Friday, May 14, 2010

San Leandro Times Offers Platform for Hate


TIMES POST-PRODUCTION MEETING Next year, my father will be an American citizen for exactly 50 years. He's been American nearly four times as long as he was a citizen of Portugal. He, along with millions of immigrants, came to the United States with little more than hope and a change of clothes. For my father, all he remembers of Portugal is living in poverty as a teenager under the rule of Portugal's Socialist dictator and writing letters to his "rich Uncle" in California to sponsor his journey across the Atlantic.

Three years ago, while living in Yuba County near Sacramento, a supposedly "dyed-in-the-wool" red-blooded American neighbor of my father's surreptitiously sent a package filled with sheets of paper printed from the Internet featuring anti-immigrant rhetoric and a hastily-typed note questioning why my father flew both an American flag and a Portuguese flag in his backyard. "What kind of person flies a foreign flag in their backyard?" it read while questioning whether my father realized how many had given their souls to protect "his" stars and stripes.

I bring this up because this same sort of ignorance and stupidity was given a platform in the opinion pages of this week's San Leandro Times.
Wants Illegal Immigrants 'Rounded Up and Escorted Out of the Country'

As far as I am concerned, all the illegals of all kinds should be rounded up and escorted out of the country. They need to get the right papers and learn to speak English if they want to live here. We should stop all these signs and printing on packages in different languages.

Illegal mean "against the law." We no longer have single family homes in San Leandro and the census will never get the right count. The people parading in the streets for immigrants rights don't understand that immigrants have no rights here if they are illegal.

Let the flag wavers volunteer to help these people help themselves in their own countries. We can no longer be everyone's keeper. California used to be known as "The Golden State" but we are sinking fast.

We have been taken advantage of by ignoring our laws and will pay dearly for it. It is not fair for California and its citizens to ignore this anymore.

-Dorothy Allen, San Leandro 
The point here is not to condone or even disparage Ms. Allen's opinion, however repulsive it is, but to question why the Times would even consider printing the screed in the first place.

A newspaper's letters to the editor page is not related to the a comments section featured in a blog. The contents of the page is carefully chosen in the same way any article is chosen based on the paper's ideological bent, newsworthiness and sometimes length. A blog's comments page exhibits the wild ethos of the Internet, an opinion page is carefully chosen. The Times "chose" Ms. Allen's anti-immigrant letter to post. More likely, it seems, the Times only had three letters to fill up the space as evidenced by running a syndicated editorial cartoon in the top right corner.

Worse of all, the Times attached the newsworthiness of the recent controversial Arizona law suspected to racially-profile people of color to the outrageous letter. Of course, that's reading too far into the situation. The Times could have left the column blank. They could have ran a recipe for Taco Salad in the spot or re-printed a "Best of Stephen Cassidy Letters to the Editor" column. Instead, the Times ran the most insensitive, callous and most embarrassing point-of-view possible.

Once, again, the Times' Editor Jim Knowles has shown blatant irresponsibility to his readers, advertisers and the city. This city was founded by immigrants and flourished under their hard work. It is reprehensible conduct like the Times' decision to run Ms. Allen's letter that perpetuates the perception San Leandro's days of housing segregation and racism still linger on every corner of the city. By handing over tax dollars to the Times for a full-page ad along with a quarter page spot for the Farmer's Market San Leandro is more than tacitly approving the newspaper's crude decision-making, but subsidizing its hate. With a city council meeting set for this Monday night, it is my plea to the mayor and councilmembers to denounce the publishing of the hateful letter by the San Leandro Times along with a threat of cancelling future advertising.

