Two Jews, three opinions. That sounds like a bad Mel Brooks joke, but it is exactly what the bipartisan Commission on Civil Rights testimony on campus antisemitism sounded like this month. The Jewish world appears genuinely divided on whether the federal government should take real, muscular action to protect Jewish students. I find that strange, bordering on surreal. The United States has been the greatest protector of the Jewish people in all recorded history. America welcomed refugees after pogroms and the Holocaust, stood with Israel when much of the world wouldn’t, and built the freest, safest diaspora community Jews have ever known. Yet a vocal segment of the community is seized by the fear that if President Donald Trump does anything in the name of stopping antisemitism (defunding universities that tolerate harassment, enforcing Title VI the way we enforce it for every other protected class), that will produce more antisemites. I’m sympathetic to Jewish nail-biting. I also have “chai” anxiety about politicos turning Jews into partisan footballs. But here, that fear is dangerously misplaced. The “not in our name” movement rests on two flawed assumptions. The first is that antisemitism is something we can manage or de-escalate through our own behavior. The second is that the hatred is ultimately about something we did. Neither is true. Antisemitism is an ancient, irrational hatred. It has survived every attempt at assimilation, every political realignment, every change in Jewish behavior. Jew hatred has been dressed up as religious duty, economic resentment, racial pseudoscience, and now as anti-Zionism. At bottom it is about who we are. We are a people who introduced monotheism to a pagan world, who gave the West its moral grammar, and who somehow produced outsized contributions in every field despite millennia of exile and massacre. Jew hatred isn’t a rational response to Israeli policy or campus activism or Jewish privilege. It’s a nasty virus that mutates but never dies. Jew hatred won’t disappear no matter what we do or who is in the White House. But university administrators who turned blind eyes toward anti-Jewish crimes respond to enforcement and career-ending consequences. Pretending Jews can stop antisemitism by rejecting help from the wrong president is pure mishegas. Think of the guy in the classic Jewish flood parable who waves off every rescuer, yelling, “Hashem will save me!” only to drown, wondering why no miracle showed up. (In Heaven, G-d shrugs, “I sent you three boats!”) The data from the antisemitism hearing in Congress itself proved the point. The surge in incidents didn’t begin with Trump’s second term. It exploded after Oct. 7, 2023, under the previous administration, while many universities and federal offices dithered, or worse. The students who testified are sincere and brave for speaking up. Their concern that aggressive federal action will politicize Jewish suffering and turn it into a pretext for other agendas is understandable. But I’m twice their age and that’s old enough to know, as the kids say, haters gonna hate. Worse, when even basic enforcement of existing civil-rights law is framed as a partisan assault, the antisemites win twice: once by attacking Jews, and again by making Jews afraid to accept defense. So where do we go from here? Stop treating protection as a partisan luxury. Equal enforcement of the law isn’t a favor to Jews or to Trump. It’s the bare minimum America owes every citizen. Demand civil rights for everyone, including ourselves.  The encampments are largely gone, and administrators are suddenly paying attention because universal rules are finally being applied without apology. Yes, we should watch for overreach and defend free speech. But the solution isn’t paralysis or waiting for the right president. It’s consistent, principle-driven action no matter who sits in the White House. In the end, Jews don’t get to pick and choose which forms of bigotry deserve zero tolerance. We don’t tell the fire department “not if that guy is driving the truck.” History has been brutally clear on what happens when we wave off the lifeboats. Clarity about who we are is what has always saved the Jewish people.  We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post 2 Jews, 3 Opinions on Campus Antisemitism appeared first on The Daily Signal.

