New York Governor Cuomo Announces Jewish Redlining Policy (Updated)

Rather than imposing restrictions on high-density zip codes, New York will draw red lines (literally) around "clusters" in Orthodox Jewish neighborhoods.


During the New Deal, the Roosevelt administration rated communities based on whether they were desirable for lending. The government color-coded the maps to give banks a helpful guide. More desirable areas were outlined in green. Declining areas were outlined in yellow. And risk neighborhoods were outlined in red. Unsurprisingly, the "redlined" neighborhoods tended to be poor, black communities. And, in turn, banks denied loans to these redlined communities. To this day, the legacy of redlining is still felt, especially in urban areas.

Did anyone in Governor Cuomo's office reflect on this history? Today, the New York Governor announced a new policy to contain COVID-19. His administration will color-code neighborhoods based on the COVID-19 infection rate. Yellow neighborhoods will have light restrictions. Orange neighborhoods will have heavy restrictions. And red neighborhoods will have stringent restrictions. All schools will be closed in red and orange neighborhoods. In red zones, houses of worship will have strict 10 person caps, regardless of capacity.

And make no mistake. These red zones will not be drawn based on geographic features. They will be gerrymandered to fit Orthodox Jewish communities, but exclude others.

The tone-deafness of this move is absolutely stunning. The Governor is drawing up the 21st century equivalent of ghettos for Jews. And he is encircling these ghettos with red lines. The people in these communities will be subject to heightened inspections, and no doubt, harassment. Quite possibly the only area of New York that will see a greater presence of law enforcement will be Jewish communities. Police officers will stand outside temples, like bouncers at a club, blocking entry after 10 are inside.

Cuomo seems to think he can twist arms, and pressure Jews into compliance. It will not work. Consider this statement from Agudath Israel, a leading Jewish organization:

Governor Cuomo's surprise mass closure announcement today, and limit of 10 individuals per house of worship in "red zones," is appalling to all people of religion and good faith. We have been down this path before, when religious practices were targeted for special treatment by the Governor's Executive Order in May. A suit was filed challenging the Governor's Order then (in which Agudath Israel filed an amicus brief), and the court found it unconstitutional. Repeating unconstitutional behavior does not make it lawful. Moreover, it should be made clear that the Governor's reference to a "good conversation" he had earlier today with a group of Orthodox Jewish leaders was largely a one-way monologue, and contained no mention of this new plan.

Agudath Israel intends to explore all appropriate measures to undo this deeply offensive action.

Agudath is not alone.



Update: The Governor has issued a press release, which I include after the jump.

From: Press Office <>

Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 6:53 PM

To: Press Office <>



For Immediate Release: 10/6/2020 GOVERNOR ANDREW M. CUOMO





Initiative Developed in Consultation with Leading National Public Health Experts—Dr. Noam Ross of EcoHealth Alliance, Dr. Michael Osterholm of the University of Minnesota and Former CDC Director Dr. Tom Frieden


New Initiative Maps Clusters by Density of Cases to Address COVID Hot Spots in Brooklyn, Queens, and Broome, Orange and Rockland Counties


Fines for Sponsors of Mass Gatherings Increased to $15,000


New Rules and Restrictions in Effect for Minimum of 14 Days


Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today announced a new cluster action initiative to address COVID-19 hot spots that have cropped up in Brooklyn, Queens, and Broome, Orange and Rockland Counties. Working with the top public health experts, New York State developed a science-based approach to attack these clusters and stop any further spread of the virus, including new rules and restrictions directly targeted to areas with the highest concentration of COVID cases and the surrounding communities. The new rules will be in effect for a minimum of 14 days.


The plan was developed in consultation with national public health experts including Dr. Noam Ross of EcoHealth Alliance, Dr. Michael Osterholm of the University of Minnesota and former CDC Director Dr. Tom Frieden.


"A cluster is just that—it's a cluster of cases, a high density of cases, and it seeps and grows from that cluster almost in concentric circles. Drop a pebble into the pond, the pebble goes in, then there's one ring, two rings, three rings, and the rings continue across the pond. When you see the cluster, you have to stop it at that point," Governor Cuomo said. "Our strategy is to crush the cluster and stop the spread, and we're announcing a special initiative to do just that. Step one, you take the most dramatic action within the cluster itself where you have the highest density of cases. Understanding that the people in that cluster interface with the surrounding communities, take additional action in the communities surrounding the cluster. Then as a precautionary measure, take action in the communities that are outlying that area."


The initiative is composed of three steps:


  1. Take dramatic action within the cluster.
  2. Take action in the area surrounding the cluster to stop the spread.
  3. Take precautionary action in the outlying communities.


The initiative will currently apply to clusters in the following areas:


  • Broome County (One Area, Yellow)—Click Here for Map
  • Brooklyn (One Area, Red, Orange and Yellow)—Click Here for Map
  • Orange County (One Area, Red and Yellow)—Click Here for Map
  • Queens (Two Areas, Red, Orange and Yellow)—Click Here and Here for Maps
  • Rockland County (One Area, Red and Yellow)—Click Here for Map


The initiative will divide clusters and the areas around them into three categories with successively higher restrictions within each one:


Red Zone — Cluster Itself


  • Houses of Worship: 25 percent capacity, 10 people maximum
  • Mass Gatherings: Prohibited
  • Businesses: Only essential businesses open
  • Dining: Takeout only
  • Schools: Closed, remote only


Orange Zone — Warning Zone


  • Houses of Worship: 33 percent capacity, 25 people maximum
  • Mass Gatherings: 10 people maximum, indoor and outdoor
  • Businesses: Closing high-risk non-essential businesses, such as gyms and personal care
  • Dining: Outdoor dining only, 4 person maximum per table
  • Schools: Closed, remote only


Yellow Zone — Precautionary Zone


  • Houses of Worship: 50 percent capacity
  • Mass Gatherings: 25 people maximum, indoor and outdoor
  • Businesses: Open
  • Dining: Indoor and outdoor dining, 4 person maximum per table
  • Schools: Open with mandatory weekly testing of students and teachers/staff for in-person settings. The New York State Department of Health will establish a percentage of teachers and students/staff who need to be tested by Friday.


The enforcement of the zones will go into effect as soon as tomorrow and no later than Friday.


Governor Cuomo also announced that fines for the sponsors of mass gatherings in violation of state public health rules will be increased to $15,000.


Four New York City politicians issued a joint statement:

Joint Statement From Senator Simcha Felder, Assemblyman Simcha Eichenstein, Councilman Chaim Deutsch & Counsilman Kalman Yeger

We are appalled by Governor Cuomo's words and actions today. He has chosen to pursue a scientifically and constitutionally questionable shutdown of our communities. His administration's utter lack of coordination and communication with local officials has been an ongoing issue since the start of the pandemic, and particularly recently as we face this uptick. Though we are the representatives of "hotspot" neighborhoods, we have been disincluded from conversations with the governor and his leadership team as they made devastating decisions affecting the people we serve.

What occurred today can only be described as a duplicitous bait-and-switch. The governor informed Jewish community leaders in a conference call that synagogues in "red zones" would be permitted to operate at 50%, and he requested community cooperation (which he was assured would happen). Outrageously, just hours later, Governor Cuomo announced a draconian return to restrictions that would shutter thousands of New York businesses and limit houses of worship to a maximum capacity of 10 (no matter the maximum capacity of the building).

Even worse, his rhetoric in recent days has been irresponsible and pejorative, particularly to a community of Holocaust survivors and their descendants, for whom his language was reminiscent of past verbal attacks on Jewish communities. Governor Cuomo's choice to single out a particular religious group, complete with a slideshow of photos to highlight his point, was outrageous. His language was dangerous and divisive, and left the implication that Orthodox Jews alone are responsible for rising COVID cases in New York State. This implication is not born out by the state's own data.

We will continue to encourage total compliance with mask-wearing and social distance guidelines in our communities. In recent weeks, we have seen a vast increase in compliance throughout our communities. We have personally organized massive mask distributions in areas that have seen an uptick in positive cases – distributing hundreds of thousands of masks to our constituents. Sadly, instead of working alongside our community to build on our work, the governor has instead chosen to respond with threats and aggressive enforcement — a tactic which has historically failed in all communities throughout New York.

That said, it is disgraceful that Governor Cuomo would impose these restrictions targeting our community in the midst of our Jewish holidays. Because of his unilateral and irresponsible acts, our community is rightfully shocked, angered and highly frustrated. Americans are constitutionally permitted to worship freely, and Governor Cuomo may be assured that we intend to exercise that right without his interference. G-d Bless America.

NEXT: Indictment of Netflix Under Texas Child Pornography Law Probably Won't Go Anywhere

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I wouldn’t worry. Covid deaths, are thankfully trending downward steadily to the levels at the earliest points of the pandemic. I suspect the threat of the virus and politicians concerns over it by extension to recede very soon. Say maybe around Nov 3rd. Slightly and gradually in the case of a Trump victory, and immediately and almost completely if Biden wins.

    1. The governor should hand out Red Bullseyes to all the Jews in Brooklyn, and make them wear it. I am sure he would find that thrilling. F’ing putz.

      1. Quit whining, you petulant, credulous, anti-social child, and let the reasoning, competent adults address the pandemic.

        1. The resident religious bigot awakens.

          1. Lethal recklessness and belligerent ignorance during a pandemic are neither improved nor excused by a cloak of religion.

            Gullible, disaffected clingers seem to disagree. They also believe their bigotry is cleansed by a superstition-based claim.

            Enjoy the remainder of the culture war, clingers, while your betters handle the operation of the reality-based world.

            1. Yeah Arthur, by all means, keep raving. It is comedic at this point.

              The reality is that this virus is considerably less lethal than the 1918 virus. Yet our rights are suppressed a hell of a lot more. Not just religion (which is completely unacceptable); but peaceable assembly, commerce, free association as well.

              1. Your preference for childish superstition to science and reality is showing, clinger.

                Get out of the way and let your betters handle this. Or stay in the way and get run over. Either way, you (as is customary) lose.

                1. Nah Arthur….I am content staying right where I am. It bugs you when I correctly call you out for your religious bigotry. You might convince others that you’re a mindless bot. But no, you’re a true believer.

                  Your problem is your beliefs are so shallow and tawdry. Your orts and dropping are a parody of reason and logic.

                  1. “I am content staying right where I am.”

                    Run over it shall be.

                    1. Glad to hear it. You’ll be a punching bag for a while.

                    2. You’re going to try to fight modern American society and expect to win? I hope I have finished the Sopranos and the Americans by the time you start, because it should be fine entertainment.