When I read rhetoric like Ms. Allen espouses and the Times happily passes along, I turn to the poet of American populism, Bruce Springsteen for inspiration.
The McNicholas, the Posalski's, the Smiths, Zerillis too
The Blacks, the Irish, the Italians, the Germans and the Jews
The Puerto Ricans, illegals, the Asians, Arabs miles from home
Come across the water with a fire down below

They died building the railroads, worked to bones and skin
They died in the fields and factories, names scattered in the wind
They died to get here a hundred years ago, they're dyin' now
The hands that built the country we're all trying to keep down
VOTE JUNE 8! www.eastbaycitizen.com


  1. Steve,

    I think you're over-reacting here a little bit; you need to show more Mike Katzian journalistic "objectivity" on this subject. ;)

    Knowles is the master of "hokey sensationalism." He tries to stage letter-to-editor wars between folks, so he usually prints to most outrageous and opinionated letters. It's kind of like he prints the crime blog stories that do nothing to help prevent crime or find perpatrators, but rather it's a feeble attempt to emulate "Cops" in print--and the joke is on San Leandro.

    Personally, city officials are in favor of the San Leandro Times and its m.o. If SL's one printed newspaper offered critical thought or objective analysis of issues; then those running the city would be in trouble. As it is, they are happy with the perpetuation of ignorance and apathy; and lack of a real watchdog (until you came along). I would say concentrate your energies on upping the readership of this online paper--which is the only thing in SL worth reading. It sounds like your metrics are pretty good and readership climbing.

    I can't really say that I descended from immigrants--though my grandparents were farm laborers who came from Arkansas when Arkies weren't wanted and treated poorly. People for English only should read the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. We won California in a war against Mexico, but in the peace treaty, we assured Mexico that California would remain bilingual.

    Frank Lynn

  2. Good one! I was going to call the blog Citizen Bytes, but it conjures up images of rabid San Leandrans foaming at the mouth.

  3. I don't see anything wrong with Mrs. Allen's letter. She was talking about "Illegal Immigrants" Steven, not the legal ones like my family from Madeira. Why should my parents have to have had a sponsor and job to come to America while others just cross over, a demand that we feed, house and school them? I would never fly the Portuguese flag over my house and I'm thankful every day that my family left that backwards, mud hut dwelling country of Portugal. Everytime I go back there I can't wait to come back here and kiss the ground of this great nation.

  4. It's rich seeing you criticize on this topic given you allow anonymous comments every bit as offensive, if not more, including plenty of personal attacks on just about everyone in sight.

    It's not that you allow wild and wooly comments that is the problem Steven, it's that you allow anonymous posters to vent their spleens with no accountability. Certainly the SLTimes is a different case, and you blog is certainly not an exact parallel, but, given your policies, this site too is a "platform" for ignorance and stupidity. As unfortunately as Ms. Allen's beliefs are, at least she has the courage to stand behind them.

    I don't agree with many letters in the Times, nor many posts on this blog, nor Ms. Allen, but I've only ever suggested you remove the option for anonymity, not censor those posting.

    As for not seeing "anything wrong" because she's mentions illegal immigrants... Eliminating spanish writing isn't about illegal immigrants, and yes, even illegal immigrants have rights, not to mention human rights. Amusingly, she never says what it is about them that causes her harm.

    And really, before you tell all illegal immigrants to pack their bags and leave, just try to stop relying on the work and sweat they put into California before you do so and see if it's even possible for our economy to survive without this work force.

  5. I'm sorry Mr. Holmes, but what about "illegal" don't you understand? They are here illegally, meaning they broke the law and therefore they have no rights and should be deported. And yes, it's very possible for our economy to survive without these people. Hmmm, I wonder if you're taking advantage of illegals???

  6. Comments deemed to be threats in nature or totally inappropriate have been deleted in the past. The definition of inappropriate can be debated, but after the infamous Tea Party situation, censoring comments would be highly hypocritical.

    In the past, a user created a homophobic slur for a local politician. What occurred afterwards is instructive to the policy. Commenters called out the vulgar comment and denounced it. This is what happens in public discourse and in both cases works itself out. A crazy voice is allowed to be heard and the group, realizing it was out of bounds, reacted appropriately.