REUTERS–The United States and Israel launched the most ambitious attack on Iran in decades on Saturday, and Israel said Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had been killed in the operation. Khamenei’s body has been found, a senior Israeli official told Reuters. Iran called the strikes unprovoked and illegal and responded with missiles fired at Israel and at least seven other countries, including Gulf states that host U.S. bases. President Donald Trump, who made the biggest foreign-policy gamble of his presidency after campaigning for reelection as a “peace president”, said the strikes were aimed at ending the threat from a country that has threatened the U.S. for decades and ensuring Iran could not develop a nuclear weapon. Trump called on Iranian security forces to lay down their weapons and invited Iranians to topple their government once the bombing ended. In a video posted overnight on social media, he also warned there could be U.S. casualties, although several hours later the Department of Defense said it had no reports of American deaths or injuries.  Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suggested the strikes had killed Khamenei, and called on Iranians to “take to the streets and finish the job.” There were many signs indicating Khamenei “is no longer”, Netanyahu said. He said Khamenei’s compound had been destroyed, and Revolutionary Guard commanders and senior nuclear officials had been destroyed. Iranian media had said Khamenei’s son-in-law and daughter-in-law were killed in the strikes. Originally published by Reuters The post Iranian Leader Khamenei Killed in Strikes, Israel Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address hit several important policy areas, but even though there was no specific mention of the country’s declining marriage rates and “birth dearth,” the concerns of families were a major theme. One of the key concerns for families today is the future of American homeownership. The cost and supply of housing is an issue that comes up often among policymakers and academics who study the decline in family formation. The president told the story of a Houston mom of two who has put in 20 offers on homes, only to be outbid by institutional investors. Trump pointed to an executive order he signed in January banning Wall Street investment firms from buying homes that could otherwise be purchased by families. Some commentators see this move as unhelpful government intrusion in the housing market, but the average American family cares more about being able to buy a home in a safe neighborhood than strict adherence to laissez-faire economics. Another issue that concerns parents is the financial prosperity of their children. The president touted his Trump Accounts as a way to help today’s children “jumpstart the American Dream” when they become adults. Beginning on July 4, the tax-deferred investment accounts will be seeded with a $1,000 initial deposit for every American child born between Jan. 1, 2025, and Dec. 31, 2028. Parents don’t have to touch the accounts after that, but as the president said, even “modest additional contributions” could help them grow to over $100,000 or more by the time they turn 18. While every parent is concerned about securing a stable financial future for their child, Trump’s acknowledgement of Sage Blair and her mother, Michele, in the gallery brought attention to another challenge facing families. Sage was 14 when she began identifying as a boy. Her school “affirmed” her decision and treated her as a boy without telling her mother. The actions of these adults set off a chain reaction that led Sage to be trafficked, abused, and separated from her mother. The president’s willingness to highlight Sage’s story brought needed attention to the growing trend of state government’s punishing parents for not affirming children who identify as the opposite sex. Some legislators have tried to fight back. Virginia lawmakers introduced HB 2432, “Sage’s Law,” in 2023, requiring schools to inform parents if their child wanted to identify as the opposite sex. The bill passed the Virginia House of Delegates, but it failed in the state Senate. The failure of elected officials to protect the vulnerable and stand up for families is an all-too-common reality in today’s political landscape. It’s one reason Democrats refused to stand when Trump asked every lawmaker who prioritizes the needs of American citizens over illegal aliens to rise to their feet. Misplaced priorities in public safety are why so many families have had to bear the brunt of violent crime—perpetrated either by repeat offenders or immigrants who are in the country illegally. One example was the killing of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train in 2025. Her attacker, Decarlos Brown Jr., had a long criminal history that included 14 previous arrests. No parent should have to bury a child because our justice system fails to do its job, but too many families across the country have had to do just that. There is a lot of work being done on the political right to strengthen America’s families, much of it focused on attempts to boost declining marriage and birth rates. But the reality