                    3. Arthur, you represent American society about as well as donkey shit resembles roast beef.

            2. What science supports the idea that hiding from the virus is a viable eradication strategy.

              What science supports the idea that retarding the development of the human immune system is a viable.

              1. Joe – we now have countries who have used ‘hiding’ successfully and have now eradicated the virus. Smaller countries to be sure, but enough to be a counterexample to your broad postulate.

                1. Small countries, which could close their borders to international travel and immigration (without being called racist, oddly), unlike interstate travel in the US? And stupid lefties calling Trump racist for trying to protect the US similarly by restricting international travel and immigration, during the horribly, terribly awful pandemic that we must do anything and everything to stop, except curtail immigration…

                  What happens next year, when travel returns to normal, and suddenly “oops, corona isn’t eradicated”?

                  “Science”. Artie and his true believers.

                  1. What science supports the idea that hiding from the virus is a viable eradication strategy.

                    There is science supporting the idea that social distancing, contact tracing, and testing can eradicate the virus.

                    Quibble about the practicalities, get pedantic about whether eradication counts if it’s only national and not worldwide, but it’s clear that Joe’s scientific pronouncement is full-on wrong.

                    1. Quibble about the practicalities

                      Yeah, those pesky practicalities get in the way of many a feel-good theoretical pipe dream.

                      There is science supporting the idea that social distancing, contact tracing, and testing can eradicate the virus.

                      If by “science” you mean that someone posited on paper it could happen, of course. In the real world, not so much. Spain, France, Germany, Finland, Switzerland, etc. etc., were trumpeted as having “crushed” the virus earlier in the year. Every single one is lighting up again. Even the supposed poster child South Korea piled on another ~10k cases over the past several weeks.

                      It’s crystal clear now that the real world doesn’t work the way the eggheads decree it should. It’s time to get past the denial and deal with what is.

                    2. What Joe said: What science supports the idea that hiding from the virus is a viable eradication strategy.

                      Plenty of science supports that. I’m thinking of NZ and Iceland.

                      Joe is wrong.

                      As, it seems, are you.

                    3. “There is science supporting the idea that social distancing, contact tracing, and testing can eradicate the virus.”

                      new zealand
                      solomon island
                      french polynesia
                      papua new guinea

                      are all island countries with low population, easy to restrict travel into those countries.

                      The virus is too deeply embedded into the general population of NY & NYC for contract tracing, enhanced testing to be able to “eradicate ” virus. There is zero credible scientific support for the proposition of the viability of eradicating the virus in NY under the current situation. You have to deal with facts as they exist, not some pipe dream

                    4. I’m thinking of NZ and Iceland.

                      Both New Zealand and Iceland reported new cases today. They haven’t eradicated squat.

                      Reality aside, you of course are free to go live in whatever isolated community suits your fancy, and cross your fingers. But that strategy doesn’t work in the world at large, for the reasons addressed in my post.

                      And you understand that perfectly well, which is why you’re left sadly picking around the edges trying to maintain your illusion.

                    5. Brian – if you are talking only about NYC, then say that. Don’t make broad generalizations that are demonstrably false.

                      Though even talking about NYC,
                      1) contact tracing plus testing work at scale just fine to keep numbers way down, it’s just expensive to maintain
                      2) social distancing a viable delaying strategy until other methods get up to speed
                      3) setting your goal posts to eradication in NYC is overdetermined; no one in policy or science is using that as the goal. Are we ever going to eradicate chicken pox?

                    6. Above was to Joe.

                      Brian, both those countries have no need for masking so long as they quarantine everyone coming into the country. Their lives are full-on pre-COVID.
                      If you want to argue Joe means hiding will not get us to a point where no COVID viruses are alive in NYC, that just makes him look like a tendentious fool.

                    7. Their lives are full-on pre-COVID.

                      NZ just came off another full-blown lockdown. Making stuff up isn’t helping your cause. Nor is ignoring real-world data demonstrating that the strategy of two island countries can possibly work in the rest of the world.

                    8. That wasn’t Joe’s thesis.

                      Also, in my response to Joe I outlined the science about how ‘hiding’ is actually useful.

                    9. Sarcastr0
                      October.7.2020 at 2:16 pm
                      “That wasn’t Joe’s thesis.

                      Also, in my response to Joe I outlined the science about how ‘hiding’ is actually useful.”

                      Sac – its to late for contract tracing – It could have worked starting the first week in January. It was too late by Mid february, especially couldnt work after coumo’s nursing home fiasco.

                      You have to deal with reality.

                    10. That wasn’t Joe’s thesis.

                      The funny thing about that is I wasn’t addressing Joe’s thesis — I was addressing yours: “There is science supporting the idea that social distancing, contact tracing, and testing can eradicate the virus.”

                      If your story now is that you were just chasing a narrow, pedantic point rather than suggesting it had any applicability whatsoever to the world at large, party on.

                    11. ? There is no ‘too late’ for contact tracing. Contact tracing limits the effect of super-spreader events, which remain very much a thing.

                      Brian – I was using what I believed Joe meant by ‘eradicate’ as I replied to him. Subsequent comments make it clear I was correct, he did not mean an unrealistic zero virus goal, and you have put words in his mouth in an attempt to pick a dumbass pedantic fight with me.

                    12. Oh, stop it with the confetti. I said nothing to Joe or about Joe. I responded to your high-minded comment, which you now seem to be claiming you meant in a stupidly irrelevant academic sense. Given that, there’s zero point in carrying this conversation further since stupidly irrelevant academic theories got us into this problem in the first place, and are not going to get us out of it now.

                      Catch you in the next thread, my favorite troll.

                    13. Eradicate? It’s a contagious airborne pathogen that primarily causes a respiratory disease. It’ll never be eradicated. Just like we’ve never eradicated flu, the common cold, etc… Small pox is the only virus we’ve ever eradicated, and it evolves much much slower than respiratory diseases.

                      Social distancing was about ‘flattening the curve’, not reducing total infections. The science on that hasn’t changed – only the goalposts of the politicians have changed, because they never understood the science in the first place.

                      (Contact tracing merely identifies the infected. It doesn’t eliminate a disease. Same with testing).

                      If you think there is scientific evidence that supports your claims, cite it.

                    14. You misunderstood my comment because you didn’t bother to read what I was replying to.

                      The trolling ain’t on me – do your due diligence next time.

                    15. How in the world can you claim eradicating this virus?
                      That is as laughable a claim as any that Trump makes.
                      Perhaps you meant “control the effects of,” but even then it remains a threat ready to infect the public.
                      We know nearly nothing of the extent or duration of any level of immunity; we know less about the decline in effectiveness of any vaccine with increasing age, except the effectiveness most likely decreases.

        2. Kirkland, you will defend even this? Even for a troll, this is a new low for you. As for your comment, neither you nor Cuomo are included in even the broadest definitions of reasoning, competent or adult, nor has Cuomo ever ‘addressed’ anything but the camera.

          1. Defend what?

  2. Is that a bullet hole in the middle of the red center? Why, yes, it is.

    1. I think it’s a virus.

      1. You can open the picture in a separate window and blow it up. It’s a bullet hole.

        Of course, this administration, they probably just did an image search for bullseye, and grabbed the first picture that looked good without looking closely.

        But still, imagine a Republican using that graphic.

      2. It’s a bullet hole. And obviously so.

  3. You know who else closed the synagogues?

    1. Rabbis when they went home for the night?

      1. No sir. He has the Shabbos goy for that.

  4. Red lines might be better than yellow star-shaped lines.

  5. I have asked this question several times. Can someone explain why Jews and Blacks continue to vote for their mortal enemy, the Democrat Party?

    1. selfhatred is a hallmark of leftism.

    2. Stockholm syndrome?

    3. Jews belive strongly in social justice an issue that the Ds support and three Rs do not. The main R issues are anti-abortion, anti-gay, pro-gun, and anti-immigration. Jews do not vote based on the first three and they li,e immigrants. Also the Rs are way too much Christian foe them.

      1. Jews and Blacks are pro gay? Are they pro-immigration to lose their jobs, and to have their wages suppressed, from laborer to professional? Are they anti-gun after their historic experiences? Then 30% of abortions are of black babies, when they are 12% of the population, going beyond the wildest dreams of the most maniacal, genocidal KKK extremist.

        1. Jews generally are in two camps you have the internationalist ones that form the bulk of the population in Europe and America that tend to be ultraliberal. They are often irreligious or antireligious so this doesn’t bother them. They are also more hated by groups they cater too than the groups they despise but thats another story. then you have the more conservative Orthodox and Haredi that are more dominant in Israel which are the ones being targeted, while they are quickly growing they still a minority.

          Blacks and hispanics at least the older generations vote Dem mostly for economic reasons and really don’t care much for the SJW stuff. As for why some continue to vote when the Dems pull away from basic economics to focus on identity politics and transgender bathrooms, force of habit I guess. I know people who remain from the days of the old working class unionist Dems. Lol whens the last time Leftists cared about that? And are still pulling the lever party line decades later out of what can best be described as inertia. Even though they are deeply social conservative and religious and basically have nothing in common with the modern leftwing parties.

        2. Most Jews are pro equal rights for gays, a few are anti-gay, but they don’t vote on that issue. Jews also are very aware of the need to be armed, but don’t buy into the Rs BS narrative that the Ds are out to take you guns. And they also don’t buy the BS R fear mongering around immigration. Jews in general care more about social justice.

          1. I believe it is their urban locations. Local culture cannot be overcome even in the face of damaging policies of the Democratic Party. If you move to France, within a short time, you will think like a French person. We imitate those around us. It is not to avoid ostracism. Even with tolerance of other viewpoints, it is just the human tendency to imitate.

          2. Anyone who claims the narrative that the Democrats are out to grab guns is “BS” is either a liar or ignorant. Which are you, Molly?

            1. The Ds have a long history of supporting some gun control, but “grabbing guns” is not their position (even if a few fringe want that). The biggest evidence is that they have not done that, and not even campaigned on that. The “Defend the 2A!!!” is a R get out the vote gimmick that has little basis in what the Ds actually want.

              1. Cut the BS. They have campaigned exactly on that, and the laws they’ve put in place in blue states speak to their true goals. stop the lies.

                1. Name a blue state in which Democrats have “grabbed guns”.

                  1. No one wants to ban or confiscate guns. Ever! It’s a crazy and paranoid idea!

                    Hawaii, Which Registers Guns and Medical Marijuana Users, Starts Disarming Patients

                    Hawaii is one of 29 states that allow medical use of marijuana, but it is the only state that requires registration of all firearms. …you can probably surmise what this means for patients who use cannabis as a medicine, which Hawaii allows them to do only if they register with the state. This month many of them received a letter from Honolulu Police Chief Susan Ballard, instructing them to turn in their guns.

