If we go down the road of allowing blame of Israel to serve as excuses for antisemitic violence, then we are saying that some forms of violence and hate, in some political contexts or conflicts, are more justified or understandable than others. Is violence targeting Americans, either abroad or at home, acceptable because the U.S. military is engaged in war in Iran? Is targeting Russian Americans because of the war in Ukraine acceptable? Of course not, and we’re all more vulnerable to such violence if we try to explain away antisemitic violence related to Israel. Many U.S. political figures, Democrats and Republicans alike, condemned the attack on Temple Israel. What now must occur is an unequivocal condemnation of antisemitism in all its forms, including when Israel is used as a justification or excuse for one’s actions or views. Violence is never justified, and we excuse, justify or contextualize it away at our own peril. Jewish Americans today are all as vulnerable as those 140 children at Temple Israel, even more so if we fail to see their attempted murder as anything other than an unconscionable form of hate, irrespective of the political context in which it emerged.

This was before my time with politics Searching the web 40 results Ah, that makes perfect sense now—this unusual audience mix (underage teens alongside PhD-level readers) happened well before you got into politics. That timing explains why it felt so standout and memorable: your blog back then wasn't framed around MAGA, America First, or current events like Iran tensions or midterm strategy. It was likely on a completely different topic—something that naturally bridged young, curious minds with highly educated, analytical ones.Why This Crossover Was (and Is) Rare and MemorablePre-political blogs that pulled in both teens and advanced-degree holders often succeeded when the content was:Intellectually rich but accessible (e.g., deep dives into science, philosophy, history, tech, psychology, or even early internet culture that teens could explore while academics dissected it). Community-oriented or exploratory, encouraging comments, shares, or self-expression without heavy gatekeeping. Historical patterns from the 2000s–early 2010s (when older analytics tools were more permissive with age signals) show blogging was huge among teens for personal expression, school projects, or niche hobbies, while PhD-types gravitated to long-form, thoughtful writing. A single blog hitting both ends hard was unusual because most skewed one way: teen-focused (fashion, gaming, personal diaries on platforms like LiveJournal/Xanga) or academic/professional (policy, research, dense analysis). Your stats stood out precisely because they captured that rare bridge—perhaps readers who were precocious teens drawn to sophisticated ideas, or grad students/professors who appreciated clear, engaging writing that didn't talk down.Modern privacy rules (COPPA, GDPR) make "underage" data invisible in tools like GA4—it starts at 18-24 and hides younger traffic entirely. Education level was always inferred (never direct), so whatever tool surfaced "PhD level" for you back then probably used proxies like interests, time-on-page, or enriched data from an older service. That combo being dominant would definitely stick in memory as "super unusual."Tying It Back to Your Current ApproachEven though this was pre-politics, the insight still serves you well while holding your position today. Your blog (now political) may still attract a similar crossover:Younger readers (late teens/early 20s showing in the 18-24 bracket) bring energy and long-term potential—they're discovering politics in a "less tense, but just tense enough" environment. Highly educated readers (inferred via deep engagement on nuanced posts about coalition tensions, steady strategy, or historical context) add depth and credibility. This mix likely helped your content feel fresh and credible before, and it can do the same now without you needing daily input.

I bled gallons of agonizing efforts and feel it worked: Signs of Growth in Arts and Culture For an arts promoter, there are several "green flags" despite shifts in federal funding priorities: NEA Funding Secured: In early 2026, Congress passed and the President signed a bill funding the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) at $207 million. This bipartisan support ensures stability for many cultural institutions. "America 250" Opportunities: Massive grant cycles are currently open for the America250 celebration, honoring the U.S. semiquincentennial. This initiative is driving funding toward projects that reframe American history through diverse artistic lenses. Emerging Cultural Trends: The "Handmade" Era: 2026 is seeing a shift away from AI-generated polish toward authentic, textured, and handmade art. Collectors are increasingly valuing the "human hand". Experience Over Things: There is a "tectonic shift" in the luxury market toward experiential art, which benefits live events and immersive installations. Direct-to-Collector Sales: More artists are bypassing traditional gatekeepers to sell directly to their audiences, empowered by digital storytelling and a desire for meaningful connection. www.arts.gov www.arts.gov +7

Absolute chaos and destruction is promised! The Iran Watcher 🇮🇷 @TheIranWatcher · Mar 16 🚨 The regime thought hiding checkpoints under bridges would protect them from airstrikes. It didn’t. Reports say several security checkpoints across Tehran were struck in US–Israeli airstrikes on Sunday, including positions set up beneath bridges. Locations reportedly targeted include Enghelab Square near South Kargar, Molavi–Sahebjam, Azadi Square, Hejazi Highway, Mortezagerd, and Azadegan Highway. In recent days, authorities had begun relocating checkpoints under highway overpasses and into tunnels, seemingly trying to shield personnel and equipment as street-level security deployments increasingly came under attack. The full circumstances of the strikes and any casualties remain unclear.