is that family policy encompasses more than wedding bells and baby showers. It includes young couples who want to have children but are afraid they won’t be able to afford a home in a safe neighborhood. It also extends to schools, where adults should be focused on the building blocks of a solid education, not pushing radical ideas about gender in the classroom. Trump’s State of the Union address was a good reminder that all policy is family policy. The post Trump Reminds Americans That All Policy Is Family Policy appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of a segment from today’s edition of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words” with Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to Hanson’s own YouTube channel to watch past episodes. This show was filmed prior to the start of Operation Epic Fury. Sami Winc: So, Victor, let’s then turn to another topic before we go to a break again. I was wondering your thoughts on Iran. I know that Trump has moved assets into the region, that the regime has now killed, from my source, 32,000 demonstrators, and Trump has said he’s going to do something. And not so much what will Trump do—because, obviously, you couldn’t know that—but what’s in the realm of possibilities of what Trump might do and what is the grand strategy of Trump right now? Victor Davis Hanson: Well, he’s looking at—he always looks at these situations of intervention or bombing on a cost-to-benefit analysis, whether it was killing al-Baghdadi, or Soleimani, or the Wagner Group, or bombing ISIS in his first term, or hitting the nuclear facilities in his second in Iran, or the Maduro kidnapping capture, etc. And so that’s a good way to look at it. What are the downsides? The downside is: If he starts bombing, who does he bomb and can he hit them? He has to have the Revolutionary Guards. He has to get the theocracy. They all know he’s going to be after ’em. They’re in bunkers. Will he be able to do it? He’s gonna have to get the missile depots. He’s gonna have to get all of the means that that regime exercises to create deterrence: missiles, nuclear facilities … tanks. Get rid of ’em all. And he should expect, as we saw with Hamas in the tunnel, that they’ll all be parked, stored—like they are in Beirut—in apartment buildings, in hospitals, in mosques. And so they want a lot of collateral damage. And then he has to understand that he needs a popular uprising at the same time. We’ve already had one and that prompted him to send the assets to the region. But he said, and you said, 32,000 people were killed and they’re probably executing thousands that we don’t even know about. So, if you’re afraid to go out on the street and you see American planes, maybe even Israeli planes, and they’re hitting targets, is your reaction, “Good, good. I’m glad they’re killing my government,” or “I don’t really care anymore. They’ve killed us. Why are they hurting Iran? I’m an Iranian”? And will that create a counter-patriotic fervor? Then he has to think: Look what happened in Libya when we bombed. We got rid of Gaddafi, the Obama—that triad of Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton, and Samantha Power. And what did they give us? They gave us ultimate chaos. And we went in and took out Saddam, we had chaos. We went in and got rid of the Taliban, we got chaos, and we had to stay there. So do we want ground troops in there to overthrow—no, we don’t. So, who is going to take the place—the shah? And if we could get the shah’s son, we could have him say, “I will not be in power for more than three years. I’m a transitional… to get a new constitution and bring in outside observers for fair elections. And we’re gonna outlaw that theocratic Khamenei party, sort of like the Germans outlaw the Nazi party.” So that’s a lot of—and then he has the weather and then he has other considerations. Israel has a whole list of targets and they may not be the same number of targets as we are. They have killers that have killed Jews, they have terrorists. They know where they are. Once people see Israeli planes, does that confirm the propaganda of the regime that it’s Israelis, et cetera. Then he’s got the MAGA base to worry about. Tucker Carlson said just the 30-minute incursion into Iran was gonna start World War III. Steve Bannon, that group. So he has the assets. You can’t take a 100,000-ton displacement, huge carrier, $14 billion, 5,000 people, and just stick it out there forever. You know what I mean? It has a shelf life, maybe three, four months at most. So, he’s assembling these assets and they’re almost in place. They’re in the Mediterranean, they’re in the Strait of Hormuz, they’re in the Persian Gulf, they’re in the Red Sea. They can come at a 360-degree angle. But they’re reaching their climactic point of their extreme readiness. That means if you’re a young sailor, you’re not sleeping well, you’re gonna be called at any moment. You’re having drills. You’re at a state of readiness. It’s not sustainable for more than three or four weeks. So, at some point the commanders are going to come to Trump and say, “You’ve gotta pull the trigger, or we gotta go back.” And that is gonna be a decision, I think, that