                    “Your medical marijuana use disqualifies you from ownership of firearms and ammunition,” Ballard says in the November 13 letter, which Leafly obtained this week after Russ Belville noted it in his Marijuana Agenda podcast. “If you currently own or have any firearms, you have 30 days upon receipt of this letter to voluntarily surrender your firearms, permit, and ammunition to the Honolulu Police Department (HPD)…

                    1. Aktenberg, and Kevin, neither of those are “gun grabs”.

                      With respect to the New York case, he can own guns, just not assault weapons. He can still own deer rifles, pistols, and handguns. When New York tries imposing a flat ban, get back to me.

                      With respect to Hawaii, there is no general purpose ban on guns; just a ban on people who are violating federal law from owning guns, which is perfectly reasonable. The problem here is that federal law should not ban marijuana; make pot legal and the Hawaii issue goes away.

                    2. You people are the most despicable and vile liars. Yeah, it’s not a gun grab, he can still own guns, just not any guns we arbitrarily define as assault weapons, the list of which changes based on the whims of Democrat Party politicians on a daily basis.

                      Would you accept “You can still get gay ‘married’ or kill your baby, but not on any day that isn’t July 17th?”

              2. No one wants to ban or confiscate guns. Ever! It’s a crazy and paranoid idea!

                Survey: Majority of Democrats want to ban semi-automatics, half want to ban all guns

                When pro-gun control advocates tell you they don’t want to take your guns, they actually want to take your guns.

                A YouGov survey released this week shows a significant number of self-identified Democratic respondents support the idea of total gun confiscation.

                82 percent of Democrats say they favor a ban on semi-automatics, which would include not just rifles like the one used in the Feb. 14 Parkland massacre, but also most handguns.

                That’s a hell of a ban.

                On the question: “Do you favor or oppose … [banning] the sale of all handguns, except those that are issued to law enforcement officers.”

                If you can believe it, Democratic respondents were split on this question. Forty-four percent said they would support such a ban, while a oh-so-slightly larger 46 percent said they would oppose it.

                That’s not all! The survey also found that Democratic respondents were loosely split on whether the Second Amendment ought to be repealed. Thirty-nine said they’d oppose it, while 41 percent said otherwise. The broader population, on the other hand, overwhelmingly opposed the idea by 60 percent to 21 percent.

      2. And once again, one of the big lies. Republicans are not anti-immigration. They are for legal immigration only. They are against illegal immigration. What part of that do you not understand?

        1. The part where Trump and other Rs keep making new rules to restrict legal immigration and make life harder for legal immigrants. The Rs are clearly though their actions anti-immigration.

          1. Blacks benefited the most from immigration restriction. They thrived. But immigration hurts everyone by replacing and suppressing the wages of everyone from laborer to professional. It benefits the tech billionaires who make a bigger profit from lower wages. That is why they are flipping out, and using their media outlets and their dogs in the Democrat Party to oust President Trump. He is the greatest President since George Washington.

            They picked Biden, a weak person, and have Harris as Vice President, a San Fran tech billionaire agent, to order his policies.

            (Your fav, Lincoln, was, of course, the very worst President, in a class of badness, all alone, the most catastrophic President in history.)

        2. This blog has showed that a lie. Every Trump admin restriction on legal immigration, refugees, etc. is supported.

          Many even calling for a complete closing of the border.

          Railing against legal residents getting benefits before citizens.

          It’s full-on nativism and the fig leaf of it’s only anti-illegal has fallen off long ago.

          1. I guess Ilya doesn’t post here. What’s that called then, when one of the blog’s authors is the exact opposite of what you describe?

            Every restriction supported? Refugees, who are not immigrants, and should be seeking refuge some hundreds of miles closer to where they left…

            Many, meaning “a few vocal commenters, some of whom are likely just lefties pretending in order to ensure their evil foe is present to fight against”.

            Sarcastr0, don’t you get tired of just making shit up?

            1. …We’re not talking about Prof. Somin, we’re talking about Republicans in general.

              Hostility to refugees means it’s about a lot more than illegals, as you demonstrate.

              Vocal commenters, who were just as vocal in saying they were only against illegals…until something about cutting off legal immigration came up. Suddenly they were all about not swamping western culture with shithole countries.

              And surveys of GOP voters show that’s not some VC-specific aberration.

              I’m sincerely glad you’re not one of those, though.

              1. It’s not hostility to refugees. It’s hostility to ‘refugees’. Notice the sneer quotes?

                Your house burns down, and you start walking down the street. You’re a refugee.

                You arrive at the Motel 6, you’re a refugee.

                You walk past it to the Doubletree, because you like the cookies?

                You’re no longer a refugee.

                Very few people arrive at the US as refugees, and basically none by walking, because once they failed to stop at the first safe refuge, they became mere migrants.

                1. Awesome, Brett.

                  I didn’t ask for a poster boy for how the GOP has speculated itself into hating refugees, but here you come!

      3. When you base your opinions on a parody of your opponents’ beliefs and priorities, it’s no surprise that you reach invalid conclusions.

        When was the last time you actually talked to a Republican rather than just read new stories and twitter outrages about them?

      4. The (D) perceived (R) main issues are anti-abortion, anti-gay, pro-gun, and anti-immigration. As for ‘Jews belive strongly in social justice an issue that the Ds support and three Rs do not,’ since when did you speak for all Jewish folks? And since when have they been a monolithic voice?

    4. Because they’re not mortal enemies. Learn to notice your confusion.

    5. “Can someone explain why Jews and Blacks continue to vote for their mortal enemy, the Democrat Party?”

      FWIW – the Orthodox Jewish community is very conservative and votes accordingly. The liberal jewish community on the other hand votes for socialistic policies and have largely abandoned traditional religious values and has adopted government as their new religion

      1. That may be true, but note that both state legislators who signed the letter Josh posted are Democrats. (Felder has always run as a Democrat but sought to caucus with the majority.)

    6. I recall seeing a study some years ago which addressed exactly that question. They polled a bunch of black people, asking their positions on various issues. Then went back and gave them pairs of positions on those issues taken from the party platforms, and asked them to identify which party had which position.

      They just attributed whichever position they approved of to the Democratic party, and whichever they disliked to the Republican party. They apparently had no idea where either party actually stood on any given issue!

    7. Jews don’t vote for the Democrat Party. “Jews,” whose idea of “practicing” is going to synagogue once or twice a year, eating bagels, and using a shmear of Yiddish. They’re disgusting animals.

      1. You admitted you changed your name to erase your Jewish identity so you can sit safely with your popcorn when the violent civil war you fantasize comes for the 70+% of identifiable American Jews that are liberal. And you have the gall to say which Jews are and aren’t legitimate? Fuck you, Nazi.

        And fuck you to all the commenters here who routinely excoriate Arthur Kirkland as the most despicable bigot on the site while finding not a single harsh word for this proud, unapologetic Nazi.

        1. And BTW Josh, in case you’re reading these comments, which I doubt: This is what real Nazis looks like. Not the politicians trying however clumsily, maybe even unconstitutionally, to protect everyone’s lives, Jews’ no less than others.

        2. Their idea of counterpunching is to yell ‘no, you’re the bigot.’

          I guess they learned that from Trump. Or maybe they never advanced beyond fourth grade with respect to conduct. It seems an ineffective form of argument to me, but I am not among the target audience.

        3. No, fuck you. You and your ilk don’t know the first thing about halakha. You don’t pray, you don’t keep kosher, you don’t follow any of the rules of the Torah, but you spew some leftist BS about “tikkun olam” and think you’re holier than thou. I do hope that you leftists are the only ones herded into the gas chambers next time.

          1. You, of all people, who talks about how it would be good to gas people you don’t like, don’t get to police who is Jewish.


            1. No, what’s disgusting is thinking that you are a Jew because you support liberal politics and eat challah.

              1. No, I’m a Jew because I was born Jewish. And unlike you I embrace my Jewishness. That’s Halacha, you vile antisemite.

    8. “Can someone explain why Jews and Blacks continue to vote for their mortal enemy, the Democrat Party?”

      I’ve seen that question answered here dozens of times. As a liberal (albeit now registered independent) Jew I’ve answered it several times myself. Anyone who sincerely wants the answer would have found it by now without further assistance. I’m content to let those still asking the question to believe Jews and blacks choose the affiliations we do because we’re stupid.

  6. Really? Calling them “temples”? For Orthodox Jewish houses of worship? They would strongly object to that. There are only three “temples” in Judaism, the First (destroyed by that Babylonians), the Second (destroyed by the Romans), and the Third (not built yet). Where they go to prey is either a synagogue, or shul.

    1. Do Jews not call them “Temple Xyz”? IANAJ but that’s the impression I get from books and movies.

      1. Only the Reform movement has “temples”, in an explicit rejection of the expectation that the Third Temple will be built.

  7. They will be gerrymandered to fit Orthodox Jewish communities…Police officers will stand outside temples

    Uh, one of these things is not like the other

    1. Possibly that’s why both were listed.

  8. Gee, and I though Trump was the Nazi

  9. Guess the New York Jews never heard of Never Again. They think voting Democrat buys them a pass from the pogrom. They need to shoot the Jew haters.

    1. Yeah, this somehow equates to a pogrom.

  10. Hey Josh, supposedly you’re originally from New York and therefore we’d assume that you understand the geography of the city reasonably well. Looking at the maps that Governor Cuomo has posted, they’re definitely not “gerrymandered” around orthodox communities. They don’t include the communities in Crown Heights or Williamsburg at all, and the red area extends well beyond the boundaries of the communities in Borough Park. Ever stop to think that these are just the areas with the largest Covid spread recently?

    1. What do you think gerrymandered means? It seems fit perfectly well by my understanding. It doesn’t have to be political.

      1. Wait, so you’re saying they’re “gerrymandered” around the places where Coronavirus is spreading most rapidly?

        I think you’re onto something, but a pretty different something than Josh seems to be trying to portray.

        1. jb, can you show us the numbers of actual hot cases/ infections dangerously spreading in those places more than others, or are you basing your assumption on the fact government declares there are rising “positive” tests cases in those areas?

          You should investigate the pcr test and the fact it is NOT a diagnostic tool for active infection. You’ll have to look beyond the scrubbed Google search results and look at Kary Mullis, the test’s inventor and recently deceased, unfortunately, who said the test should never be used to prove active infection, and also the many top scientists who agree with him.

