The Downward Spiral of Local Politics

It happened first at the county Democratic Party’s annual Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, when one speaker compared the tactics of Mayor Reed, the Chamber of Commerce and other supporters of Measure B to those of the Nazis that he recalled from a visit to the Holocaust Museum.

It happened again yesterday, when four councilmembers signed a memo asking Mayor Reed to sign a declaration with over 200 other U.S. mayors signaling our city’s support of same-sex marriage. A woman stood up at the Rules Committee meeting and compared the tactics of these councilmembers to those very same Nazis, proving Godwin’s law.

Is this what we’ve come to in one of the most diverse and dynamic communities in the world? One side comparing the other to fascists and the other side refusing to turn the other cheek in favor of escalating a war of words that only serves to degrade our political discourse to the point of stagnation?

I’m talking to all of you. The ones who read this blog. The ones who move and shake and set the tone for the rest of us. You have to step up your game. The 10th largest city in the nation cannot be allowed to devolve into the same public policy morass we see in Sacramento and Washington.

This isn’t about politics or elections or personal or religious beliefs. It’s about a fundamental respect for one another. It’s about respecting our right to agree to disagree without turning the disagreement into an excuse to bring each other down or hold grudges that prevent any chance of genuine compromise in the the future. 

It’s about letting cooler heads prevail and remembering that true leadership is more nuanced than speaking loudly and waving a big stick. Sometimes, it’s about tipping your cap and moving on to the next fight.

It’s unfortunate that our civic, labor and business leaders seemingly refuse to accept the core principles of a civilized and democratic society. The silent victims are the residents of San Jose, deprived of the governance to which they are entitled, possibly unaware that there is any way of conducting our public affairs without the vitriol that invades their physical and electronic mailboxes on a daily basis.

I say this as a profiteer of the vitriol. It can be a strange feeling waking up in the morning, wanting so much to believe that you’re making a difference, but knowing from experience that it’s probably not true. 

I’d like to believe that my work in this world will have an impact, that even one person’s life will be improved—even saved—by something I’ve brought to the table. I still believe that it can and it will. But lately, my hometown seems like it’s slipping away before me and my friends have had our chance to help pull it back from the ledge. 

If you’re reading these words, you have the power to turn us around. Get to it.

Peter Allen is an independent communications consultant and a proud native of San José. He votes in City Council District 6, Congressional District 19, State Senate District 15, and Assembly District 28.

Peter Allen was born and raised in San Jose and lives in Willow Glen. He is a board member of the Willow Glen Neighborhood Association and vice chair of the city of San Jose Arts Commission. Follow him on Twitter at @pjallen2.

32 Comments

  1. “The silent victims are the residents of San Jose, deprived of the governance to which they are entitled, possibly unaware that there is any way of conducting our public affairs without the vitriol that invades their physical and electronic mailboxes on a daily basis”

    Remain silent, remain a victim.

    ‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing”

    Isaiah 53:7
    He was led like a lamb to the slaughter. … As a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep that before its shearers is mute, so he didn’t open his mouth.

    Pick your poison.

    • >>Remain silent, remain a victim.

      ‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing”

      People wonder why I won’t shut the hell up.

  2. I would like to see a media outlet untainted by politics of any sort.  Nowadays it seems hard to get the news or information without some sort of bias attached to it.  Just the truth would be nice….no hearsay, no slant to appeal to any one particular group, no hypotheses, just the plain truth.  In this day and age, it seems the whole concept of truth has been lost.

  3. I am still waiting for Mr. Robinson to explain his accusations against Ms. Herrera when he wrote weeks ago:

    “The Sheriff pulled her endorsement of Rose because of fraud, but has yet to endorse anyone else.”

    The two questions I have asked Mr. Robinson to answer numerous times on SJI are:

    1) Is Sheriff Smith accusing Ms. Herrera of committing a crime of fraud?

    2) If yes, please provide the penal code(s) Ms. Herrera has violated.

