38 Comments

  1. Hmmm… Being good liberals, you are smearing this guy for utilizing his 1st Amendment rights or for being gay, or both?  Tolerance is okay only so long as you get to decide who and what is to be tolerated? Ironically there is truth here, the libertarians are the only true liberals left on the country. The Left has become everything it claimed it used to despise.

    • You honestly don’t think there’s something wrong with a person who refers to the media as “Jew-run”? It’s his first amendment right to say whatever he wants, but if someone wants to criticize it, that’s their first amendment right. I’m honestly surprised that someone is defending some racist from a party school who tells ridiculous lies about teaching homosexuality to children. Considering that Macias maintains a strong online presence, I would be less surprised if you were him.

      • Talking about the media being “jew run” isn’t in itself wrong.

        The only relevant question is:  IS the media subject to inordinate jewish influence?

        I mean, most of the media DOES appear to be behind American blood & bucks being wasted on fighting Israel’s enemies, no?

        Only a Politically Corrected anti-White idiot would say that it’s impermissible to be critical of either Jews or the possibility that Jews might have WAY more influence than their numbers would allow them … in a “democratic” society.

        It’s not like this hasn’t gotten the Jews into trouble hundreds of times over the last thousand years.  The only question is:  Is it TRUE?  And if so, what do the rest of us plan to DO about it if it’s not good for OUR interests?

    • How is this in any way a smear?  Assuming the facts are as characterized here, all this post has done is to construct a rope out of Mr. Macias’ own words, leaving the reader to decide if he should hang.  And saying that Mr. Macias is affiliated with the Gay-Straight Alliance is not a smear, either, even if that statement proved to be false.

      Tolerance does not mean that you are protected from suffering any consequences for your stupidity.

      Now, if Mr. Macias did not write those statements within the quotation marks, then The Fly would have much to answer for.

      • The Fly will indeed have much to answer to in court if they refused to retract their libelous smear article and apologize, which I have requested in writing and have copies and certified mail receipts as evidence. The article is indeed a homophobic attack. It also implies that Nora Campos herself is affiliated with the article, which she her staff has assured me that she is not. I’ll be waiting to see if she publicly denounces it or not.

        Either way, The Fly libeled me and Campos all in the same article? What I did write are what I am attacking Campos on. Her voting record indicates that she indeed voted for AB 499 and SB 48. My accusations against her are true and official government records.

        If The Fly really wants to avoid lawsuits in the future, they really should do a better job at checking their sources. Yahoo! forum posts that appear on a forum that is infamous for internet trolling and impersonators will hardly hold up in court. One can commit libel via negligence under the law.

    • Ok

      This fellow is a gay activist.  Nothing wrong with that.  But he attacks Campos for supporting education aimed at promoting tolerance and understanding of gay issues.

      Okay

      Are you sure this guy was not soliciting signatures for Santa Clara Plays Fair?

      • I am a vocal opponent of Proposition 8, and will work to repeal it if the issue is on the ballot again in 2012. I’ve abandoned my campaign to outright repeal SB 48 now that an alternative initiative has been filed to keep the law in place, but also allow parents to opt their children out of such instruction. I will be backing that initiative instead.

        • Im sorry Anthony, did you actually write jew-run media? I just want to clarify your statement before I engage in any intellectual discussion with you.

        • This twerp at Chico is just another example of how low student government has sunk at the state university level.  This cupcake is on a free ride at Chico and it is sad that a system of student government that fostered Joe Trippi and the late State Senator Oropeza has now fostered a punk.  San Jose Inside has done a great job exposing this person for the selfish twit he is.

  2. Putting the challenger’s ethics and opinions aside, the incumbent is truly an empty suit, incapable of a cogent thought and little more than a puppet for organized labor.

      • It may be a repeat but doesn’t change the fact that it is true.  Nora Campos and her brother are jokes.  They provide zero leadership for the Eastside of San Jose.

        Is there no shame on her part for all her attacks on her brother’s competition as being too L.A. connected when both take big development dollars from L.A. based companies and her first real “accomplishments” in the Assembly were all Hollywood/L.A. connected issues?  What exactly has she done that is of benefit to San Jose in her freshman year? 