          The pushback by the government medical pandemic industry against this info getting out, which, of course, they call a fake and dangerous meme, contradicts the inventor’s clear admonition that his test was never to be used to determine active infection. But please note how even their counter propaganda admits this one and only salient fact, along with an “excuse”:

          (From good ole Reuters)
          “It is important to note that detecting viral material by PCR does not indicate that the virus is fully intact and infectious, i.e. able to cause infection in other people. The isolation of infectious virus from positive individuals requires virus culture methods. These methods can only be conducted in laboratories with specialist containment facilities and are time consuming and complex.”

          It’s right there, the plain and simple truth, despite all of their misleading sciency verbiage leading up to this truth that the pcr test is worse than worthless for defining public health emergencies and pandemics.

          1. Best comment I’ve seen all week. #Facts

  11. All this targeting and harassment based on the meaningless metric of “rising cases” within their community? How many “hot” cases have been serious enough to require hospitalization, and how many have died from Covid causes?

    The PCR test cannot show active infection of any virus, only prior exposure to a similar virus. Its inventor said the test should not be used as a diagnostic tool. Also, the way the mRNA fragments are being currently amplified in the test yields a high percentage of false positives wrt viral load.

    This German lawyer lays out a case that the Covid tests, social distancing, mask mandates, fear-mongering, shutdowns and quarantines are based on bogus science and corrupt interests, and are harming individuals and our societies immeasurably:

    1. If you test twice as much, you get twice as many cases. If you test the same people over and over in order to find when someone gets infected, such as the White House staff and possibly Congress, that’s a lot of negative results; if you keep on testing once detected to see when they are no longer infected, that’s a lot of positive results.

      IOW, enough leeway to cook the books any way they want.

      1. “IOW, enough leeway to cook the books any way they want.”

        Yes, exactly. Vote and nose swab often!

        Certainly looks as if (false) positive non-infected cases are being hyped by government and the media until the new flu season gets some people coughing and others scared they’re going to die if someone sneezes near them.

        This winter and spring, we’ll likely be told “positive cases” are soaring out of control and subjected to even harsher lock-down measures than before, to induce us to take the series of jabs. Look for the “positive cases” test results to markedly decrease after the vaccine is out and in use– their “proof” the vaccines work.

        Of course, the very old or otherwise unhealthy should always take precautions and extra vitamins during flu time. They are more vulnerable than the rest of us.

      2. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf — You ought to take a close look at the city-by-city testing data from Massachusetts. The cities of Cambridge and Somerville both took considerable hits in the initial wave of the virus. They are now leading the state in testing, and get positivity results among the lowest in the state.

        Why? Apparently, because residents there have been highly disciplined about social distancing and mask wearing, among other things. And because local political leaders have been encouraging that discipline with harsh fines for violations.

        A few other cities in the state have similar behavioral profiles, and show similar results. In effect, these are the places which show how to defeat the virus. Most such places are on the privileged side, but Somerville is remarkable for diversity, and for especially crowded living conditions. Those facts make the Somerville data stand out especially.

        It is notable that other cities in Massachusetts which have not been as disciplined or as heavily tested—even excluding those with the least-favorable demographics and living conditions to resist the virus—are once again on the upswing in virus cases, and apparently headed for more intense misery this winter. They are the contrasting cases, which show how not to manage the pandemic.

        To see the data, Google: Covid 19 massachusetts town by town.

        Of course it helps to understand what the data might mean if long residence in MA affords insight into the living conditions and sociology among the many towns.

        1. Lathrop: “Of course it helps to understand what the data might mean…”

          Do you have the data for these ringed NYC communities concerning hot cases, hospitalizations, and deaths due primarily to Covid?

          And, why would we believe the government numbers of “positive cases”, anyway, after months of its conflating “positive” nose swab results from meaningless and misleading pcr testing that produces many false positives with active infections requiring sicktime in bed or hospitalization? Why would we give any credence to the stats of a government and media that have hyped the “rising positive” test numbers to create hysteria and impose more onerous and unconscionable controls over us?

          Why would we believe the government numbers, given its policies to intentionally miscount and misattribut deaths due to Covid?

          1. “misattribute”

      3. The way PCR amplification works it’s more you run the test 30% more times on a given sample and you get over 5-10 times as many positives.

      4. Actually that is NOT true if you actually run the numbers.
        The correlation is only ~ 44%

  12. These red zones will not be drawn based on geographic features. They will be gerrymandered to fit Orthodox Jewish communities, but exclude others.

    Of course, any necessary cordon sanitaire ought to be drawn based solely on epidemiological control—regardless of geography, regardless of culture, and regardless of religion. If Orthodox Jews have by their behavior and defiance of public health measures made their communities into spreading centers for deadly contagion, then Blackman’s characterization above is less than forthright.

    Life-saving measures during a public health emergency cannot be a respectable basis for hurling charges of anti-Semitism. But that is what Blackman does here.

    It is hardly anti-Semitic for a secular government to act to save Jewish lives, even if to accomplish that it must act with disregard for Jewish faith. Secularism demands that government always prioritize the preservation of life ahead of the momentary requirements of religion. Secularism requires also that any demands from religionists to have it otherwise be disregarded.

    My hope is that this clash of religious liberty and secular values can be resolved in the service of the religious and the non-religious alike, but in either case, on a principle to maximize secular utility. That principle in this nation has always been managed also as a protection of religious liberty in the broadest context. Doing that requires policy makers acting in a narrower context—as they do during a public health emergency—stay mindful that the job of a secular government is not to tailor policy to favor any particular religious dogma.

    Instead, government must act in steadfast confidence that the greatest protection of religious liberty government is empowered to offer is to maximally protect the lives of religionists themselves. And to protect all of them, alike with all other persons. At least in that way, the religionists can continue to live to practice their religion, and do so on a footing which puts their interests in solidarity with the interests of others.

    America has enjoyed a long history during which a secular government strove actively to guard a refuge for religionists of all creeds. That history argues persuasively that any government which undertakes to act itself under guidance of specifically religious principles—the kind of action demanded by Blackman here—thereby sacrifices capacity to guard religious liberty for all. The State of New York should not let that happen.

    1. > It is hardly anti-Semitic […] to act to save Jewish lives, even if to accomplish that it must act with disregard for Jewish faith.

      The funny thing is that this is also a tenet of the Jewish faith: Pikuach Nefesh:

      (Not literally everything can be overridden in the name of saving lives, but nearly everything can.)

    2. Hmmm…secular utility. That is a new one. Tell you what lathrop, why don’t you go to Brooklyn and hand out Red Bulleyes to the Orthodox. You want to flex your little totalitarian muscles along with the putz governor. I’m sure you’d find that rewarding.

      Secular utility. Pfffft. You seek to actively suppress religion under the guise of saving secular society. Just come out and say what you want: You want religion, and religious people out of the public square and out of the way, using whatever means you can.

      1. Commenter_XY, I did say what I want. It was not at all like what you say I want.

    3. This is along the lines of my thinking. It seems odd to see people wringing their hands over this, when I suspect many of those same people would object to discrimination claims based on disparate impact.

      If zones with large Jewish populations are subject to this, but those same populations have high infection rates, pretty tough to say that it’s their being Jewish, not the infection. Particularly if one can identify other areas of high Jewish population, but with low infection rates, that aren’t subject to this.

    4. Perhaps masks worn in synagogue would be as effective; the ten person rule is arbitrary and asinine. I suspect that much of the irrational argument against religious services is made by those who insist on images of people packed in shoulder to shoulder, and maskless. An aside, the practice of being outraged by what other people are or are not doing is not a sign of a well-developed mind.

      ‘Religionist’ seems to put you squarely in one camp, by the bye, all talk of civil liberties aside.

      1. The ten person rule is scientifically arbitrary, but it looks like it was also tailored to be the bare minimum to allow a .

  13. Hopefully, no scientist offered the “drop a pebble into a pond” analogy. People — like water molecules in a pond — move about, banging into one another notwithstanding any superficial ripples. Is the Governor forming a shore to envelope the water molecules; that is, will the people within the Governor’s ghettos be forced to remain therein?

    At the outset of the pandemic, scientists in China urged New York localities to shut down all public transportation and to take other steps to limit personal movement. Absent a timely cordon around a contagion, there is little that can be done: amulets, poultices, and “dramatic action”s [perhaps meaning a few good Ndeup?] are useless, yet are being touted as “science.”

    [If the Ndeup are successful, there might be a publication opportunity: ]

  14. Ahh yes, invoke the Holocaust and call the NYC government Nazis based around speculation and ipse dixit.

    We have fun.

    1. Yellow Star or Red Bullseye….and the suppression of free exercise of religion. Governor Putz is making this happen.

      1. The thing is, as has been pointed out elsewhere in this thread, this is both under and overinclusive of targeting Jews.

        You can think this is bad policy without devaluing the Holocaust to show you really mean it.

        1. An aphorism is appropriate here: If the shoe fits, wear it.

          Governor Putz used pictures from 2006 to dramatize his actions. To call that misleading is to be charitable. It was a deliberate lie. Tell me Sarcastr0…the suppression of religious expression by government edict. Who else has done this? To me, this smacks more of communism and totalitarianism than anything else.

          If you are Ok with Governor Putz’ actions, maybe you need to take a long look in the mirror and ask yourself: At what point is it too much?

          Our 1A rights are not up for suspension by governmental edict.

          1. There are countless laws that burden various faiths. Drug laws, laws against animal sacrifice, laws about time place and manner of speaking.

            You yourself brought me around to the idea that all of these laws should look much more carefully at their burden on faiths.

            But no, it’s not totalitarianism. And it sure as hell isn’t Naziism. It isn’t even targeting religion – Blackman hasn’t established that, he’s just starting from there and then blustering his way into kapos and yellow stars.

            He’s beyond shame, but you shouldn’t be falling for that kind of simplistic outrage propaganda tactic. Again, disagree, but turn away from the Nazi Nazi Nazi types. I said the same thing back in W’s day.

            1. Blackman doesn’t need to make the case that Governor Putz is targeting the Orthodox; anyone with a modicum of intelligence, familiarity with NYC and map reading can see that pretty clearly. And to allow commerce and political protest while simultaneously suppressing religious free exercise is wrong. Not just a little wrong…it is HUGELY wrong. Governor Putz made an ‘own goal’ with his use of the Red Bullseye. I am simply making him own that.

              Our 1-A rights of religious free exercise are not cancel-able by government edict. That is the bottom line.

              As an American, why are you Ok with that?

              1. Or maybe you’re mixing up cause and effect – that there are outbreaks in Orthodox communities and that’s why they are overrepresented.
                That would explain why it’s not just Orthodox, nor is it only them.

