get to represent any of us. The Republican Party is consumed by extremism and fear tactics. The Democratic Party is fractured and too often indecisive. Both chase headlines while families struggle, health care costs explode and trust erodes. Neither party centers everyday people, and that's the core failure. — Kayleisha Miller, Coal Township, Pennsylvania Our political parties have been lost to oligarchs. We need a shake-up. We need a viable third party to shake up the status quo. Both the Republican and Democratic parties are being held hostage by the extreme right and left of their parties. We need a party that is not beholden to American oligarchs. It needs to govern with common sense and realize that compromise is not a four-letter word. As a nation, we used to value these traits. Now it's a take-no-hostage era. Do you want to take part in our next Forum? Join the conversation by emailing forum@ You can also follow us on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and sign up for our Opinion newsletter to stay updated on future Forum posts. Musk is one of the oligarchs of the United States. He is a businessman whose sole raison d'être is to make a profit. One cannot run a nation like one runs a company. Both parties are being held captive by the extreme right and left wings of their parties. The Democrats have lost their focus on the issues that mean the most to the people. They have forgotten who the working people are in this nation. They need to realize people don't want a cradle-to-grave nanny state. The Republicans have come under the spell of authoritarian governance. As much as they profess to care about the working people, they care more about the American oligarchs. — Paul Tonello, Sparks, Nevada If we had better people in power, two parties would be enough. But we don't. If there were representatives who would vote to represent the people who elected them on different issues, rather than always being in lockstep, a two-party system works very well. A multiparty system that requires different coalitions on different issues would work better than what is happening in Congress. I believe that fiscal responsibility, compassion for those in need, smaller government and stewardship of national assets would win the greatest coalition's vote. Musk's resources are important, but getting moderates from each party to be involved would be more important. Also, getting more people who are not currently involved in politics could make it very powerful. Neither party is doing anything to make the future better for our children and grandchildren. I wish we had good people instead of people who thrive on power and ego. — LaMar Stephenson, Spanish Fork, Utah It's a matter of when, not if, a third party will emerge in America The existing two-party system limits the people's choices. They coexist in a symbiotic relationship. Much like defense and plaintiff attorneys. They need each other to exist. Loyalty among the members is first to their respective party, not the Constitution. In my sphere of connections across all of America, I have yet to meet a person who does not believe a third party is a necessity. It is my belief that the time of a two-party system has passed. A new political system is a necessity. If we have a third option, more fiscally conservative and socially moderate, this country will be better served. When, not if, this happens, the legacy parties might wake up and realize they have lost touch with the American system. It is incumbent on the news media, which has also polarized, to begin an honest reporting of this movement. A third party should be fiscally conservative and socially moderate, protecting the future of America and not buying votes by borrowing from the future. The youth of America will wake up and align with a new model. Musk has the resources to overcome the start-up challenges of a viable third party. He has clearly shown his commitment to improving government and its misdirected leadership. But he is not the person to lead the party. We need a charismatic younger leader who comes from the heartland, has been in the actual world and served his country. Service in the military is important. It's too easy to place young Americans in harm's way when they have not also made that choice. Look at how few elected officials have served or have children in service. Service can take many forms that reflect their passion for serving the United States. The two parties exist to support each other. Loyalty by their members is to the party, not the country. Congress demands this loyalty. Leadership punishes those with loyalty to country above party. — Bob Jones, Dadeville, Alabama We need a political party that isn't beholden to the rich The present political parties are beholden to the rich. We need a party that also hears the people. A better party would focus on middle-class needs, education, helping college kids with their future, present and past college bills. It would focus on the environment and upholding and advancing the ideals of the Declaration of Independence: life, liberty the pursuit of happiness and equality for all. We need a party that has a little nuance on issues and looks for ways to solve problems with compromise. Our young people need affordable housing. Medical care should not be tied to employment. And we need to restore the sense of community that we have lost in some places ‒ a sense that there is something greater than me. Musk is not the person to lead a third party. He has done too much damage by reelecting President Donald Trump and with DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency. I suppose his money could be useful. The Republican Party is firmly under the control of Trump. He is corrupt, cruel and embraces chaos. The GOP should be renamed the CCCP. Most of the Democratic leaders do not know how to resist Trump. There needs to be a moral rebirth in our nation. Many are morally blind to Trump and his actions. Who are we? What does it mean to be an American? What is right and wrong? Many are under the influence of conspiracy theories and do not realize that they are being played for money. — Rick Jones, Mount Gilead, Ohio You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
USA Today
3 minutes ago
- USA Today
Trump isn't gutting Medicaid and food stamps. He's fixing our broken welfare system.