        This kid Macias may be a joke but that doesn’t negate that Assemblywoman Campos is a joke as well.  Lets hope a real candidate comes forward soon

  3. Hi, my name is Anthony Macias. You may have seen a nasty smear article that the Campos people wrote about me in the Metro.

    First of all, to say that I attacked her personally is a lie, plain and simple. In fact, I mentioned how she earned a reputation for being independent and doing what she thought was right when she was a San Jose City Councilwoman. What I was criticizing her on are two bills that she voted for, and how I am disappointed in her for voting for them. What I said that she voted for is entirely true.

    The claim that she voted for a bill to allow girls as young as 12 to be receive STD vaccinations without their parent’s consent or knowledge is true. The bill is AB 499.
    Have a look here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_0451-0500/ab_499_vote_20110512_1011AM_asm_floor.html

    It also true that she voted for a bill to required mandatory “gay history” lessons in public schools. The legislation does not set a minimum age or grade level for them to begin, which leaves the door open for them to begin as young as kindergarten. That bill is SB 48.
    And yes, Campos voted for it: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sb_48_vote_20110705_0137PM_asm_floor.html

    I also find it funny and hypocritical that these so-called tolerant liberal Democrats placed so much emphasis on the fact that I am a member of the Log Cabin Republicans and have been involved in GSAs. I guess Campos is only tolerant of people who agree with her politically. If not, why would she make such a big deal about that? She also attacked me for what she believes is my sexual orientation is. She doesn’t know my orientation, since I never was asked about it by her scumbag crony who was questioning me, but the fact that she would attack me on that just goes to show what a hateful, homophobic hypocrite she really is.

    Regarding her charges of antisemitism: Those are entirely false. I have never posted anything of the sort on any Yahoo! message board or forum. I think that someone was pretending to be me. I have had a history of meeting and socializing with people online, and while making friends with people across the globe is one of the wonders of living in the age of technology, you sometimes make some enemies. Identity theft is unfortunately one of the risks we run by establishing an online presence, and I now know to be more careful in the future. I suspect that someone took on my personality on a Yahoo! board. My family raised me to have a profound respect for God’s chosen people. I was a vocal opponent of San Francisco’s proposed ballot measure to ban male circumcision, citing the religious rights of the Jewish community on of the main reasons for my opposition.

    Nora, I have nothing against you as a person. Watching you, I think that you’re probably a better person than you let off. Although I don’t feel like I attacked you personally, I apologize for anything that made you feel that way. I do feel like I’ve been attacked personally by you on the basis of perceived sexual orientation and charges of antisemitism. Despite, that I will gladly accept your apology and do the Christian thing, which is to forgive those who have trespassed against us. Am I going to run against you? Probably not. I’m much too young and need to finish my education, first. What I wanted to accomplish by calling you out and floating the idea of running against you is to get you to watch what you vote for in the future. While I know that you’re a Democrat in title, what happened to that spirit of independence that you once had? Sometimes you have to vote against your party when their interests are harmful to interests of the people that you swore an oath to serve.

    Thank you for your time, and I hope that we can put this all behind us.

    • I find it funny too……

      Anthony I find it funny that in your rebuttal above you describe:

      “she voted for a bill to allow girls as young as 12 to be receive STD vaccinations without their parent’s consent or knowledge is true.”

      thats significantly different than your Craigslist verbage of:

      “She voted for AB 499, which allows girls as young as 12 to be swept away to a clinic during school hours to receive risky vaccinations for sexually transmitted diseases which have painful side effects, and have even killed young girls. The worst part is, according to the bill that Campos voted for, parents do not have to give consent, or even merely be informed. You may never know what killed your daughter.”

      Swept Away? lol Risky Vaccinations?? Vaccinations that can even KILL young girls? You may never even know what killed your daughter…?? This is 2012 not 1890 Anthony… did you send your email to SJi via carrier pigeon?