                This looks fine under current Smith 1A jurisprudence. You can disagree, but that doesn’t change what the law is. I was put off when I read the Scalia opinion in law school, but the prof pointed out enough practical issues that I understand why it’s actually better for religion that the judiciary stay out of this particular ideological thicket.

                I get that this is a big cause for you, and I understand why. But don’t buy into the tempting extremist narratives offered by tools like Blackman; it undercuts your argument when you yell Nazi – you just look like you are just seeking a partisan cudgel, and this happens to be one. I know that’s not you.

                1. Sarcastr0, I don’t agree that this is ‘fine’ with Smith jurisprudence. I don’t think Smith ever contemplated suspension and suppression of our rights for months and months on end, subject to the whim of an executive putz. No way.

                  Blacks have significantly higher mortality (for a variety of reasons) to Covid-19, yet we don’t see Red Bullseyes being drawn around predominantly black neighborhoods in the Bronx. Amazing.

                  You have not addressed why commerce and protest for favored political causes is Ok, but not religious free exercise. I would love to read your rationale here.

                  No, this is targeted and singles out the Orthodox. There is no lipstick you can stick on this pig and call it a beauty queen.

                  1. Smith contemplated permanent suspension of religious expression for plenty of religions, just not yours.

                    Higher mortality isn’t the issue this policy is dealing with.

                    Protests tend to be outside, and masked. And it doesn’t look like they’re resulting in super spreader events, for whatever reason.
                    They’re also fundamentally more difficult to enforce like this – their spontaneous nature means you can’t target a problematic area for additional enforcement.

                    Despite Blackman pounding the table, you need to squint real hard to see this as targeting the Orthodox, as many upthread have point out. It happens to all of us, but this is a square peg and you have a round hole you really want to fit.

                    1. This is false = Protests tend to be outside, and masked. What protests are you looking at? And I am sure it is just a coincidence that Covid-19 rates went up just after mass demonstrations around the country. Am I right about that?

                      Smith never contemplated suppression or suspension of our religious rights for months and months on end, subject to the whim of an executive. C’mon Sarcastr0, that isn’t what Smith said.

                    2. DC, and NYC due to personal interest (my Mom was in NYC until recently). And Portland, just from twitter.

                      Covid rates didn’t go up after the demonstrations started, they went up months later after schools reopened.

                      You’re arguing disparate impact equals intentional discrimination now. That’s not generally accepted by anyone, even critical race theorists.

                      Smith doesn’t talk about executive or legislative; like most rights cases it’s about government action generally.
                      Whether a given government action is legitimate as an executive action is a separation of powers question.

                    3. Sarcastr0….political arguments aside, I am glad your mother is out of NYC. It is not a good place to be right now. And it will get much, much worse.

                2. There are also outbreaks in immigrant communities where people live in nuclear family units, in other states. So far, no bizarre treatment like this. You are engaging in partisan kneejerk reaction, again, to defend something that doesn’t need to be defended. This issue isn’t whether or not Cuomo deliberately chose the bullseye, or is singling out Jewish communities, it’s his methodology and overreach. Having said this, can you agree that the optics of a bullseye are terrible?

                  1. NYC has different policies than other states when it comes to COVID. Wonder why?

                    Must be antisemitism!

        2. Devaluing the Holocaust? Your in-group tags ‘denier’ on each and all skeptical of their beliefs.

        3. “The thing is, as has been pointed out elsewhere in this thread, this is both under and overinclusive of targeting Jews.”

          The underinclusivity argument only works when one is arguing that President Trump’s immigration ban wasn’t anti-moslem. Do you really not yet understand conservative bad faith?

  15. I’m far from being on board with this specific policy, but they aren’t being targeted because they’re Jews. They’re being targeted because they refuse to follow CDC guidelines to help stop the spread of a deadly disease. A group of similarly situated Episcopalians would likely be treated the same way.

    1. Since when do free people have to obey guidelines?

      1. Unless you’re a sovereign citizen, since just about the beginning of society.

        1. You should look up the definitions of “free” and “guidelines”.

          1. Under your definition there has never been a free society, I guess.

            Instantiating federal guidelines as local law/reg is not abnormal.

            1. In which case, these are laws or regulations, not guidelines.

              1. Which this is. Executive action (i.e. regulation) instantiating federal guidelines as municipal rules.

      2. Since stop signs, traffic lights, and ‘no parking in intersection’ signs were placed?

        Conservatives deserve everything that is coming to them. The adult supervision is about to begin.

        1. Hopefully, the 2nd Amendment remedy which results in thousands of 5.56 rounds flying at liberals, is about to begin.

          1. LOL at the guy saying ‘The libs want to take our guns!’ and also ‘We should be shooting all the libs.’

            1. It’s a tough job maintaining a fictional over-the-top online persona AND being consistent. Better people than him have failed here.

      3. Since there’s a deadly disease that needs to be stopped. Grow the hell up.

        1. Treat people like enemies, expect them to fight back.

          Also, you can fuck right off. Covid doesn’t excuse oppressing religious minorities.

          1. Trying to save their lives is not treating them like enemies.

            I’ve said it before, libertarianism is basically a religion for petulant teenagers. Anyone who has had petulant teenagers will recognize the dynamic.

            1. “Trying to save lives” does not justify oppressing a religious minority.

              1. It’s not oppression if the purpose is to save lives. They’re not being singled out because they’re religious; they’re being singled out because they’re making it harder to suppress the virus.

                1. “To save lives”? I think that’s why police kill and harass all those black folks too.

                  Anyone who wants to get away with anything can just say it’s “to save lives”.

                  Border wall is “to save lives”.

                  1. So are the left’s insane gun grabbing schemes.

                    1. WW2 Japanese American internment: Trying to save lives.

                2. Krychek_3, you must be basing your support for the government’s police state actions on the real numbers of active infections, hospitalizations, and deaths in these areas that are being “singled out,” because the pcr “positive” test results don’t indicate infection, if you study the real science behind the induced panic. It would help us all if you would share the real medical case numbers in those Orthodox communities.

                  Pcr tests for Covid only show prior exposure to any kind of corona virus, even far in the past, and DO NOT and CANNOT show active infection. Most people would test “positive” with the pcr, were the testing methods made more uniform from lab to lab and also not manipulated (there have been many documented instances). Pcr “positive cases” are not in the least infectious and contagion-spreading cases, unless live infection is also present.

                  Amplification of RNA fragments from previous colds and flus that the PCR test detects are meaningless for declaring current pandemic case numbers. It’s a rhetorical shell game and cruel joke being played on us, complete with a lot of triggering words and images.

          2. Fight all you want, Ben. And whimper, mutter, whine, stutter, rant, sputter, rail, flail, wail . . . do whatever you want. Complaints are free.

            But you will comply with the preferences of your betters, as you have been doing throughout your life and will continue to do until your replacement occurs.

            Toe that line, clingers.

            Thank you for your compliance.

            1. You are one really sick individual, RAK or BL, whoever you are.

              All of your touting of “reason” and “progress”, (which, btw, are virtually impossible to objectively define given numerous modes of logic, inadequate to absurd modeling, disputed facts and metrics, and the omission of personal preferences, experience to the contrary, and intuition,) is actually a cudgel with which to beat your “inferiors” into submission.

              You desperately want a coercive globalist State, top-down clerisy of entrenched technocrats, and restricted society that direct everyone everywhere, with extra loads of odium and misery sent the way of its dissidents.

              You’ll make a fine Czar of High Self Regard and Hatred of Lessers.

      4. They don’t. But it’s not the failure to follow the guidelines that is making them subject to this. It’s their spread of the disease.

        If they have some way other than following the guidelines to stop the disease, good for them, and they won’t be subject to the restrictions.

    2. So Krycheck, do you support drawing lines around African American communities, and subjecting them to enforced bans on movement and gatherings, since their infection rates are significantly higher than the rest of the population?

      Just curious if that little fact changes your mind at all.

      1. It depends on whether African Americans are cooperating with efforts to suppress the virus. The Orthodox Jews have made it clear they are not; I don’t know if African Americans are or not.

        1. Well, according to your view on “cooperation” or lack thereof. I’m sure other people would have different views on the cooperation.

          So, you do support selective bans around African American communities during an election then? Because of their higher infection rate? Interesting.

          1. Clearly, his reasoning would allow it. Does that make him a racist?

            1. What word describes someone so afraid of a virus that he’d support inhumane treatment of minorities?

              1. What word describes someone who calls limiting the number of people in a synagogue at one time “inhumane treatment of minorities?”

            2. I mean, hypothetically speaking, if the African American community was to engage in large scale protests outside, which clearly violated social distancing requirements at the time, as well as clearly violating bans of large numbers of people gathered in a single location…

              One might have the view that African Americans weren’t “cooperating” with efforts to suppress the riots. And based on their higher infection rate, just before an election, it would be entirely justified according to Krycheck’s logic to ban political gatherings within select African American communities.

              Personally, I don’t think targeting ethnic or racial groups for selective bans like this is appropriate. Krycheck apparently does though…

              1. Edit. Suppress the virus.

          2. Armchair Lawyer, Ben, and Commenter_XY:

            In your Alice in Wonderland world in which keeping people from killing themselves and other people is vile discrimination, racial prejudice, religious oppression, and the first step in the direction of building gas chambers, does it occur to you that if the Governor of New York actually were an anti-Semite, simply allowing Covid to spread through the Orthodox communities would be more in keeping? Or that maybe the real issue here is that the Governor cares more about the lives of the Orthodox than they themselves do? Or that if the Orthodox are so determined to spread Covid, that maybe the rest of the community has rights too?

            I candidly can’t believe I’m having this conversation. You seriously think that it’s anti-Semitism to save Jewish lives, even if you have to do it without the assistance of the Jews themselves? What color is the sky on your planet?

            Your position is so ridiculous that I’m not going to respond further. Say whatever you like; I’m going back to work now.

            1. You’re really panicked about that virus, aren’t you? It’s been 6 months, you’d think people would stop panicking and get a little perspective…

            2. Krychek,

              This is amazingly paternalistic and authoritarian. The selective picking out of a single ethnic group for “enhanced protections” by limiting their rights because “They need to be protected, especially if they won’t do it themselves”.

              This type of logic is the same that many ex-Confederates used to use on the African American population. That they needed to be “protected” and “weren’t capable of making choices for themselves” so really the restriction on rights was just “protecting them”.

              This is exactly the same.

              1. Armchair Lawyer, here is the question you should have asked:

                Suppose there were a neighborhood in which everybody was exactly like me — same race, same religious and political views, same everything — except that they were refusing to follow guidelines and had become a hotspot for spreading the virus. Would I support the same sorts of measures against them that I would support against the Orthodox. (Keeping in mind I already said I’m not on board with this specific proposal.)