President Donald Trump has preserved the core of the safety net for the truly vulnerable. He and his fellow Republicans are helping millions of able-bodied adults leave welfare and find work. It's a simple question with an obvious answer: Should Americans work as a condition of receiving welfare? More than two-thirds of Americans respond with a resounding yes. But while the principle of the matter and popular opinion are clear, our country's welfare system has been a muddled mess for decades. The biggest welfare program − Medicaid − has been disconnected from helping its 84.6 million recipients find work. And while the food stamps program technically has work requirements, they're inconsistently enforced for the 42 million people who benefit from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. The result: Tens of millions of people, especially able-bodied adults, have been trapped in government dependency. But they deserve the chance to become self-sufficient. They deserve to fully share in our country's progress. And they deserve to shape that progress while pursuing their own American dream. Trump is fixing broken welfare system That is why President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act is so important. The president and Republicans in Congress have started to fundamentally fix America's broken welfare system. They're finally connecting welfare to work. Your Turn: Medicaid handouts only create dependency. Able-bodied adults should work. | Opinion Forum Unfortunately, many Americans haven't heard this side of the story. They've been told − by virtually every politician on the left as well as a few loud voices on the right − that Trump and his fellow Republicans are gutting the safety net that vulnerable Americans need. Nothing could be further from the truth. In reality, the president has preserved the core of the safety net for the truly vulnerable. He and his fellow Republicans are helping millions of able-bodied adults leave welfare and find work. That's the point of the safety net: to support people who've fallen on hard times, then help them move on to better times. It was never meant to be a hammock. Yet that's what it has become, trapping millions of people in generational dependency. Trump's welfare reforms are righting this wrong. To start, Medicaid now has its first federal work requirement in history. Able-bodied adults without children as well as those without young kids will now be required to work at least part time to keep receiving Medicaid. Will Trump's big bill kill people? Here's the truth about Medicaid cuts. | Opinion That is common sense. Medicaid was created to help the neediest people in society get health care. It wasn't intended to cover healthy adults who are capable of working but choose not to. It's good for them, and all of America, if they find jobs and raise their incomes. The same is true for food stamps. The president and Congress are closing loopholes that have allowed able-bodied adults to avoid work requirements. They've also put states on the financial hook for giving food stamps to those who aren't eligible. These reforms will help millions of people find work and boost their incomes. That's good for them and the rest of society. Work requirements will help people living in poverty Those who criticize these commonsense reforms aren't just missing the point. They're missing something profoundly American. We should want our fellow citizens to find good jobs, earn more income and put themselves on the path to everything from buying a car to buying a home. That's the ticket to a life of fulfillment − to the American dream. But we shouldn't want people to stay on welfare with no strings attached, especially able-bodied adults. We should want them to lead better lives. And we should believe in their incredible potential and innate ability to improve their lives. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. Trump's welfare reforms are grounded in this deeply American principle. They will move millions of people from welfare to work, transforming lives in powerful ways. Virtually everyone intuitively understands that this is a good thing for everyone, including those on welfare and those of us who pay for it. The real question is why some politicians and pundits think it's bad to empower people on welfare to rise through work. Hayden Dublois is data and analytics director at the Foundation for Government Accountability. You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
The Intercept
3 minutes ago
- The Intercept
Donald Trump Jr.'s Drone Ventures Could Make a Killing — Thanks to Dad's Big Beautiful Budget
Last November, shortly after Donald Trump was reelected president, his son Donald Trump Jr. joined a venture capital firm with investments in several defense companies. Later that month, he was appointed the advisory board of Unusual Machines, a small, Florida-based drone company incorporated in Nevada. Securities filings showed Trump Jr. owned 331,580 shares in the company, with only two top executives holding more. After he joined the board, the stock doubled to about $10 a share. It was a boon for Trump Jr., but not his last chance to make big money off drones — and his efforts to do so may get a big helping hand from dad. President Donald Trump's military procurement policies, defense budget, and recently passed government budget, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, includes $1.4 billion dollars for small drone production — where Unusual Machines has been making big investments. 'There is no modern or historical comparison for what Don Jr. and the President are doing.' With his father's administration footing the bill for massive domestic drone expansion, good government watchdogs fear Trump Jr. could benefit financially, creating a conflict of interest, or at least the appearance of one — without anyone even finding out. The president's family is not subject to the same financial disclosures that federal officials must make about their financial and business interests. 'Don Jr. is not subject to any disclosures,' said Donald Sherman, executive vice president and chief counsel at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW. 