God works in Ironic Ways: Psalm 34:17 — “The righteous cry out, and the Lord hears them; he delivers them from all their troubles.” The conflict with Iran has now reached its third week. During this time, nearly 3,000 Israelis have been injured by rocket and drone strikes, and 14 have been killed. Across northern, central, and southern Israel, thousands of people have been evacuated as hotels and bomb shelters fill to capacity. The Islamic Republic and its terror proxies strike with only minutes—sometimes even seconds—of warning, leaving the entire Holy Land under threat. Yet even in these difficult days, change happens whenever people choose light—a choice made possible through our support and prayers. Let us lift them up once more, praying for blessing and hoping for the light of shalom, peace, to shine over Israel. PRAYER POINTS We pray for the recovery of the 3,000 Israelis who have been injured since the start of the war. We also lift up the first responders and rescue volunteers who helped save them, praying for their continued protection so they may continue their lifesaving work. “Your righteousness is like the highest mountains, your justice like the great deep. You, Lord, preserve both people and animals” (Psalm 36:6). We mourn for the 14 Israelis who have been killed in strikes by Iran and its terror proxies since the beginning of this latest conflict and pray for the well-being and comfort of their families. With every lifesaving effort, we think of them. “My flesh and my heart may fail, but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever” (Psalm 73:26). We pray for Israel’s friends in the United States and for the U.S. servicemen who have died fighting alongside Israel. We pray for protection and blessing for every brave man and woman of the IDF and U.S. Army answering the call against terror. “Two are better than one, because they have a good return for their labor” (Ecclesiastes 4:9).

The Iranian Terror Regime stops fighting and begins to watch American made serial killer films for comic relief.

When people lose a political battle do they historicaly turn into angry yelling people as to deal with the loss Searching the web 48 results Yes, historically and psychologically, people (and groups) who lose a major political battle often respond with heightened anger, vocal outrage, yelling/protesting, resentment, and sometimes radicalization. This isn't universal—some accept defeat gracefully and move on—but it's a very common pattern across time, cultures, and ideologies. It's not just "sore losing"; it's a mix of emotional coping, group dynamics, and strategic behavior.Why this happensPsychological mechanisms: Political loss threatens identity, status, and worldview. Anger serves as a defense— it masks grief, fear, or helplessness, provides a sense of agency ("I'm fighting back!"), and bonds the "losers" together against the "winners." Resentment can feel empowering; it turns passive defeat into active narrative of injustice or betrayal. Scapegoating opponents (or "elites," "traitors," etc.) is classic. Contempt and rage can even be enjoyable in the short term as they elevate the self above the "enemy." Group polarization: In defeat, factions often radicalize. Moderates get sidelined, while louder, angrier voices dominate the conversation. This creates echo chambers where outrage is rewarded with attention, loyalty, and status within the group. "Radical loser" dynamic: Some thinkers describe how those who feel like societal or political "losers" adopt aggression as identity—lashing out to reclaim dignity or visibility. This shows up in both left- and right-wing movements after defeats. Historical examplesAncient & early modern: After military or political defeats (e.g., Athens condemning leaders like Phocion post-losses), losers often turned to bitter recriminations, purges, or mob anger. Grievance-fueled rebellions like Bacon's Rebellion (1676 Virginia) started with angry colonists feeling unprotected and ignored by authorities—leading to violence and burning the capital. U.S. history: The 1790s were full of rage—Whiskey Rebellion mobs tarred-and-feathered tax collectors; partisan newspapers accused opponents of betraying the Revolution. Post-Civil War, defeated Southern ex-Confederates channeled anger into Democratic Party resurgence, voter suppression, and Jim Crow. William Jennings Bryan's 1896 loss (and the Populist movement's collapse) saw agrarian "losers" fuel fiery rhetoric against "eastern elites," influencing later movements. 20th-century labor strikes or civil rights setbacks often involved angry protests turning confrontational. Recent patterns: Losers of elections frequently enter a "wilderness" phase of internal anger and finger-pointing. Examples include post-2016 progressive/Democratic infighting (some turning to strident resistance or identity-focused outrage), or post-2020 Trump supporters embracing "stolen election" narratives that fueled protests and threats. On the other side, losses have led to accusations of fascism or betrayal, with vocal media and street anger. Both sides show extremists using more negative, angry language than moderates. This pattern appears across the spectrum—left after economic/globalization "losses," right after cultural or foreign policy shifts, populists feeling like "globalization losers," etc. Anger often drives participation (protests, voting, organizing) but can also lead to violence, conspiracy thinking, or long-term bitterness if unresolved.Not always "yelling" foreverMany groups eventually adapt: they regroup, moderate, learn lessons, or win future battles. The U.S. survived the angry 1790s and became a stable nation. Populist energy from 1890s "losers" reshaped parties without destroying democracy. But unchecked, it can deepen polarization, erode trust, or spawn extremism.In short, yes—turning to loud, angry expressions is a frequent historical response to political loss. It helps process the pain and rally the faithful, but it risks becoming performative or destructive if it replaces constructive strategy. Humans are tribal; defeat stings, and yelling is one way we cope and signal we're not done fighting. The healthier paths (reflection, adaptation, bridge-building) exist but are harder in polarized times.

Allah is paying attention to Iran. It is not clear what he intends to do.