                The answer is hell yes. Despite your efforts to make this about racial and religious bigotry, the real issue is suppressing the virus. If you’ve got people who will not cooperate in doing what needs to be done to contain the virus, the rest of the community has rights too. If they were only harming themselves, that would be one thing, but they’re not. People will continue to die and the economy will continue to be flat on its back until the virus is contained.

                And I’m sorry if you think that interferes with someone’s freedom. But please stop with the canard that this is bigotry and prejudice. It’s not. You know better.

                1. Your premise is wrong = Despite your efforts to make this about racial and religious bigotry, the real issue is suppressing the virus.

                  1. Right. And parents who won’t give their 15 year old whiskey and car keys hate him.

                    1. Again, look at the language you’re using. “15-year olds”.

                      You’re equating a religious minority with minors, and justifying TAKING AWAY THEIR RIGHTS because you’re “protecting them”.

                      Religious minorites aren’t minors. They are full, thinking, capable people. And if they want to use their rights to do something, then they should be able to, EVEN IF YOU THINK IT’S NEGATIVE. Because they are their RIGHTS.

                    2. No, I’m protecting the rest of the community from them.

                    3. “No, I’m protecting the rest of the community from them.”

                      By stripping away their rights?!?

                      You know who else thoughts he was “protecting his community from them” by taking away rights from the Jews…

                  2. Wrong. Depriving Jews of their free exercise rights won’t suppress the virus.

                2. “Suppose there were a neighborhood in which everybody was exactly like me — same race, same religious and political views, same everything — except that they were refusing to follow guidelines and had become a hotspot for spreading the virus.”

                  Let’s call this the “African American Community” who have been having massive protests with no social distancing, no listening to maximum numbers of people allowed in an area, and Much higher rates of infection than the rest of America.

                  “would I support the same measures”?

                  Let’s be clear about the MASSIVE difference between how these groups (Orthodox Jews and African Americans) were treated, despite both breaking social distancing and both having HIGH infection rates.

                  One group gets hit with the further restriction of their rights, have gatherings and businesses closed. The other group is ENCOURAGED to keep having large demonstrations that violate social distancing.

                  If that’s not discrimination based on race and religion, I don’t know what is.

                  1. A lot of the BLM protesters are wearing masks — not all of them — but be that as it may:

                    The cold, hard realities are that shutting down a demonstration with thousands of already angry people is basically asking for violence and bloodshed, so that’s a case of which course of action will do the least amount of harm. If Cuomo could shut down the BLM protests, at least until after Covid is over, without risking civil war, he probably would.

                    Bowing to that cold, hard reality does not make him a bigot, even if you might have analyzed it differently. And, just to be clear, I view BLM marches as potential super spreader events, and I think they are being every bit as irresponsible as the Orthodox. But sometimes you do what you can, and the fact that he can do something about the Orthodox doesn’t mean he shouldn’t, merely because he’s recognized the higher cost of doing something about BLM.

                    1. Jesus, listen to yourself…

                      “The cold, hard realities are that shutting down a demonstration with thousands of already angry people is basically asking for violence and bloodshed, so that’s a case of which course of action will do the least amount of harm. If Cuomo could shut down the BLM protests, at least until after Covid is over, without risking civil war, he probably would.”

                      1. Cuomo actively SUPPORTED the protests. He didn’t say “well, it would be better if they didn’t have them. He actively SUPPORTED them”.

                      2. This type of logic is insanity. “Well, we can’t shut them down, so might as well let it be an event and support it”. Insanity. It’s like a pseudo-super heckler’s veto, where only law abiding folks have their rights stripped away, while those who violate executive orders get a free pass.

                    2. No need to address me as Jesus.

                      You do realize that a heckler’s veto is when people are prevented from speaking, right?

                      I’m not sure I would analyze things exactly the same way Cuomo has, but his way isn’t based on religious prejudice, and if the Orthodox want to avoid being redlined, they can stop engaging in conduct that spreads the virus. It really is that simple.

                      And when Cuomo encouraged the BLM rallies, it was within the context of encouraging people to march peacefully rather than loot, which is not quite the same thing as encouraging them to not social distance and mask.

      2. Arguably, following their rationale, the state can draw red lines around neighborhoods with high incidents of gun murders and suspend the 4th Amendment to go through apartments without warrants looking for illegal weapons. The lives saved are worth the minimal imposition, all in the name of suppressing that public health scourge of “gun violence”.

        1. Grifthunter, spot on. What absurdity that no one follows the logic as you have. It’s as if we’re living in an evil cartoon of lies and false arguments based upon them that refuse to address the obvious with any clarity.

  16. Oh wow…

    OK, just for fun, we pulled out a map of Brooklyn, and the voting patterns in the 2016 election. Contrary to popular belief, Brooklyn didn’t entirely vote for Clinton. There was a section in Brooklyn that voted for Trump, dominated by the orthodox Jewish community. I post that map here.

    Now, compare that dark red area (Which voted for Trump in 2016) to the area that Cuomo has highlighted for “Increased precautions”

    They are basically exactly the same shape, area, and localities….

    This is a discrimination suit goldmine.

    1. I will believe that you believe your silly assertion when your name appears on a pleading.

      Keep flailing, clingers.

      1. Nah, the deplorables will vote instead. Can’t wait. 🙂

        1. You see the Republicans taking the House, keeping the Senate, and somehow pulling Trump’s depleted flab across the finish line on election day?

          1. I see nothing getting better either way due to people like you.

          2. Arthur, I’ll be totally straight with you. I have absolutely no idea what will happen election day. Anyone who says they know is crazy.

            1. No one knows precisely what will occur, but evidence can generate reasonably reliable predictions with respect to many events, including elections.

              The Democrats are roughly a 94 percent favorite to hold the House.

              Republicans have roughly a 1-in-3 chance to hold the Senate.

              Republicans have roughly a 1-in-6 chance to hold the presidency.

              1. Like the 2016 predictions and Crooked Hillary? Those reasonably reliable predictions? Yeah, Ok Arthur.

                Listen, you should quit while you are behind.

                1. You sound like someone who saves nothing for 30 years, hits for a few million with a lottery ticket, and figures he had a sound financial and retirement plan.

                  Trump scored a three-cushion bank shot at the Electoral College; people who rely on longshots like that tend to be losers. Like most clingers. Losers.

                  1. There are some who make their big money off of committing atrocities against others while attempting to rationalize their doing so with artful lies to others and a great deal of self-deception.

                    They are the true, souless losers, on both sides of the manufactured ideological divide. Of course, they all tend to cling to their vile and petty ways and earthly life, because they’ve rejected any and all idea of transcendence.

                    Losers cling to this mortality and reject any goodness bigger than the sum of us.

    2. Thanks for posting this map (and descriptive commentary). It makes clear the point I flagged upthread. As you can see, the Cuomo restrictions do not include two of the three orthodox Jewish communities in Brooklyn (the northernmost one in Williamsburg and the one between Cuomo’s red cluster and Williamsburg, which is Crown Heights). Similarly, it includes a variety of non-Jewish neighborhoods in the southwest part of the borough.

      If you look solely at Brooklyn and Queens, there’s a much better argument that he’s targeting Republican voters than orthodox Jewish communities, but that falls apart once you realize that the most Republican part of NYC is Staten Island and it’s not included at all, and that most of Republican upstate is not included, whereas Binghamton–which is a patch of blue in a sea of surrounding red–is.

      1. Your argument appears to be that if Cuomo isn’t targeting ALL of the voters of one group, then he isn’t targeting the group. This is a fallacious argument. One doesn’t need to target every single individual in a group to be selectively targeting one group.

        You understand that, right?

        1. Let’s reinforce this with an example. Imagine a state which is mostly white, but has two areas which are predominantly African American.

          If the state was to drawn a line around one of the African American areas that almost exactly matched the exact boundaries of the ethnic lines and said “This area is not allowed to do political gatherings”…and no other area was mentioned. It would still be discriminatory, even if the state didn’t include the OTHER African american area.

          1. I can’t quite tell if you’re trying to make the case that Cuomo is targeting the Jewish communities or Republicans at this point. The red zone is obviously not targeting Jewish communities since it not only misses lots of them, but includes a bunch of other communities. So in your example, the lines around the area would happen to include some African Americans but would also include many white people, Asian Americans, and Hispanics.

            As for targeting Republicans, the inclusion of Binghamton is where the argument breaks down. If we go with your analogy, there would be a couple of areas that overlap strongly with African American communities, but then there would also be one area that happens to be the only white majority population for fifty miles in any direction.

            And then most importantly, there’s a stated rationale for the maps which is this is where the most infections are happening that is both religiously and politically neutral and best matches the maps. Sometimes stated reasons are pretextual, but when they explain the situation better than alternative hypotheses, they’re probably be best explanation to choose.

            1. Didn’t Espinosa last term demolish your reasoning = The red zone is obviously not targeting Jewish communities since it not only misses lots of them, but includes a bunch of other communities.

              If the effect is discriminatory, then pretext doesn’t matter, does it?

              1. This situation looks nothing like Espinosa. Montana banned the use of tax credits for all religiously-affiliated schools, and basically allowed it for all others. In this case, not only are all of the Jewish communities not targeted, but many other communities that are not Jewish are included in the red zone. If Montana allowed tax credits for schools in rural areas but not in urban areas, that wouldn’t be discrimination against religious schools even if some of them happened to be located in urban areas.

                1. jb….If you go to the oral argument transcript of Espinosa (pages 10-18), you’ll see what I was getting at. If the effect of what you are doing deprives a group of their rights (e.g. free exercise), even if it was not done to discriminate against them specifically….is not permissable.

                  That is why I made the statement: If the effect is discriminatory, then pretext doesn’t matter, does it?

            2. 1. Cuomo is selectively targeting the Orthodox Jewish community, which tends to vote Republican.

              2. He’s reinforced that with references, specifically targeted at the Orthodox Jewish community

              3. He’s further reinforced that by selectively outlining areas that ALMOST PERFECTLY correspond with 2016 precinct-level voting data

              4. Just because not EVERY republican or EVERY Jewish group is hit with a ban, does not mean that Cuomo is not discriminatorially hitting the Jews.

              5. Cuomo has not provided the in-depth precinct level data to support his selective enforcement and ban claims.

              1. 1. No, that’s not established.

                2. These subset of Orthodox communities have taken specific actions that are being cited.

                3. Nope.

                4. You’re bad at this.

                5. You’re really bad at this.

                1. 1. Yes it is
                  2. And you agree he is
                  3. Yep
                  4. And you have no rebuttal
                  5. And you really have no rebuttal.