    So far Mr. Robinson has avoided answering the questions directly.  Let see if Mr. Robinson will step up and provide clear answers to these two simple questions.

  4. With respect to my favorite local issue, the stadium,the organized opposition which was funded by San Francisco acted with all the toleration of Klansmen towards the voter registration of blacks in the 1960s.  Santa Clara Plays Fair did more to damage the reputation of legitimate stadium opponents by having members assault council members physically even spit at campaign workers.  One of their associates spoke of chaining people to a truck in a discussion with a frequent commenter here. In the end, the stadium became reality, and the anti stadium mob remains as a collection of local bigots and fools.

  5. A truly fascinating topic.  Joanne Jacobs, when she was a writer for the Merc, was one of the most prolific users of “Neo-Nazi” I have ever seen in this town.  Not one peep of criticism was ever raised by anyone with a public voice.

    It’s odd to see Allen’s criticism on only one point when there are so many loathsome examples.  A taxpayer-paid San Jose film magazine named “Film Clips” published an essay in September 2001 that began with “God, I’m sick of white people” and went on to discuss “high tide at Honky Beach.”  And the author, Eric Eisen of E2 Media at that time went on to vent about “Caucasians” (suppressing their nationality & diversity) and calling them “Ozzie & Harriet.”  It’s not “Nazi” but it is in the same hate territory.  Nobody spoke up against this taxpayer-paid slander.

    And the Merc has clasped hate speech close to its bosom for the last 30 years.  Here are 13 labels the Merc has used (out of 82 that have been documented) that deny the diversity and nationality of the diverse white Americans.

    “Wasp, white flight, redneck, hillbilly, cracker, white trash, white bread, typical white person, goober, acting white, gringo, haole, and Wonder Bread.”

    Each one is not the shocking fire in the night that “Nazi” is, but the cumulative effect has been huge, especially on school children forced to read the Merc.  Why the silence about this hate speech?  It’s been right there on the pages of the Merc for 30 years.

    Someday there will be a discovery that a very large share of the diverse white Americans living in San Jose has left, and the campaign of defamation in the Merc and at City Hall will be proven to be a major element in their decision.

    • > Why the silence about this hate speech?  It’s been right there on the pages of the Merc for 30 years.

      Hate speech has not just been confined to the Merc.

      On these very electronic pages of this electronic forum, SJI columnist Joe DiSalvo reported to us a while back about “his students” venting about “the problem of white culture/values”.

      Columnist DiSalvo reported not a twinge of judgementalism on his part or the part of any other of “his students” about the impropriety of this mindset.

      I have yet to detect where DiSalvo has accepted or tolerated any ethnic or cultural group being judged as problematic—other than persons of “white” ethnicity or culture.

  6. Nice message but don’t lecture us. Mayor Reed is not a a victim here but a willing participant in the degradation and chief spewer of vitriole.

    Reed threw the first grenade in this pension/benefit fight when he came in to police department shift briefings to address department members. He prefaced his comments to us with his usual all-American “I’m a military guy like many of you… I tell it like it is and don’t mince words or apologise for sending the the message…” line of crap like he was some sort of Commanding Officer giving a big motivational speech to troops he was personally leading into battle.

    What came out of his mouth next was disgusting!  He came to a place where men and women were prepring to go out and protect the citizens of San Jose – knowing they could be seriously injured or even killed while doing so.

    That “man” said: “you people have been riding the gravy train and I am going to stop it!”

    Sgt walked up to Reed and asked him to his face:  “were those officers whose pictures you passed as you walked down the hallway into this briefing room, pictures of San Jose Police officers killed in the line of duty, on the ‘Gravy Train’?”

    The Mayor in all of his straight shooting tell-it like it is bravado mumbled, “What?”

    The Sgt repeated his pointed question allowing Reed time to gather his thoughts. Reed’s response was a callous, “Don’t be ridiculous Paul!”