    This site has a liberal bent. Deleting comments could easily be misused by merely silencing the numerous comments with a conservative bent. This will not happen. This is democracy. This is communication. This is healthy for our city and region.

  7. Oh and bringing up crap about "racism" and "housing" segregation is old hat. Until the people who live in the ghetto's get up off their butts, take pride in themselves and their communities there will always be "stereotypes". Afterall, if there were no element to truth to a stereotype there wouldn't be that stereotype. High test scores and low test scores in a school are representative of the people who send their kids to that particular school. Take San Leandro's SLUSD Roosevelt School and San Leandro's SLZUD Corvallis School. Both in the same City, different school districts, Roosevelt is "affluent", Corvallis not so "affluent" yet their test scores are the same. Seems all the usefull idiots in Estudillo who brag about their M.A.'s and PhD.'s kids aren't all that much smarter than the kids from the "other" side of town.

  8. And Bruce Springsteen is a putz.

  9. By allowing Frank Lynn to post here the Citizen is as racist as the Times.
    He is a homophobic racist and Steve Tavares has given him a platform.
    Oh excuse me this is a blog,that is the difference, bullshit

  10. whine whine whine

  11. Nicholas E. TerryMay 17, 2010 at 10:47 AM


    I adore your father, I have since I was a young boy running a softball snack bar. My late father was Portuguese & Italian; his parents came here like your father, with hope. They all did it the LEGAL way. They are all proud of their origins and VERY proud to be American citizens. We can not take away their right to fly their native flag; I have American / Italian and American / Portuguese lapel pin flags...I remember my heritage. We can not forget that they came here legally and lived here legally.

    What CAN outrage people is folks coming here and living here illegally for many years.

    The person who sent your father that hate filled mail is another example of ignorance; just as the people who haven't read the Arizona bill and get it completely wrong and spew hate towards those who support it, are wrong.

    Once again, this is a law that is filled with so much emotion.

    People don't seem to get it; this law makes it illegal to be in Arizona, ILLEGALLY! Sounds stupid, but its THAT simple.

    I am happy my family came here and did it the right way...taking advantage of the freedoms of being a U.S. Citizen...I am not happy with those who come here and take advantage of the system, period.

  12. I am not homophobic, nor racist. Many folks have labled my concern about San Leandro's public schools or abundance of low-income housing as being racist. I contend iff one automatically equates sub-performing schools and low-income housing with race; that's the racist person, not me.

    As for the homophobia; people have started this because I called Michael Gregory "Michael Faggory." This is by no means a way to disparriage Mr. Gregory's sexuality, it was simply to disparrage HIM. To those who keep up on pop culture, the word, "fag" is no longer used to solely insult male homosexuals; it's used to insult people in general. South Park recently had a whole episode dedicated to the subject.

    I would assume that Mr. Gregory is a heterosexual based on what I know about him. I have met his wife and I understand that he has fathered two children with her. The "gayest" thing that I'm aware he does is drive a Honda Civic Hybrid; which is in fact the same make and model that I drive.

    I think there's an ultra-sensitivity in San Leandro that everything is about race and sexuality. And of course, calling someone a "racist" is a lot easier than coming up with intelligent arguments to counter what's been said. I would never call someone a racist unless they started using racial epitaths or started talking about the superiority of one race over another; but apparently it's okay to throw that word around in San Leandro...

    Frank Lynn

  13. Nicholas E. TerryMay 18, 2010 at 10:08 AM

    17 pages...if you read a newspaper everyday, you have time to read the truth:


    "The legislature finds that there is a compelling interest in the cooperative enforcement of federal immigration laws throughout all of Arizona."

  14. Frank drives a hybrid??? WTF?

  15. Nicholas E. TerryMay 18, 2010 at 7:39 PM

    Do not forget the most important part of that song:

    "There's treasure for the taking, for any hard working man.

    Who will make his home in the American Land."