                2. Name the actions, Sarcastr0. Because he used pictures from 2006.


                    AL is either lying or seeing things. The ALMOST PERFECT correlation he claims in his 7:38 am post doesn’t line up very well if you click on the link.

              2. You’ve lost the thread by trying to treat the Jewish areas and the Republican areas are the same. The correspondence you’re talking about in #3 (which is nowhere near as precise as you’re asserting) is with Republican-voting precincts. Some of those precincts include large orthodox Jewish communities. Most of them do not, as is made clear from the article you linked. In order for the argument about Cuomo targeting Jewish communities to make any sense, you would expect the boundaries of the zones to correspond to the boundaries of the Jewish communities, but they do not.

                You need to choose your conspiracy theory because trying to make them both work at the same time results in nonsense.

                1. “Most do not, as is made clear from the article you linked.”
                  Evidence does not support your point.

                  Orthodox Jews vote heavily Republican. The groups overlap significantly. Like African Americans and Democrats. By targeting Republican voters in specific areas, Cuomo is targeting Orthodox Jews.

                  1. “Evidence does not support your point.”

                    It does if you understand the geography and demographics of Brooklyn, like the original blog post you linked to:

                    “Other neighborhoods with red include Bay Ridge and Dyker Heights in the southwest, with large Italian-American and Greek-American populations; Brighton Beach and neighboring Sheepshead Bay, with many residents from post-Soviet nations (Russia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan), and middle- and upper-class predominantly white neighborhoods like Manhattan Beach and Marine Park, which have a mix of residents, both native born and immigrant.”

                    1. Bay ridge has no red. Your statements do not match facts.


                    2. These are the neighborhoods with deep red in Brooklyn.

                      1.) Borough Park
                      2) Homecrest
                      3) Midwood.

                      This is their wikipedia pages:

                      “Borough Park is home to one of the largest Orthodox Jewish communities outside Israel, ”

                      Homecrest: “There is a growing population of members of the Jewish faith in the community, served by quite a few Orthodox and Sephardic synagogues”

                      “Midwood is a diverse multi-ethnic and multi-religious neighborhood; however, the neighborhood is predominately Jewish.”

                      Notice a trend here???

                    3. WTF? I literally quoted from your own source, that you’re now arguing with. Have you ever even been to Brooklyn?

          2. Just to illustrate the Binghamton point using the same data set you’re looking at, here’s what the conspiracy against Republicans looks like upstate:


            (that blue area correlates strongly with Cuomo’s cluster/restrictions in Broome County, including the fact that both exclude the Willlow Point/Twin Orchard areas)

        2. That’s what the left claimed when they argued that a ban on travelers from 7 countries was a “Muslim” ban. These disgusting savages can’t even keep their lies straight for five minutes.

          1. Wait, so are you saying that it was a muslim ban, or that Blackman is wrong here?

            1. Yes, not the best time to bring up the underinclusivity argument you used to defend the travel bans.

    3. It’s almost as if Trump supporters don’t believe the risks or are less likely to follow recommendations that would help stop the spread of Covid-19. Imagine that!

      1. They should stop it.

      2. People don’t believe in the flu or the common cold either. Otherwise we would have a lockdown from November to March every year.

        1. “People don’t believe in the flu or the common cold either. Otherwise we would have a lockdown from November to March every year.”

          It’s disconcerting how few people point this out. Flu testing and stats have never been rigorous over the years, and so we can likely add a non-trivial increase to what’s on record. We all know that a significant number of people, mostly the elderly and immuno-suppressed, succumb to flu-related illnesses and death every year.

          The Covid flu this year has been documented to death and into fictional realms. The pcr test does not indicate active infection for the host or as a contagion. Covid deaths have been irresponsibly inflated and not sorted by co-morbidities. The CDC guideines even directed that coroners call all deaths Covid fatalities, no matter why they died, if the deceased had tested “positive” on the useless pcr tests or were even suspected of having Covid, based on a wide range of symptoms. Hospitals and doctors have been paid per designated Covid death and even per “case,” whether a real infection with symptoms or a mere suspected case as identified by contact tracing and *possible* exposure.

          Politicians and headlines scream rising cases, and then numbers are adjusted downward and even retracted on the back pages. This confusion plus the conflation of asymtomatic and likely not infected “positive cases” with actual illness and death have led most people to give up figuring out what’s actually true and rely on the latest official pronouncements and media echo chamber, instead.

          What in the world?

          1. Sorting covid deaths for co-morbidities yields only tiny correlations. Your argument fails on that point

            1. I see you’re the designated denier of the what’s in my posts. Why don’t you document this latest and truly weak drive-by assertion of yours?

      3. “It’s almost as if Trump supporters don’t believe the risks or are less likely to follow recommendations that would help stop the spread of Covid-19. Imagine that!”

        This is not about Trump supporters vs. Democrats (the latter who have to call their approach to policies “reality-based” so that one doesn’t mistake their politics for impossible pie-in-the-sky beliefs or even darker Peter Pan fantasies.)

        Many of us don’t support either party or candidate. We are following the science of doctors, virologists, and other academics, and researchers who are speaking up about the official misrepresentations of tests and stats, about the health industry lies, about Big Pharma as a corporate government agent, and about the destructive government actions taken against us using the Covid flu virus and, allegedly, ongoing pandemic as a reason to retool society and reset our economies and lives.

        We’re following the skeptical and verifiable science, not the controlled medical propaganda dominating the media that has politicians and technocrats hyping danger and offering a magical series of vaccines, and not herd immunity, as our only hope. When we’re not actually forced to be in lock-down, they are always warning us to be in lock-step with whatever we’re told.

        We are expected to not to ask questions, especially about their science and methodologies, so that’s why more and more of us are asking questions. We are finding many good scientists and doctors and even some officials who are willing to speak up and show us the hard science and truth about what’s really going on wrt the testing, degree of contagion, morbidity rates and numbers, effective treatments, and the terrible consequences of universal masking, social distancing, quarantines of the healthy and so on.

        Those in charge would like to make this all about free-wheeling, irresponsible Trump vs. Progressive technocratic science and dictates, but that’s just a distraction from the truly problematic misrepresentations that few Trumpians and even fewer Progs like to address.

        1. “We are following the science of doctors, virologists, and other academics,…”
          This is the usual meme from people of all stripes. The actual science is still fairly cloudy.

          1. “The actual science is still fairly cloudy.”

            Like Global warming? Actually, we are following the science of the inventor of the pcr test inventor, unlike the pols and their medical technocrats overseeing the pandemic they’ve declared.

            Cloudy with a big chance of blinding snow is how the obfuscators like it.

    4. Right, that’s Felder’s district which was designed to have an Orthodox Jewish majority. It votes Republican in national elections. And it’s also a COVID hotspot.

  17. I hope they now understand that Cuomo and DeBlasio are their enemies.

    1. . . along with reason, science, modernity, education, decency, a virus . . essentially the entire reality-based world.

      1. you left out Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland

        1. I am of the reality-based world.

  18. Let’s do this again. In Queens, Cuomo has highlighted an area just south of Flushing Meadows Corona Park.

    And again, that’s a center, a little core of GOP voters, right there..

    1. Sorry, dude, this is the thread about the antisemitic conspiracy. The partisan conspiracy will be along shortly.

      1. The two are the same.

          1. “Orthodox Jews”. Not all Jews.

            1. There are no other Jews – according to Orthodox Jews.

    2. I finally took a look at this map, and if you think this is Cuomo trying to target or suppress Republican votes he’s doing a terrible job. Yes, there are some red precincts in this zone, but there’s about five blue precincts for every red one. This becomes even more obvious looking at the Far Rockaway cluster, which is centered on some deep blue precincts and happens to include a few red ones on the western edge. If Cuomo were targeting Republicans, he’d just move the boundaries of that zone half a mile to the west, avoid all the Democratic voters in the current zone, and pick up a bunch of extra Republican precincts.

  19. This shows why no one should agree to be tested for Covid or provide any data or cooperate in any way with public health authorities. They use the information to justify threatening you and harming you.

    1. Not only that Ben, the pcr test is being misued as a diagnostic tool. It CANNOT diagnose any active infection, only prior exposure to similar, in this case, corona viruses, and, further, it yields a high percentage of false positives that government is using to mask and eventually vaccinate us, while shutting down our way of life.

      People are not infectious, contagious, or spreaders just because their bodies show fragments of previous corona type RNA. We virtually all have them. Different testing centers can ramp up or down the number of amplification cycles of these fragments and come up with different results, but even the optimal 36 cycles or so don’t indicate the presence of a live infection.

      Basically, “positive case” numbers tell us nothing with respect to contagion numbers. Here is one of many explanatory vids:

      1. Never mind Youtube.
        Read an peer-reviewed medical paper in the NE Journal of Medicine

        1. That paper is about false negatives, i.e. scenarios in which a test reports no infection when there really is one. It has nothing to do with the false positives that Miss Greenparker (and presumably Ben_) are going on about.

    2. We’re in some real 1984 land where trying to protect people from a deadly infectious disease is “threatening you and harming you.”

      1. They should stop threatening people and stop targeting religious minorities. Threatening is not protecting.

      2. “We’re in some real 1984 land where trying to protect people from a deadly infectious disease is ‘threatening you and harming you.”

        Sure, opposite-speak, Newspeak. And loving communities and togetherness is selfish super spreader sicko criminal behavior.

        As has happened to countless other families, I couldn’t visit my very elderly parents in the hospital, on two separate occasions, even if masked and even when they and I had no Covid infection. What a most inhumane farce.

    3. Ben_, if you really believe what you just said, you might be more comfortable in an earlier century, before all those nasty, threatening, harmful public health authorities horned their way into our lives. Perhaps the 19th. Or just to be safe, the 14th.

      Unfortunately there are no time machines. The next best thing might be a good book. IIRC “A World Lit Only by Fire” by William Manchester was as good as its title.

      Have a good long read. Ask yourself whether you’d really want to be there, and if not, what are the key factors underlying the differences between our era and that one (you might have to read additional books to help with that one), and how the attitude reflected in your comment relates to those key factors (this will require some honest self reflection).

      Take your time.

      1. Sigh. The ‘Reply button in this blogging platform appears to be intermittently broken-

        My October.8.2020 at 6:23 pm comment was in response to Ben_’s October.7.2020 at 10:18 am comment “They should stop threatening people and stop targeting religious minorities. Threatening is not protecting.”

  20. Josh,

    I highly recommend another post, putting the Brooklyn “High Risk” map of Cuomo’s transposed with the 2016 Presidential voting data by precinct in Brooklyn. To make it absolutely clear how egregious this is.