    Since that day, Reed has been shown to have lied about the size of the unfunded liability – there is serious question no as to whether or not there is any unfunded liability in the City Employees PEsnion FUND – thats right folks NONE! Soon internal doocuments will be released showing that the Mayor is fully aware that components of measure b are patently illegal AND that his “Voluntary Election Plan” which needs US COngressional approval to change US TAX Law WILL NEVER BE ALLOWED!!! 

    Mayor Reed is a dishonorable person who has lied and deceived voters – he has successfully whipped voters into a frenzy believing that the sky is falling and that City Employees are to blame.

    Meanwhile Peter, THe MercuryNEws, Metro and SJ Inside endorse his “scorched earth” agenda while providing cover for his actions by dismissing Reed’s behavior as “clumsy bedside manner.”

    Meyer Reed

    A dark haired/light eyed military veteran, Republican and career City Employee who has been called a “nazi” more times for skin/eyecolor combination,  party affiliation and occupation by members of Reed/Oliverio/Nguyen/Herrera/Liccardo’s party than any other walk of life – cry me a river??? Probably not Peter, probably not.

    • Meyer Weed,
      I think the point here is that two wrongs don’t make a right. Stay safe out there and thank you for your service.

      • THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!!! We know a majority of the public supports the dept and we are frustrated that those same supporters subscribe to the lies and deceptions that the Mayor has repeated so frequently that they have become the truth.  What’s worse is the supposed “watchdog” media (MercuryNews, Metro, blogs like SJI) parrotting what he says without critical analysis thereby reinforcing the message.

        Then this article appears and challenges blog readers to “step up their game???”  Excuse me, but readers here on all sides of issues under discussion seem to me ARE UNANIMOUS IN THEIR DEMANDS FOR ACCOUNTABILITY , HONESTY, OPENNESS AND TRANSPARENCY.  All i see are free passes handed to term-LIMITED politicians – the veryones who have set the tone when they fail to negotiate then villanize career emoloyees in person and in the media the ones who are made out to be the victims here.

  7. This is the result of the government so deeply involved in our lives.  It will get worse, much worse, before it gets better.

    On another note, for those who like to throw the word Nazi around; communism, socialism and fascism all come from the same side of the political spectrum.

  8. Not all truth is positive, not all positive information is the truth.

    The slide in tone did not start at the Democratic Party Dinner, the personal nature of the debate in San Jose can be traced back for years.

    The problem with utilizing Nazism, fascism, and socialism is two-fold.  First, the visceral reaction to the words themselves and second the fundamental failure of people to understand their definition.

    Facism is a rightwing philosophy, authoritarian in nature, that emphasizes nationilsm and rejects pluralism and minority rights.  George W. Bush is a facist.  He adhered to this philosophy as a matter of philosophy on the basis he was “protecting the nation”.  Many in the tea party are facists, though the reject the term because of its negative connotations, but their proposed policies from iimmigration to their rejection of the President betray their belief system.  In fact, if you go through what they believe and define facism—not as a nazi, but as a political theory—many do not disagree—as long as you don’t use the term, facist.

    The excesses of facism are the natural result of the implementation of the philosophy.  Hence the emotional reaction to the use of the term.

    The tea party attack on socialism is ironic, misguided and shows their complete lack of education regarding the definition.  Their two biggest issues they want to protect are socialist ie. Medicare and Social Security. 

    Socitalism has been hijacked by the right to equate with Communism.  Socialism is not communism, though socialism is an element of communism.  But socialism is also an element of Nazi philosophy where the State takes precedence ie. National Socialist.

    Socialism is an economic system that can be part of any government philosophy.  The U.S. economy is mosty capitalist, but has some socialist elements ie. public schools, roads and the aforementioned Medicare and Social Security.

    Moreover, unfettered capitalism is a discredited economic system (it is not a government system).  Unregulated capitalism can lead to facism.. 

    But definitions aside, the public has their own reactions to these terms because of the way they are used in the media.  For a tea party activist to call Obama a socialist or a facist, given their stated goals and philosophies is absurd.