  16. I bought a hybrid with HOV lane privellages to lesson my commute. I hear a lot of people who work in the City, San Jose or Tri-Valley always complain about the lack of white collar work in San Leandro. And as long as Tony Santos is at the helm; there will be no new business parks in San Leandro...he's stated that he wants to keep them out because they'll cause traffic!


  17. Where is the empty property to build those parks?

    Where is the empty property to build executive housing?

    Boy Frank and Manuel add their IQs and you would be hard pressed to get double digits.

  18. Anonymous,

    The "empty" property is the BART parking lot, where low-income housing is going instead. It's the property adjacent to BART that is slated for low-income housing instead. It's in the area downtown where the city wants to eventually build 7,00 more units of dense housing. San Leandro needs office jobs, not more dense housing, and not more rentals. "Executives," if foolish enough to buy in San Leandro at all, would probably choose to live in the Hills or Estudillo/Broadmoor. You can still buy houses there, unless all those realtors and their for sale signs are lying...

    Nice personal attack on my IQ. I'd bet my college degrees and powers of deductive reasoning that my IQ is higher than yours...


  19. Frank, your toe nail has a higher IQ than that babooze, (who no doubtedly not only voted for Santos but also Stark, Boxer, Feinstein and Obama).

    Hey idiot, get your head out of the rectal cavity and think. We can improve San Leandro by several things; all that Frank just listed plus we can streamline the permit process so that it takes no more than 30 days to get a building and demolition permit in this City. I'd prefer a quick turn around; a business comes into town, wants to tear down some old warehouses and build and office park and bada bing he's given the go ahead within hours not months and years.

    It would be so refreshing not to have the useless idiots out there complaining; "oh I worked for Customs for 25 years" or another example of stupidity in this town, over on Davis St. this company wanted to move into a warehouse, and the company was a cotton broker or something. Well, the usless idiots that live in Davis West blocked it because these idiots, these FOOLS, these ABSOLUTE JACKASSES said that "the bales of cotton will float off the trucks and litter Davis St."!!!!!!! Can you think of anything more idiotic in your life???? But, that's the kind of jackasses we have in this town. But look at the results for Mayor; Santos, Young, Corbett, Faria, KARP!, Gill, Maltester. The collective IQ of all of them wouldn't equal that of a warm bucket of horse urine.

    Then there's that shyster Realtor who got all these regulations and taxes imposed at the beginning of the Century then the rat bastard moved to Colorado.


  20. I don't think executives that buy in the San Leandro hills are any more "foolish" than those that buy in any close in urban area's nicer areas - Oakland, SF, Berkeley or others. Pockets of very nice areas do exist and you gain great weather, beautiful bay and city views, lg private lots, easy commute, access to great parks and easy access to all areas in the Bay Area.

  21. I agree, we do not need any more low income housing in this city, especially paid for with redevelopment $$$.

  22. For all the commenters who take pride in their families' legal immigration, you fail to take into account that the U.S. allowed more legal immigration in the era your relatives arrived. It was easier for them to gain escape from starvation, oppression or a lower quality of life because of chance, not because they had purer characters. The flow of legal immigration has been slowed since Ellis Island due to government policy changes, but circumstances remain desperate for citizens from other countries; human needs remain.

    Barb, there are many, many people with low incomes in this city and region who are terrific people. Many are doing important, valuable work which is poorly paid; others are unemployed through no fault of their own. There is not enough low income housing in this city to meet future Federal guidelines, or the needs of some in the local population. Why do they not deserve an opportunity to gain one of the staples of a dignified life?

  23. Doug, this is a free (well, Obama doesn't want it that way) country. If people cannot afford to live in any area then can pack up and move to other areas of the nation where they have a better opportunity to gain one of the "staples of a dignified life". I don't get that statement at all. If a person wants a "dignified life" then they had better wake up to reality and take care of themselves and not expect the Government to give them that "staple".