has political ramifications. So then his other advisors are gonna say, “We’re nine months from the midterm. If you’re gonna do it, you gotta do it now. And this is what can happen if we have a bloodbath and we hit a hospital and the Europeans—don’t expect the Europeans to be there. Don’t expect the British to let us use Diego Garcia. Don’t expect anybody—and expect the Chinese and the Russians to be very angry because they’re gonna lose their asset and they will cause us problems somewhere else. Maybe they’ll start threatening, at a higher degree, Taiwan, or maybe Putin will escalate in Ukraine while we’re doing this.” So, there’s all these things that he has to filter out as important, somewhat important, irrelevant. And then he has to say, “What is the timing on the world stage?” Well, the Olympics is over. Well, you can’t bomb somebody during the Olympics. I mean, there’s this pretense— Sami Winc: All these things come in. That’s true. Victor Davis Hanson: And you can’t bomb somebody before the State of the Union. So, my anticipation is the Olympics are over, the State of the Union is over. The weather and the seasons are getting better. And if he is going to do it, he would probably do it in the next 10 days. And then he will not have ground troops because, you know, he said George W. Bush should have been impeached for going into Iraq. So, it’s a very difficult thing. Very quickly, then, there’s a grand strategy. I just wanna say, you know, H.R. McMaster and Nadia Schadlow created the first national security strategic assessment in the first term. That was updated. I think Michael Anton and others updated it. It was a little bit different, but it had the same theme. The theme was that Trump is not an interventionist. He doesn’t want to go into ground—but he is not an isolationist. He is a Jacksonian. He is a preemptive deterrent. That’s what he wants. And his main fear in the world is China. And if you think about that—and it’s been pretty brilliant what he is done the last 13 months, because if you take, say all these isolated incidents that everybody said, “Oh, he is herky-jerky. We don’t know what he is gonna do on any given day. Oh, there’s no point to it.” There is. If you just go down the list of say, nine or 10 things. Take the Panama. He goes in and he starts, “We might take the canal back. We might do this, we might…” but what was the whole point of that? The whole point was to get the Chinese out of the entry and exit and tell the Panamanians you violated the spirit and the letter of the Panama Canal Treaty and we have a right to revoke it. So you’ve got one choice, you get ’em outta here now, and you restore the Panama Canal to a partnership between us and you, or else. That worked. Take another one. He got rid of Maduro. Maduro had a communist enclave that was a drugs -exporting conduit to Mexico, or the United States via Mexico. And partnership with the left-wing government, Colombia, anti-American, and embargoed and stealthily sending oil to China. And he said, “Nope.” And we’re going to do what? We’re going to starve Venezuela out of its oil. We’re gonna blockade it, and we’re gonna take him out and we’re gonna restore the Monroe Doctrine. And China, we should have warned you in Panama. Now get out. And they did. The post Victor Davis Hanson: Trump’s Cost-Benefit Analysis for Striking Iran appeared first on The Daily Signal.

President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address sent shockwaves across Capitol Hill this week as he outlined an aggressive legislative agenda for Republicans in Congress. In Ohio—a state that encapsulates the MAGA shift in the Republican Party—the president’s call to action and his patriotic rallying cry did not fall on deaf ears. The Daily Signal spoke to Ohioans about their views on Trump’s speech and the moment that grabbed their attention. Trump Calls Out Democrats on Illegal Immigration Deborah Oberlin, a local realtor in the Canton area, told The Daily Signal that she was “very disappointed” in Democrats for refusing to stand when Trump asked members to stand up if they agreed with the following statement: “The first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens.” The president shamed Democrats for not standing. Oberlin noted that Democrats might not like Trump, but focused more so on how their constituents or those guests might feel. “How would you feel if it was one one of your kids?” Oberlin wondered, seeking a nonpartisan appreciation for such guests who lost children. “That hit me really hard,” she added. Oberlin said her disappointment in Democrats went beyond immigration to their refusal to stand for the military and family members who were injured or killed by criminals. Matt Dole, chairman of the Licking County Republican Party, said Democrats sitting in disagreement with the president on illegal immigrants was “the moment of the speech.” Drew Carchedi, Mahoning County Republican Party Central Committee chairman and general manager for his family’s retail mattress business, Sleepy Hollow Sleep Shops, told The Daily Signal, “All I continue to hear from friends, family, and members of our party is, ‘Look at what Democrats did not stand