    Let’s be clear. This is textbook voter suppression.

    Directly before (and given mail in/early voting) during a major election, the Governor of New York has used precinct level-voting data from 2016, drawn a line around the precincts in Brooklyn that voted Trump, and said “These people are not allowed to politically gather in large groups to discuss voting (and they tend to be of a minority)”. But outside those “GOP” areas, people are free to. Textbook voter suppression.

    Lest you think that this is “OK” because of the infection rate differences, let me remind you of an interesting fact. The African American infection rate is significantly higher than the non-African American infection rate. Do you REALLY think it would be OK for a governor to “Draw a line” around African American communities, and ban their ability to politically gather, based on the infection rate, while allowing non-African American communities to gather just fine? Really?

    1. A couple of clingers getting lathered about “voter suppression.”

      I still like to believe that having better ideas and character enabled the liberal-libertarian alliance to rout the conservatives in the American culture war, but part of it apparently was the luck of drawing the shambling likes of Prof. Blackman and Armchair Lawyer as adversaries.

      1. Only if you consider giving “marriage” licenses to people who like to sodomize other men to be a “better idea.”

  21. Will the last person leaving New York City please turn out the lights?
    For the children.

  22. If the governor and mayor would just let communities handle their own risk, all these accusations of ill will could be avoided.

    1. Because contagion is a thing, the notion that “communities” can handle their own risk is mistaken. That’s sort of a big part of this discussion.

      1. Like many Christian churches, maybe part of the religion is doing the opposite of what the government wants them to do. Good for them.

      2. Does the infection kill 10% or .01% ? T%hat also matters. We don’t lock down during flu season.

        1. “Does the infection kill 10% or .01% ? T%hat also matters. We don’t lock down during flu season.”

          Right, and there’s very little commentary on this point by most of us and next to nothing in the mainstream media about real comparisons. To begin with, case numbers and deaths attributed to flu in past years have not been stringently documented, so we can suppose they’re even greater than currently on record. We do know that every year, a not insignificant number of people, mostly the elderly and immuno-compromised, succumb to flu-complicated illnesses and death.

          For this current corona virus flu strain, cases have been over-documented with a lot of meaningless “positives” per the pcr test which does not mean active infection, and even suspected cases based on alleged exposure from contact-tracing are counted as “positives”; deaths have been “generously” and sometimes falsely attributed to Covid, especially since hospitals are paid per Covid death and sometimes per each “diagnosed” case; and, a lot of startling stats have been officially released to big headlines and then modified, even retracted, later on the back pages.

          In the confusion and hysteria, people give up trying to understand what’s really going on and end up relying on the latest politician-agency-media talking points.

        2. MSimon, we got a preview this spring. Absent lockdowns, Covid 19 was on course to kill shocking percentages in the Northeast. At one point, there were literally thousands of corpses in the streets of New York City, discretely concealed in refrigerator trucks, but there nonetheless. Use your common sense. Don’t let attempts to minimize turn into a semantic argument with numbers.

          1. Stephen,
            Your comment misses the fact that in many places the apparent covid mortality rate has fallen significantly. Moreover we don’t know the actual number of infections, only the number reported by governments. Estimates of non-symptomatic cases are as much as 5 to 10x the number of symptomatic cases.
            Also confused is dying from covid and dying with covidd.

          2. lathrop…and why pray tell, were those thousands of corpses there in refrigerated tracks, and whence they came?

            Answer: Primarily elderly nursing home patients. You know, the ones that Governor Putz managed to kill with his idiotic executive order mandating nursing homes take in covid-19 patients.

            How right you are. Use common sense. Try it sometime.

      3. “Because contagion is a thing, the notion that “communities” can handle their own risk is mistaken. ”
        And for the next false syllogism consider….

    2. That seems reasonable – with a few conditions.

      First, those in the community also provide their own hospital beds as well as medical personnel and equipment for patients infected in their community or just ill unrelated to COVID-19.

      Second, those in the community do not leave the community or allow others in (once anyone enters, they can’t leave until undergoing 14 days of monitored quarantine).

      Third, those in the community provide all necessary “first responders” (police, fire, paramedics, etc) to their community.

      Fourth, no traditional public services will be provided to the community. If a transformer blows up, either the community repairs it or that portion of the community lives without electricity until after all those in the country who want to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 have been so vaccinated. No public transportation (all subway stations in the community will be locked and abandoned, no bus stops will be serviced. If a main sewer backs up in the community, see rules for transformers.

      1. What you are suggesting is ghettoizing the Jewish community, which is unacceptable. Those in the community already pose a greater risk to each other than people outside.

  23. I adore the Chabad and Hassidic, I pray with them (pre-covid), but I also know that they do not take covid seriously. They will happily pack 770 (Chabad HQ) during holidays without caring at all about covid. They do believe (wrongly) that they have herd immunity.

    1. Your saying the sanitation rituals are all so they can ignore a pandemic?

      1. Those are symbolic. No one truly believes that splashing water on your hands three time actually washes them. Similar with the others. It is about spiritual cleansing, not sanitation.

    2. Then what is the government supposed to do about it?

  24. This is what happens when you enable the real fascists. Some politicians are really enjoying their new found achtung power. Maybe the Mayor will personally drive out to those neighborhoods to personally oversee police activity again.

  25. Geographic clusters are an expected byproduct of even a uniformly random process (see That does not necessarily mean that there is a burst of spread in that region.

    Cuomo doesn’t seem to care about any of this. Like De Blasio, he is a politician who has lost any fear of the polling booth, and he has caused an immense amount of damage to NY.

    Jews of NY should be very much afraid of Cuomo! And as goes with the Jews, so with the rest of the state.

    1. Coronavirus isn’t spread randomly, so this insight isn’t very interesting. Even in the case of random distribution, as your article makes clear there are sound statistical tools to understand which events are likely the product of chance versus those that are anomalous.

      1. Pray tell how Coronavirus is spread, jb? We have some very early emerging evidence, but it seems pretty clear that we don’t really know quite yet.

        There are statistical tools for identifying whether a cluster is statistically significant or not … it doesn’t appear to me that *anyone* is using anything more than zero-th order magnitude.

        1. It’s spread from one human to another human that come into reasonably close physical proximity to one another. What definitely doesn’t happen is that someone in Brooklyn gets it and then some random person in Alabama may or may not get it depending on the current national infection rate.

        2. “very early emerging evidence”
          where did you get that idea? It most depends on a sufficient number of virons landing on mucosal tissue
          See the JASON report:

  26. Supposed health restrictions as a basis for anti-Jewish acts has a long and infamous history.

    Nice to see all the so called liberals here falling into line because these Jews dress “funny”.

    1. Why do Democrats hate Jewish people? Even Jewish Democrats hate Jewish people. The Christian prohibition on usury has been over for centuries.

      1. Democrats like to hate. Sometimes it seems like they pick victims at random.

        In this case it’s a combination of naked religious bigotry and their reflexive support for anything that’s destructive of civilization — so they’re anti-Israel because they support the side that wants to destroy civilization in Israel.

        1. yawn

  27. It’s probably worth pointing out that New York’s deaths per day follow a Gompertz Curve, exactly as expected for any epidemic. There is no recent excursion or deviation from it. Deaths per day are still trending down, and have been low for months.

    That nice Gompertz Curve suggests the lockdowns (which went into effect Mar 20th, more than 2 weeks before the peak) did nothing. The mask mandate (which came 10 days after the curve peaked) did nothing. The virus behaved as normal for a pandemic, as if there was no societal response (likely because, from the virus’s perspective, there was no relevant societal response).

    Google: ‘Covid-19 new york deaths per day’, before any web page hits there’s a graph based on NYT data. Choose ‘deaths’ in the drop down for which type of data.
    That sharp exponential peak followed by a more gradual asymptotic decline? That’s a Gompertz Curve. (‘Cases’ shows a similar pattern, but it’s not as clean as the deaths data because it only includes confirmed cases).

    1. Sorry, you should google ‘new york covid-19 deaths by day’. Apparently the order and the use of ‘by’ instead of ‘per’ cause significant differences in results for some unknowable reason. (In particular, only with ‘by’ do you get the graph).

    2. And as an aside, it’s worth pointing out that northern areas (like new york) expect different patterns than sub-tropical and tropical areas (like florida), as has been documented for other historical pandemics. (Which is why the US traditionally experiences pandemics in “two waves” – it’s not actually two waves, it’s the northern US experiencing the pandemic in a different pattern than the southern US – when you aggregate all the data, you get two distinct peaks because of separate peaks for the north and south.)

      To see what a traditional subtropical/tropical epidemic profile looks like, check daily data for Brazil for Covid-19:

      1. Your comment is simplistic and not supported by a careeful look at case rates world wide.

        1. Cite your sources, if you have any.

          Also, cases aren’t particularly useful. (Several reasons, not least of which is false positives are almost certainly outnumbering true positives at this point in the epidemic – factoring in false positives is something even trained doctors frequently fail at when explaining test results, and the general public is grossly ignorant of). Look at deaths instead – those are real medical outcomes. If cases are shooting up and deaths aren’t (even accounting for a lag period), then the case data is not reliable.

          To illustrate the problem of false positives: Imagine the current infection rate is ~1% in your area. You get a test for covid-19 which has a sensitivity of 95% (false negative 5%), and a specificity of 99% (false positive 1%), and the test comes back positive for Covid-19. Is it more likely, based solely on that test result, that you have covid-19 or not? Feel free to show your work.

  28. Round ’em up, tag ’em, put ’em in the box cars, send ’em off for showers!!!!

    What exactly is the ‘rational basis’ at hand, in light of Sweden?

    1. That’s not how rational basis works. Sweden is a counter-argument. Rational basis isn’t about winning the argument, it’s about showing up to the argument with any argument that’s not facially insane or off-topic or gibberish.

  29. The Covid policy absurdity and insanity continues: CA Gov Newsome’s office recently tweeted and urged Californians to wear their masks between bites when dining out:

    ‘Going out to eat with members of your household this weekend?’ the tweet reads. ‘Don’t forget to keep your mask on in between bites. Do your part to keep those around you healthy.”

    Meanwhile, California requires young children over the age of two to wear masks in public.

    Am beginning to think we’re utterly lost. We’re left with bickering partisans responding to hyped up fear and arguing the details of agenda-based control policies, instead of pointing out the existential danger of all common sense and humanity being sidelined in service to an anti-individual future.

    1. “Meanwhile, California requires young children over the age of two to wear masks in public.”

      If covid is that bad, Why are children two and under exempt?

Please to post comments