    Federal Guidlines? Big deal, like we have an obligation to provide everyone with a house? It's called the free-market Doug, if the fools in the Bay Area hadn't instituted such draconian building guidelines and increased welfare in the 1960's and 1970's the prices wouldn't be so artificially inflated here. Basic economics. But it allowed greedy, poorly educated people who paid $12,000 for a house in 1956 to re-elect rats like Maltester and his crony's because now that house is selling for $350,000.

    And it was because of the waves and waves of immigrants in the late 19th and early 20th Century that brought about crime, ghettos and other vices that the United States had to cut back on immigration in the early 1920's to deal with it. Sorry to offend the Italians, but the Mafia didn't just appear out of no where.

    It's also highly hypocritcal for people to say that "circumstances remain desperate for citizens from other countries" as though the United States has some type of obligation to bring every person with a sob story from some Third World country into the United States. The United States' only obligation is to serve as an example for these other nations to emulate in order to better themselves.

    It is also highly hypocritical for someone to brag about his father leaving "socialist" Portugal yet brags about his web sites "leftward" tilt. Just why the hell do you think your Father left there? To bring that stupidity here to this country? Whenever, I visit Portugal and I'm in a coffee shop and I hear some delusional idiot brag about "Portugal was the strongest nation in the world" I tell them "Yeah, babooze that was 500 years ago, what happened since then? fecha a boca". It's all too common for people of Mediterrean stock (Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece) to leave their crap hole, corrupt countries, come to America and then look back with an almost psychotic fondness at what they left. I'm glad I left Madeira and I sure don't want someone like Barack Hussein Obama, son of a Kenyan Marxist, to take away the nation that my family and I so much wanted to live.

  24. An absolutely appalling misstatement of history and current events. Manuel, the "too big to fail" financial institutions and other big businesses are the ones who are trying to take away the nation that your family and you so much wanted to live in.

    I doubt that you're planning on refusing your Social Security and Medicare payments. Even if you were, a laughable prospect, would you want to take away these socialist programs from all others?

    It's not about "giving" people something, it's about helping people with services the "free market" does not wish to provide, or in helping people who are damaged by the "winners and losers" created by our capitalist system. How can a country consider itself the greatest and above reproach when we have homeless in the street and parents who can't properly feed their children because they can't find a job or the pay is too low? The United States has been the best country, but we need to do better.

    Manuel, here is the statement on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty. You know, that gift to America by the French. It is likely your ancestors sailed past it as they entered this country:

    "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

  25. Nick, at your urging, I read Arizona's SB 1070. This reading causes me sympathy for the statements by Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, who has announced his Department will not enforce this law:

    "what (Governor Brewer) and the legislature has accomplished is morally wrong and a national embarrassment....We're damned if we do, and damned if we don't," said Dupnik. "If we go out and look for illegal immigrants, they accuse us of racial profiling and we can get sued. And if some citizen doesn't think we're enforcing the state law, they can sue us too."

    Reading from the law: "A law enforcement officer, without a warrant, may arrest a person if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the United States."

    In the practical enforcement of this law, what will comprise "probable cause"? If I were to be asked for my birth certificate or other proof of my citizenship during a routine traffic stop, I would not be able to provide it. Would that be probable cause for the officer to arrest me? I'l go out on a limb and say that the officer would not do so, because I'm Caucasian and speak with an American accent. And that's exactly the point, isn't it? Racial profiling will be used in the enforcement of this law, and that's morally wrong as well as dangerous.

    It's dangerous because Hispanic/Latino and other ethnic neighborhoods in Arizona (and California, and everywhere else in this country) are made up of a mix of people; most are legal residents, some are on visas, some do not have legal residency status. Many who are legal residents are like me- they do not carry around their residency papers around on a regular basis. But if they don't have those papers, any officer could consider that probable cause to consider them (from the law) "...an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States...".

    These communities will become even more insular and unwilling to cooperate with any public agency in Arizona, because the law says "any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision" shall make an attempt to determine a person's citizenship status based on "reasonable suspicion."