    For them to reject the terms as applied to them, shows their ignorance of the definitions.

    But, alas, the key is education.  And name-calling is simply the last refuge of the ignorant.  But if a person calls another a facist and defines the term accurately—and supports their argument with fact,  we need to understand who those people are and why it is important.

    Those who forget history are condemned to relive it.

    • “…original fascists leaned more toward the left.
      Fascism under Benito Mussolini and Nazism under Adolf Hitler came from the same intellectual source as Progressivism, the birth-mother of American liberalism. The term “liberal fascism” comes from a speech made by author H. G. Wells when he told a group of Young Liberals at Oxford that Progressives must become “liberal fascists” and “enlightened Nazis.”
      Many modern liberals and leftists act as if they know exactly what fascism is. What’s more, they see it everywhere—except when they look in the mirror.  Indeed, the left wields the term like a cudgel to beat opponents from the square like seditious pamphleteers.
      The side of fascism attributed to American liberalism is not associated with the works of George Orwell or the racism and genocide of the Holocaust. It is a much less brutal, smiley-face fascism. Liberals hold political principles which are similar to those found in many fascist regimes. They have a desire to form a powerful state which coordinates a society where everybody belongs and everyone is taken care of; where there is faith in the perfectibility of people and the authority of experts; and where everything is political, including health and well-being. The Nazis were strong promoters of organic foods and animal rights, fought against large department stores, and promoted antismoking and public health drives.
      The Nazi war on smoking would make Michael Bloomberg’s heart jump.
      Fascism has a long history in American politics, spanning back to Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. You can even finds fascist tendencies within the presidencies of John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson and Bill Clinton as each tried to create an “all-caring, all-powerful, all-encompassing” state.
      So how did fascism become associated with the political right? This stems from the propaganda surrounding Marxism. In the 1920s, fascist ideas were popular among the American left as many saw Italian Fascism as a “worthwhile experiment.” The German version that emerged in the 1930s had considerably less appeal.
      The American left essentially picked a different team—the Red team, and as such swore fealty to communist talking points about fascism.
      At the same time, Joseph Stalin, the General Secretary of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union, found it beneficial to label all ideas which he did not agree with as fascist; this included socialists who were disloyal to Moscow and, of course, the political right. Those loyal to his social doctrine also began to see communism and fascism on opposite ends when, both are in fact socialist in nature.
      Liberal Fascism is different from fascism of the past because today’s left are pacifists rather than militarists; their plan is to nanny, not to bully. Still, this method can be just as politically hazardous.
      Simply because the nanny state wants to hug you doesn’t mean it’s not tyrannical when you don’t want to be hugged….”

      • Simply made up dribble.  Do you work for FOX?

        The separation comes from economics, not govermental systems.  Lefties were never in favor a a dicatorship of the proliteriate—nor is they any such thing like liberal facism.  The definition is antithetical.

        This horse manure about libs liking big government is a figment of the imagination of the right—who proclaims anything less than full Adam Smith capitalism is unAmerican.  Liberals or the left believe in some goverment.  Conservatives with their “nanny” list of an agenda including; intruding on women’s rights, the desire for more punishment (3 strikes), the desire for more military spending, the desire for harsher immigration laws and more enforcement and their incessant demand for public schools to teach creationism and biblical history—proven or not—is really the problem.

        Further, people have bastardized the concepts of economics and political systems ascribing philosophies to both that don’t exist. . .one can have capitalism in a dicataroship, one can have socialism in a democratic republic.  Pure democracy is as dangerous as any other totalitarian system because it is a dictatorship of the majority upon the minority.

        The concept of a democratic republic with certain rights retained to individuals and minority populations is a ralatively new idea.  The problem with the developing “democracies” in the spring uprising is there is no guarantee of individual or human rights—simply the idea that the majority rules.

        And the problem with the fascists in this country is they wish to remove the rights of minorities they don’t like.  The tea party desire to return to the “orignal” Constitution is another case of ignorance beyond belief.