      Cervical Cancer is no laughing matter and one of most effective was to prevent it is a vaccination before children become sexually active. While Anthony may not be having sex with his fellow college students… Maybe by choice, maybe by circumstance, many, if not most of his colleagues are having sex and deserve to have chance to be protected from real threats.  Protected from over bearing, out of touch parents. Protected from uniformed, Science denying, Religious or “abstinence only” fanatics. (probably the same folks who protest that being Gay is a choice) SB48

      Your choice of words shows your prejudice and inexperience. It’s ok we were all 21 once and remember what it was like. 

      Yes Anthony its funny…. we are laughing…..AT YOU Anthony…not with you

      • Let’s see if this passes the moderators, I tried to bring this point up already.

        The craigslist ad in question is an ANONYMOUS ad.  Unless fly has some inside info, as in craiglist let them see who the remailer went too, fly has no idea the ad actually came from Anthony.

        Anthony, this is complete libel.  I hope you have the resources to punch this bully in the face (legally, as in lawsuit)

        • If The Fly emailed the Craigslist poster (as encouraged by the author of the Craigslist ad), and that person replied, that email would have that person’s email address on it.  It is stated in the post that The Fly and Macias exchanged emails, and I presume that is how they determined who he was.

        • I agree with Robert.  Anyone can post anything on Craigslist, and while doing so claim to be another person…but all posts at Craigslist are effectively anonymous (unless Craigslist chooses to identify the email address of the person who submitted it, I suppose).  It is very poor journalism to read an anonymous post at Craigslist, and then to assume (based on some publicly known handle provided within the post, I suppose) that you have identified a public figure making potentially career-destroying anti-Semitic remarks.  One might even say its profoundly unethical.  At best, its more than a little stupid.  If I were Mr. Macias, I would be sorely tempted to file suit.

      • If the liberal media thinks that they can intimidate me, they are dead wrong. It’s sad that Campos can’t defend her voting record, so she immediately resorts to bigoted, homophobic smears while claiming to a tolerant liberal Democrat at the same time. She must be insecure if she finds me threatening enough to launch an anti-gay attack against me. Not much to worry about indeed.

        • How did Campos smear you, Anthony?  You and others keep saying that, but I have seen no sign of it within this posting and comments thread.  Where is the bigotry?  Where is the smear?

          The only way I can interpret the post as a smear is if, by using the inflammatory statement that a bill “requires that public schools teach homosexuality to children as early as kindergarten,” you are attempting to appeal to a certain narrow segment of the population who finds this language appealing, but not if it comes from a homosexual.  Is that it?  You’re trying to appeal to bigots, who you know won’t appreciate the message if the messenger is gay?

        • I’m confused as to how this is an anti-gay attack. Are you interpreting this as an anti-gay attack?:
          “What Macias didn’t say in his post is that he’s a Log Cabin Republican who is an academic senator for his school’s Gay-Straight Alliance.”
          I don’t think that looks like much of an anti-gay attack. This, however, does:
          “Campos also voted for SB 48, which requires that public schools teach homosexuality to children as early as kindergarten. Again, parents have no right to opt their children out of homosexual lessons.”
          It’s true that the law Campos voted for requires children to learn about gay civil rights history, and that the interpretation of the law could be that kindergartners are taught about gay history. However, despite the fact that such an event is of almost negligible probability, you said it was “required” that they teach children as young as kindergarteners about homosexuality. That is a lie! I understand you’ve defended gay rights, but you should have said “Campos also voted for SB 48, which requires that public schools teach homosexuality to children, possibly as young as kindergarten.”

      • Cervical cancer is a horrible illness, but we have certain standards in this society, and one of them is that we don’t ordinarily give aspirin to a child without a parent’s (or guardian’s) consent, let alone a vaccine for an STD.  If the state wants to make that vaccine mandatory for public high school (or middle school) students, then let them openly say so.  A bill that seeks to evade parental consent, by allowing 12-year old girls to decide to receive this non-mandated vaccine on their own, is contrary to how we do things in this society.  And it frankly should be contrary.