    So, let's consider a Latino who has been robbed at gunpoint, or whose child has been raped. Call the police, right? I'm afraid that would be foolish under the guidance of this law. The victim could be forced to provide proof of their legal status and become deported; after all, this is a "lawful contact". It's easy to see a slippery slope in which violent lawbreakers would go unpunished in many neighborhoods. This is why many peace officers such as Sheriff Dupnik feel strongly that local officers should not be forced to execute immigration law; it undermines their relationship with the pople they are sworn to protect.

    You do understand that many legal residents will be deported as a result of this law, right? You understand that families will be broken up, as children born in this country, children who are American citizens, will lose family members to deportation? Is that the America you want to live in? I sure don't.

    There's lots of other bizarrely hostile specifics of the law, such as its discussion of the illegality of soliciting employment, but that's enough for now. It's hard to believe that anyone thinks that reading this law makes it better; in fact, it's worse than I thought.

  26. Doug, who came up with the "too big to fail" argument? Oh it was the liberals, Barack Hussein Obama. Who are the biggest backers of this creep?; Oh Goldman Sachs, George Soros, William Buffett, Citibank. All the Wall Street people liberals like you vilify are backing the very same big mouth, Obama, who is bailing them out. Another delusion by the left; blame Wall Street but still bail them out. Convoluted to say the least.

    Another laughable argument Doug, about the government "giving" services that the free market doesn't provide. The government never "gives" it only "takes". Big difference there. The free market will determine the affordability of a housing market. Prices will rise but a certain price point will be met and then they will stabilize. New homes will be built, old ones will be remodeled. That's how the market works. It's when we have the government interferring with the housing market, it keeps prices artificially high and people are priced out. Basic Economics, but that is not taught in schools. Homeless on the streets are usually the drug addicts or mentally ill. It's not the government's responsibility to "spread wealth around" to those who are unwilling to take responsibility for their lives. The mentally ill were released by LIBERALS in the 1960's (don't dare bring that crock up about Reagan, because that lie will be shot down)who didn't want to keep them in "institutions". They'd rather just have them roam the streets so these same liberals can cry about "the homeless". Crocodile tears to say the least.

    Dupnik is a Putznik, Arizona is enforcing the law. I know liberals hate that criminals will be punished while the law abiding should be penalized. I'm all in favor of racial profiling. Who the hell do you think is crossing into Arizona???; Romanians? Poles? Mongols? Tartars? Huns? NO! It's Mexicans! Arizona borders MEXICO! Wow, what a concept; Mexican's are crossing the border illegally, speaking Spanish and yet, when stopped by Police we're not supposed to ask for their immigration papers? What type of idiocy is that espoused by liberals? Oh yes, liberalism is idiocy.

    Are these hundreds of thousands of Mexicans crossing the border, speaking perfect and eloquent English? NO!

    Families won't be broken up by the Government, another facious argument. These illegals come here with the express purpose of popping out some kids in order for them to be American Citizens. If the parents are illegal they will be deported, they can take their kids with them, afterall, Doug, isn't Mexico a beautiful country? When the children reach 18, if they're American's they can choose to either stay in Mexico or return to the United States. They are not being denied their Citizenship. Once again, we have liberals refusing to let people take responsibility for their actions. These illegals KNOW they're here illegally, they KNOW that. What is so hard for you liberals to understand? Lawbreakers should be punished.

  27. Oh Doug, What about American citizens who are robbed at gunpoint or raped? Should they be allowed to call the police and report the crime, afterall the criminal might be an illegal alien and have children who are American citizens and we certainly wouldn't want to break up this family.

  28. Manuel,

    Again, slurs, lies and straw men set afire. What of the promise of the Statue of Liberty?