'There's just innumerable ways that this company with ties to Don Jr. can lobby the administration through him without having to report that information.' (Unusual Machines, the Trump Organization, and the White House did not respond to requests for comment.) Though many current and former elected officials have deep ties to the defense industry, Sherman said the Trumps' positions were unique in their scale and brazenness. 'I want to make clear that this is a problem, and it's a problem that impacts the whole of government,' Sherman said, 'but there is no modern or historical comparison for what Don Jr. and the President are doing.' Unusual Machines has been positioning itself to benefit from legislative and government policy changes. The company is made up of two parts: Fat Shark, which makes goggles, controllers, and other drone components and accessories; and an e-commerce platform called Rotor Riot, which sells drone parts. According to a pitch deck for investors, Unusual Machines also plans to acquire an Australian drone motor manufacturer, Rotor Lab. The acquisition of Rotor Lab, according to the presentation, is part of a wider plan to move the small-drone supply chain to American soil. The company will produce its own drone motors at a planned 17,000 square foot facility in Orlando, Florida. That facility is, according to the pitch deck, part of an effort to 'onshore' more drone manufacturing and avoid heavy tariffs on Chinese drone technology. Moving more manufacturing to the U.S. will also help comply with new government national security regulations and Pentagon procurement policies. Congress has just begun work on the 2026 defense budget, or National Defense Authorization Act. The NDAA is set to prioritize government funding for bringing production of small drone components to the U.S., including at private manufacturing facilities. And a July 10 memo from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth states the Pentagon's intention to invest significantly in American-made drones and drone components — like those Unusual Machines plans to manufacture starting in September, according to the investor presentation. (The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment.) Some of Unusual Machines' moves are already in line with military drone applications. The company will make motors for first-person view drones, or FPVs — small drones of the kind already being trialed in military exercises — at the new Orlando facility. Because the company is focusing on making and selling FPV drone components that comply with the NDAA, they'd also stand to benefit from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act's billions in subsidies for military drone technology, including $1.4 billion 'for the expansion of the small unmanned aerial system industrial base.' Unusual Machines has a promising position in the market; since small drones are traditionally made for commercial use, larger defense contractors may have them in the catalog but haven't focused as much on developing them. Unusual Machines says in its investor presentation that bringing manufacturing to the U.S. will give it a 'strong competitive advantage.' Experts worry that having Trump Jr. on their side could do the same thing. 'There's always these risks that he is going to have inside information or be able to access inside information from the U.S. government for a whole range of things,' Colby Goodman, an arms trade expert at Transparency International U.S., said. 'Just from the procurement side, he could know about upcoming bids, and the content of what that is, and help them win contracts with the U.S. government.' 'When contractors don't get the U.S. government contracts they want … they backfill with arm sales and deals with foreign entities.' Even if Unusual Machines doesn't win contracts with the government, that doesn't mean it won't make money, Julia Gledhill, a research analyst for the National Security Reform Program at the Stimson Center, said. 'What happens when contractors don't get the U.S. government contracts they want is then they backfill with arm sales and deals with foreign entities,' Gledhill said. 'There's something to be said, potentially, about the idea that contractors are going to develop technologies or weapons with state support and make money by selling them elsewhere.' Trump Jr.'s ties to the defense and drone industries go further than his role with Unusual Machines. He's also a partner at 1789 Capital, a venture capital firm led by Republican megadonor Omeed Malik. The company's investments include plenty of defense firms like Anduril, AI-powered aerospace firm Hadrian, and Firehawk. Trump Jr.'s involvement in investment decisions isn't clear, but he's been positioned as a face of the company alongside Malik at events including the Qatar Economic Forum. 'Mr. Malik and Donald Trump Jr. have an established business relationship that dates back more than five years, which is why the firm was thrilled to welcome Don's business expertise last year in the role of partner,' said a 1789 spokesperson, who touted the firm's compliance and transparency records. 'Don, as a private citizen who has never served in government, is permitted to continue to pursue his decades-long career in business.' Trump Jr.'s potential benefit from his investments through 1789 would shake out differently from Unusual Machines. Partners in venture capital firms typically take a fee to manage investments in startups. Then, if those companies make a big return when they go public or are acquired by another firm, the venture capitalists can make money after they repay institutional investors. VCs also receive other benefits like a seat on the company's board or equity in the company. Start-ups backed by 1789 would be better positioned to be acquired or go public — as Anduril expects to do — with lucrative government contracts in hand. The fact that Trump Jr. stands to benefit from his father's presidency so much, on top of his family's wealth, clearly present conflicting interests, said Sherman, the CREW expert — but it's not illegal. Although there is legislation aimed at eliminating some types of conflicts of interest, there's no comprehensive bill aimed at the adult children of high-ranking officials. 'The rules themselves aren't designed, unfortunately, to force the adult children of government officials to report their financial entanglements,' Sherman said. 'But Don Jr. and President Trump continue to make the case for why maybe they should.'