for.’” Trump’s speech defended the administration’s deportation efforts and presented an aggressive immigration agenda, including ending sanctuary cities. Hilary Jackson, the legislative chair of Moms for Liberty Ohio, referred to “the push to ban sanctuary cities” as “deeply significant.” Trump’s Economic Message Hits Home Oberlin told The Daily Signal that she was enthusiastic about Trump’s vision for the American economy, especially when it comes to housing because of her occupation. During his address, Trump noted that “lower interest rates will solve the Biden-created housing problem, while at the same time protecting the values of those people who already own a house that really feel rich for the first time in their lives.” The president is “dead on,” Oberlin said, regarding home buying. “Real estate is booming, OK, it’s starting to get there,” Oberlin added. In her profession, she noted that she’s seen interest rates going down and people are increasingly able to afford to buy a house. Carchedi said the economic and immigration message resonated with the grassroots. “From a grassroots perspective here in Ohio, the State of the Union wasn’t about applause lines. It was about whether working families and small businesses feel relief and renewed opportunities. In communities like ours, economic policy isn’t abstract. It shows up in freight costs, insurance premiums, utilities, payroll, and whether families can afford groceries and fuel,” he told The Daily Signal. “The State of the Union exuded strength, not managed decline,” he added, noting that “that message matters. People don’t want drama. They want direction and opportunity.” A Call to Patriotism Miriam Navarro, a Franklin County resident who described herself as a legal immigrant from Colombia, was similarly inspired by what she referred to as “an excellent speech.” “It’s wonderful to hear our country is improving regarding the economy, security, and laws in general,” Navarro added, noting she “saw strong leadership with good results.” Carchedi stressed that it was “one of the most impactful State of the Union addresses in [his] lifetime.” He specifically praised how Trump’s “address signaled a belief that America’s best days are ahead and not behind us.” That sentiment was shared by Mahoning County Young Republican President James Mullarkey, who echoed that the address was “an unapologetic celebration of America in its 250th year,” with “optimism and strong justification for why America’s best days are still ahead of us.” According to a graphic presented during “The Tony Kinnett Cast,” the president spent 30 minutes on patriotic material, more than any other topic. Vance to Attack Fraud Vice President JD Vance received special mention during the speech, as he was named by Trump as the leader on “the war on fraud,” which Dole said is “great for [Vance],” as it will help “his resume heading into 2028.” NEW?: @VP just announced he is withholding Medicaid reimbursement from MN during the fraud investigation. I asked him if this should be viewed as a playbook for fighting fraud in other states. "I think you can, certainly. There are certain things that we're doing in… pic.twitter.com/4ehGLCbl2O— Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell (@TheElizMitchell) February 25, 2026 This was Jackson’s “biggest takeaway” and what she’s “most encouraged by.” “That’s especially important to Ohioans. After the massive Somali fraud scheme in Minneapolis was brought to light, it’s clear that oversight and accountability matter. Columbus has the second-largest Somali migrant population in the country, and there have already been allegations of fraud locally. Ensuring investigations are thorough and transparent protects taxpayers and strengthens public trust,” Jackson shared about Vance, referring to him as “Ohio’s own.” Midterm Ramifications Mullarkey praised “the optics” of the speech. He believes Trump “drew a stark line,” with Democrats and thinks their performative opposition “will not bode well for the Democrats in the months ahead of midterms.” Dole said the speech laid out a midterm message for Trump and Republicans. “‘Hey, I’m out there being attacked, and I better defend my achievements over the last year,’” Dole said to summarize the president’s speech. This especially applies to the economy, as Dole shared that Trump “went into his speech defending his economic record” before the midterms. Some Didn’t Bother Watching Others were not as enthused with Trump and avoided watching the speech altogether. “I just don’t like him, I don’t like how he treats people,” a woman named Krista said of the president. “I don’t like how he talks bad about other people … I think he’s racist and I don’t agree with [Immigration and Customs Enforcement],” she added. Some also took issue with the length of the speech. Dole told The Daily Signal he would have preferred if Trump had shown “a little restraint in terms of the timing.” Yet, Dole acknowledged that Trump is “a showman” and praised his command of the 80%-20% issues, like men playing women’s sports, that helped him win in 2024. The post How the Heartland Is Reacting to Trump’s State of the Union appeared first on The Daily Signal.