        When they found out about the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, there was a movement in the group to remove it.  The original Constitution codified slavery, indians were not people, women had no rights and it was written by people in the 18th century who had no clue that man would someday fly, information would be instant, or any of the implements we take for granted in the 21st century.

        We know women are equal, that people of different colors are equal and the principles of the Constituttiion now apply to those individuals, when the original noted they were nonexistant or less than a whole person (3/5’s to be exact and only for census purposes).

        By the way, in their day—those who wrote the Constitution were lefty liberals.

  9. Thank you for a thoughtful piece.  I will, however, take exception with the idea that it began at the JJ dinner.  That was simply one more brick in the wall.

    Politics overall has turned into a name calling, third grade slug fest. Everybody leaves bruised and resentful.

    While I was surprised at the comments at the JJ Dinner, in context, the quote while shocking, was a reminder of why people need to step up when there is a call to action and a response to the years of battering that began when the mayor said our structural debt was public enemy number one, pensions are the cause of our debt and our police and fire pensions are the main cause of the pension debt.  The public has since endured years of “unions are evil” rhetoric and the public has listened to years of a one-note tune telling them the very people who serve them are ruining everyone’s lives.

    We could start by holding our media accountable; labeling people as either pro-union or pro-chamber seems to be the only two choices in this town.

    We can start by holding our electeds accountable.  I’ve heard time after time that our unions won’t negotiate and I’ve heard time after time in public testimony that offers on the table have been ignored.  If either side makes such a statement, it should be called on immediately and dates, times, etc. logged.

    We can start by calling out our officials who treat each other with contempt and disrespect at meetings.  I’ve been appalled at the complete lack of professionalism lately.

    We can start by demanding that all elections for local office come with a series of debates and public forums, allowing us to actually ask candidates questions rather than being subjected to campaign literature as our source of information.  And we must demand this of all issues brought before voters.  It is much harder to fall back on rhetoric and name calling when you are repeatedly forced to participate in an actual discussion or debate on an issue.

    I don’t know when the wheels fell off this wagon.  I do remember a time when debate and discourse were expected.  I do remember campaigns where opponents actually,at the very least, pretended to treat the other side with respect.  I do remember a time when people acted like grown ups and it’s time we got back to that.

    • D6Diva,
      I couldn’t agree with you more. We do need more public debate and discussion on vital issues rather than everything being left to the media, fliers, and sleazy campaigns. It is time that we start holding people accountable, and treat one another with respect.

  10. This kind of thing always happens when there is a contentious issue.  People that would ordinarily have varied interests suddenly become one issue voters.  Special interests line up behind or against proxies and wage war.  People vote for bozos, because they’ll either support or fight against the issue.

    If we ever get past the pension issue, I’m sure things will improve.

    • You’d be correct if this were a fairly normally ran city. Most city priorities go through the expected and gradual pendulum swings and the paradigm shifts. But thanks to the decimation of public safety, and the developer influenced and financed media, in San Jose, the “bottom has fallen out”.

  11. > It’s about respecting our right to agree to disagree without turning the disagreement into an excuse to bring each other down or hold grudges that prevent any chance of genuine compromise in the the future.

    Gee.  You must be talking about Dakota N.

    > Dakota N.

    > …
    > Your worldview has always appeared very alien to mine, but I must admit, I’m starting to become frightened by language of yours that hints at an extremism that should be taken very seriously.
    > …

    I suspect that what the “frightened” Dakota N. means by taking “extremism . . . very seriously” is rounding up people with “alien … worldviews” and putting them in FEMA detention camps.