        If there is such a strong basis for undertaking the mass vaccination of young students in this regard, then there should be no reason why it need be undertaken in this secretive, underhanded manner.  Why should this vaccine be handled so radically different from how we handle the vaccines for measles, mumps, and rubella?

        • Why does a lack of parental consent make it wrong to give a vaccine for cervical cancer to a little girl who consents to it if her parents? What if the daughter openly seeks the vaccine and her parents still say no? Would it be unethical to treat the girl? In Afghanistan, the radical religious right spreads rumors about the polio vaccine being the urine of Satan. I understand that being able to keep your child from being vaccinated is some exercise of liberty, but it also exposes your daughter to a dangerous disease for no rational reason. HPV affects women disproportionately. The reason why the extreme right in America attempts to fight HPV vaccines is the exact same reason why they fight abortion: they do not want women to be able to enter into sexual relationships until after marriage. And that is a far greater violation of liberty.

        • We don’t customarily provide medical treatments to juveniles without parental consent.  I don’t understand why you are having difficulty addressing that simple fact.  Its is illegal for a school nurse to give a kid aspirin upon the child’s request, but it shall be legal to give them an STD vaccine?  That makes no sense.

          The fact you feel the need to bring the Taliban into this suggests the level of strength your argument holds, frankly.  Twelve-year olds are not customarily empowered to make such decisions, nor should they be.  And I have no doubt the vast majority of the electorate agrees.

        • The fact you feel the need to bring the Taliban into this suggests the level of strength your argument holds

          Kevin, you realize according to internet rule #38, he just broke Godwins law and lost the argument right?

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin’s_law

          I’m officially declaring Kevin the winner, Dakota the loser in this debate.  Dakota gets a cookie as a consolation prize.

        • Actually, my argument functions essentially the same without the ONE sentence mentioning Afghanistan, but I will not retract it. I oppose religious zealots who spread misinformation, whether it’s the taliban or Michelle Bachmann. If it automatically discredits me to mention a country where widespread misinformation about a vaccine has led to countless misery, what places am I allowed to mention? How about Texas, where Rick Perry tried to make it mandatory?

          Prior to the argument that the HPV vaccine kills children or causes retardation (Used by Macias and Bachmann, respectively), the argument was that it led to increased sexual activity. Bridger Maher of the Family Research Council said “giving the HPV vaccine to young women could be potentially harmful, because they may see it as a licence to engage in premarital sex.”

          Yes, parents have rights about how they raise their kids. However, the health of their children should not be put at risk so that they can secure a modern-day chastity belt over them.

        • I was visiting my girlfriend for the weekend and wasn’t concerned with constantly checking my online arguments. My bad.

  4. “While I know that you’re a Democrat in title, what happened to that spirit of independence that you once had? Sometimes you have to vote against your party when their interests are harmful to interests of the people that you swore an oath to serve.”

    Please. Nora has never voted against labor or the democratic party.

  5. I’ve contacted Nora Campos’ office regarding this article. Her secretary has assured me that she does not endorse this article. This article is libelous against both her and I. It claims that she took the ad personally in the title, which implies that these attacks are coming from her. It also accuses me of being antisemitic with no evidence other than obscure posts found on a public Yahoo! forum where many poster remain anonymous, engaging in internet trolling, and often impersonate others. Legal action for is being considered is this article is not removed from the internet and a retraction and clarification is not printed in response to any printed versions of this article.

    • 1. No one ever said she endorsed this article; you were the one who came in and said “you Campos people”.
      2. This article is not libelous against either of you.
      3. The article title does NOT claim she took the ad personally. It says the ad “went personal,” and makes no mention of Nora Campos, only using her name as an adjective to denote the ad- the “Campos ad,” named because it was attacking her.
      4. The article “implies that these attacks are coming from her”? It was very clearly written by the Fly.
      5. If you’re running for public office, and have made enemies on the internet who are attempting to steal your identity to ruin your reputation, I’d like to hear how you made those enemies.

  6. This guy will get one vote, only if he remembers to vote for himself.  This is what is wrong with America, Campos sucks but we need to do better.  DO YOUR RESEARCH BEFORE VOTING.