    Of course violent criminals should be apprehended, no matter who they victimize. Why do you lie when you claim that liberals don't want criminals punished? Many of us merely want the punishment to fit the crime, and want rehabilitation to take place so that the incarcerated have a fair opportunity to have a decent future when they are released. The current recividicism rate is unacceptable.

    We also understand that an unacceptably large part of our State budget is taken up by the correctional system, and we want a smarter and better return for our investment. It is making it more difficult to help those who need help from health and human services and other neccessary programs, including ones which serve you and your community.

    Europeans, including your relatives who emigrated from Portugal, spoke poor or no English when they arrived. As Latinos and Hispanics are doing now, almost all of those families assimilated within a generation or two, just like you and your family.

    Your average Wall Street executive is no liberal. They were with Bush and the Republicans all the way when they tried to privatize Social Security in 2005. Given what has happened to the stock market since then, how would that have worked out for your average retiree?

    Finally, the "free market" spreads the wealth around; it does it in a way that makes no sense. Do you believe that the executives of Goldman Sachs do work that is thousands of times more valuable to our society than a janitor? The free market claims so. This is much less moral than a potential increase in the highest marginal tax rate from 36 to 39%, or a modest tax on the richest-of-the-richest estates.

    The free market has just massively failed us, and you persist in claiming it is our salvation.

    What of the promise of the Statue of Liberty?

  29. Once again we have another swan song. I think of Diana Ross; I hear a symphony. Violins.

    Yes, liberals don't want to punish criminals. Why do you think the jails are so crowded? Because these people committed a crime. Why do you think the crime rate has dropped since the 1970's? Because we got tough on criminals and threw them in jail where they belong. What type of rehabs do liberals want? Can't answer that because they want none. They don't want to teach anyone a trade whether in school or in prison. All they want to do is suck money to pay for their pensions.

    I don't need "Services" to help me or my community, Americans can help themselves. Creating dependency on government is not the way "help" people.

    Hmmm, Portuguese people move into a section of a City, fix the houses, have low crime rates, kids learn English and generally don't cause trouble. Can't say that about many other immigrants that came to America. There is no "Portuguese Mafia" and the prisons were never overflowing with Portuguese. Not saying there aren't any bad apples but it's a lot lower than others from Europe and South America.

    Oh really? The Wall Street Executive is not a liberal? Then why does most of the money from there go to Democrats? Hmmm Blankenfien, Bloomberg, Soros, Buffett, Corzine all liberal Democrats. More Wall Street money went to Barack Hussein Obama than anyone else. The FACTS seem to elude you like deductive reasoning.

    Let's see; a janitor should be paid $1,000,000 plus a year? Not even worth arguing such a capricious statement. Just chuckle and move on.

    Again no mention of government intervention in the forms of forcing banks to make loans to unqualified applicants in order to avoid the "racist" label. No mention of banks being forced by regulators to increase lending to "applicants" of certain "racial minorities". Doug just can't stand to allow facts to influence an argument.

  30. Are you refusing your Social Security and Medicare?

    Should we allow those who cannot provide for themselves, or who are without work through no fault of their own, to starve?

    A janitor should be able to afford a life of dignity with full-time work. The "free market" which has held sway in the last generation has made that almost impossible, while it has allowed megarich individuals and corporations to buy the compliance of most politicians.

    Government is the expression of our collective values. It is us. The expression of government you would prefer is a callous one.

  31. All American's who work are "forced to pay Social Security Taxes and Medicare" I guess you forgot that Doug. As puny as Social Security is, I paid into it, I should get that miniscule amount back.

    "Afford a life of dignity"??? What the hell is that? Are you saying that all janitors are not dignified? What is the definition of a "dignified life"? Do we have to provide him with a 2500 square foot house, 52 inche television, Cadillac. Just what the hell is "life of dignity"? Just another bleeding heart socialist line.