  12. These are just political hacks throwing verbal bombs around for dramatic effect.  They know nothing about real atrocities like what occured in Syria recently when 48 children were executed with gunshots to the head.  That’s nazi level atrocities…

  13. Rich Robinson stated:

    “Fascism is a rightwing philosophy, authoritarian in nature, that emphasizes nationalism and rejects pluralism and minority rights.”… “Many in the tea party are fascists…”

    Without hesitation, Rich Robinson shared with us his understanding of fascism and boldly branded as fascists a few people and groups from whom he is politically at odds. But let’s see how courageous he is about throwing around the f-word at those who absolutely qualify (according to his criteria) but aren’t so safe for his epithets.

    Address the fascist elephant in the room, in our treasury, and, most destructively, in our Congress: Mr. Robinson, I dare you to brand Israel a fascist nation.

  14. Very well said Peter. I personally am sick and tired of all the ugliness, lies, media bias and misinformation, and TV commercials that out right lie, or mislead people. It is no wonder that people have stopped voting!

    My Mother survived the Nazi Holocaust, emigrated to the US with my two sisters in the hopes of sanctuary and a better life. I was raised hearing stories of the horrors she and others lived with in Germany. People who use the Nazi word to describe someone who differs with them infuriate me because they don’t know what they are talking about.

    The millions of dollars blown on sleazy campaigns could house, feed, and clothe a lot of people! We need to change the way campaigns are funded and run. Candidates need to run a clean campaign AND stick to the issues. No one wants to be drug into a personal war between two vying political candidates.

    Come on folks, play fair!

  15. @Rich Robinson

    Allow me to clarify. Using the criteria expressed in your post, Israel more than qualifies as a fascist state. But I’m betting you won’t say it; not because you’re careful about slinging mud, but because your opinions and principles—like those of just about everyone holding office or working in the media, screech to a halt when it comes to anything connected with Israel. If you feel free to assail members of the Tea Party as fascists for their desire that immigration laws be respected, then tell me, do you feel as free to brand as fascist the Israeli government for its illegal occupation of territory and deplorable treatment of Palestinians? Are you likewise willing to brand AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a fascist organization? Its influence over our lives here, from promoting wars for our sons to fight to enforcing sanctions that cost us at the pump, is a thousand-fold more powerful than that of the Tea Party. You talk about Tea Party disrespect for our president? AIPAC orchestrated a public reprimand of Obama—in our own Congress, for his audaciously assuming that the billions of American tax dollars sent to Israel every year might entitle him to speak his mind on the Middle East.

    If you don’t mind insulting your fellow Americans (many, no doubt, military veterans and/or the offspring of those who went to war against fascism), then you should have no hesitation about the feelings of a bunch of foreign fascists. Care to call a spade a spade?

  16. First of all, calling anybody a spade is racist—that is just name calling.

    I will say there are groups and individuals within the current Israeli government who are, indeed, fascist.  As, I have pointed out there are some in the U.S. who fit that description as well.

    Israel, as a nation is not, nor are a majority of their people.  But Israel is also in a very unique position.  They are surrounded by states who don’t recognize them as a nation, do not accept them as human beings and are dedicated to their destruction as a nation, state, culture and people.

    Unlike many states, Israel has traded land for peace in an effort to get along with their neighbors.  They hold land they took as wars of aggression against their nation.  To give it back to the same people who continue to call for their destruction is not a fascist response.

    Giving the Golan Heights back with no guarantee of security,for instance, is abssurd.  They have given the Palestinians control over Gaza and the West Bank—only to continually be shot at by people who don’t want peace.  They gave the Sinai Peninsula back to Egypt.  They are on record that they will make further concessions for security and peace.

    I don’t agree with the settlement expansion.  But Israel did forcibly remove settler populations in the past, when agreements called for it.

    A Israeli Jew cannot travel outside Israel’s borders.  Unlike any other nation in the middle east, their backs are against the sea and they have no ability to move.  There are terrorists and organizations who do not want peace.  Until the Palestian Authority and their allies—or even Hszbollah will make a deal that allows Israel to exist in security and peace—they have no real choices.  This does not make them fascist.

    In addition, they have a democracy that allows Palestinian participation.  In fact, Palestinian representation has been growing in the state.  There is no allowance for Jewish participation in the occupied territories if a new agreement is reached.