    Well, Doug, it was the free market that provided many people with a "life of dignity" whatever the hell that means. Prices weren't artificially high in the Bay Area until the late 1970's when limitations were beginning to be implemented by the idiots like Maltester and his paisans, the Democrats and the environmental idiots. By taking land out of development they raised the cost of doing business. Basic economics, but that evades your logic.

    Sorry Doug, Government is NOT the expression of our collective values. The United States was set up as a Republic as outlined in the Constitution. It is the Constitution that is the United States, not the "government".

  32. As a sign of the callousness espoused here, your prefered immigration policies are these, as expressed by your post from 11:57 am.

    An American citizen, from 1 to 10 and 2 to 20 years old, should be forced to choose: either lose a parent or parents to deportation or leave the country of your birth, likely the only country you have known in your life.

    What an ugly, ugly vision of our country. I do not believe this outcome would be justified by the circumstances.

  33. The Constitution and its Amendments describe many of the agreed-upon expressions and limits of our governance; the Bill of Rights and other documents describe more. We elect the people who are primarily responsible for our government. The government is ours.

    If people agreed with your vision, Manuel, the policies we have would match the ones you describe here. I'm glad the people have asked for other policies. I wish our policies were better still.

    "A dignified life", one example: All workers, regardless of their jobs, should be able to afford a decent, safe place to live and work, access to good information and education, nutritious and sufficient food, quality health care, as well as the ability to provide these things for their families.

    The fact that our current "free market" often prevents hard-working people from gaining these basics while allowing corporate executives to have more money than is possible to spend is morally indefensible. It's also an extremely lousy way to run a capitalist, consumer-based economy.

    It is disappointing that you appear to have no vision of what comprises a dignified life that all people deserve. Instead, you spend your time disparaging the very idea. How about "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"? Was that some Marxist pipe dream?

  34. Doug,
    You farking moron, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness are fine. But not on MY Dime. They can get off their collective asses and go pursue it on their tab. Quit robbing me of my money. You Libtards are all the same, you'll gladly give the other guy the shirt off of MY back! Enough is enough.
    The Guv

  35. Agree GUV. The only ones denying people life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are the liberals who want to redistribute other people's happiness.

    Hey Doug, the blame for anyone coming into this country illegally is the illegal alien. He knew he might get deported yet CHOSE to have children here so that delusional libtards like you would coddle and use them. It's not cold and callous, it's REALITY. The kids will go live in sunny, GREEN Mexico. Just think Doug, these kids can limit their carbon footprint since many places in Mexico don't have electricity, running water, sewers. It's a liberal paradise, they're living so close to nature. bahahahhahahahahahaha

  36. Interesting how Doug is so concerned about the Police being inhibited about protecting the "people their sworn to protect" when it comes to Illegal Aliens, but not American Citizens. Typical Liberal Insanity.

  37. Have any of you heard of the 14th Amendment?

  38. The 14th Amendment was meant to protect freed slaves. Not Illegal Aliens' seedlings.

  39. You are wrong. The Supreme Court has determined that the 14th Amendment is meant to protect the children of undocumented immigrants. From Wikipedia:

    "The meaning (of the 14th Amendment) was tested again in the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) regarding children of non-citizen Chinese immigrants born in United States. The court ruled that the children were U.S. citizens.

    The difference between "legal" and "illegal" immigrants was not clear at the time of the decision of Wong Kim Ark. Wong Kim Ark and subsequent cases did not explicitly decide whether such children are entitled to birthright citizenship via the amendment, but such birthright is generally assumed to be the case. In some cases, the Court has implicitly assumed, or suggested in dicta, that such children are entitled to birthright citizenship: these include Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982), and INS v. Rios-Pineda, 471 U.S. 444 (1985)."

  40. when the same newspaper published pro Nazi letters
    of mr.West with texts like this one,"Jews are Nazis".
    i didn't heard one word against from local liberals.
    I didn't heard one word from them against many
    Nazi papers from the La Raza movement .

    Rush Limbaugh: Liberals Accept Men as Women, But Not Terrorists as Muslims