    Again, democracy without guarantees to minorities is still a totalitarian system.  Unless and until the Arab, Persian, Semetic, Muslim, Christian, Jewish world can agree to allow participation, existance, freedom and opportunity in a representative democracy, there will continue to be violence.

    Splitting the baby, has to date, not worked.  While Israel has been willing to negotiate and has made peace with those who are willing to compromise;  others have not been so forthcoming.

  17. If the definition fits,  . . I would agree that the majority of the House is fascist.  No such agreement on the Treasury.  Fascism in Israel, like the United States, depends on the policies implemented by those in charge.

    Given Jews were among the most victimized by fascism, the very nature of the charge would be incendiary.  That said, make your case and allow them to refute it witht he facts.

  18. @Rich Robinson

    You readily brand Tea Party members as fascists for simply wanting the nation to resume its traditional level of immigration management, but when pressed, offer a sales pitch-quality list of reasons to avoid applying that same fascism standard to a state that, were it not for the political and economic muscle of its tribe members, would have not a single ally. Not one. No state is less trusted, more despised, or half as reckless. Israel is a state born of terrorism, falsehoods, and political intrigue; it matured into a fascist, racist, xenophobic bully.

    By the way, had the Bush administration handled our border disputes according to the Israeli model, you and the rest of the sheep herd would’ve called for his impeachment. In other words, your moral condemnations are of paint-by-the-number quality: determined by partisanship and self-interest, not principle. Thank you for proving me right.

  19. “Traditional level of immigration management”—that’s rich.  Like we treated the Irish, the Chinese, the Italians, the Russians, the Germans and Japanese.  Heck, we treated native americans worst of all—and they were here first, of course we forced African Americans to immigrate—didn’t we?  Which tradition did you like best?

    Traditional level of immigration management—LOL.

    It is not Israel that has proven xenophobic, but every state that has tried to wipe them off the face of the earth.  When did it become ok to be an anti-semite?  Your views are clearly in line with the fascists you so defend in the tea party.

    As for partisanship and self-interest, I have none when it comes to Israel—as support for Israel in this country is bipartisan and I am not Jewish.

    You, however, need some real therapy.  Hate is a disease and you need treatment.

  20. > Traditional level of immigration management—LOL.

    Your Richness:

    Could you please describe for us the Obama-Biden Administration’s “current level of immigration management”.

    I’m interested in knowing if you can explain it with a straight face, or if it likewise causes you to “LOL”.

  21. @Rich Robinson

    This little exchange reminds me of the first decades after the Russian Revolution, when lofty promises gave way to long stays in the gulag.

    Let’s examine your dangerous thought processes. First you declare yourself the arbiter of hate. I’m a hater of Jews because I’m outraged by Israel’s policies, but those who criticize other countries are just voicing opinions, as are you for accusing law-abiding Tea Party members of being fascists. Then you declare hate to be a disease, a notion that may be popular on college campuses, but one certainly not supported by health insurers (not even worker’s comp). You, of course, who’ve said something very hateful about some fellow Americans, aren’t a hater. Finally, you assume the role of judge and sentence me to therapy. Congratulations, you demonstrate the minimum qualifications to serve as a commissar, one that Stalin—any maybe even Obama, would find quite acceptable.

    Speaking of our president, answer me this: do you accuse Obama of hating Persians for waging his cold war against Iran, or of being anti-Asian for his criticism of North Korea? Of course you don’t; those nations don’t enjoy the protection of the American media machine. In fact, there is only one country that our government and media allow to rattle the threat of consequences—political, economic, and social—at any American who dares criticize its despicable behavior, and those consequences are administered regularly. As I referenced previously, even our president will leap back at the shaking of that rattle, as he did after Netanyahu told him where he could shove his peace proposal. Maybe if he, and the rest our so-called leaders, would just stand up for America’s interests I wouldn’t be stuck here, hating them all.

    second posting