Apology to Jews
President Bush is making a visit tomorrow to Salt Lake City to deliver a speech to the convention of the American Legion. Salt Lake City mayor Rocky Anderson has promised an anti-Bush demonstration, calling “for an even larger protest than the rally he pushed last year for another Bush appearance” in Utah. Commentators on the local NPR affiliate, KUER, speculated this morning (8/29) that President Bush might have chosen to speak in Salt Lake City because polls have shown that support for him is higher in Utah than in other states. If this is true, then President Bush has made the classic mistake of assuming that Salt Lake City itself is representative of Utah; in fact, he and/or his staff might have even made the mistake of assuming that Salt Lake City was predominantly LDS, and that, based on the further mistaken assumption that all LDS would automatically be supportive of Bush, Salt Lake City would be a “safe” place for him to speak.
Cindy Sheehan will join Rocky Anderson and like-minded residents of Salt Lake City in protesting President Bush, his Administration, his policies, his political party, and the current Congress. Numerous other demonstrations will take place tomorrow as well — others against Bush and his policies as well as some counter-demonstrations in support of Bush. Some Republican Utah state legislators, as well as some mayors from other cities across the country, have criticized Anderson for taking the unusual course for a mayor — even one who disagrees vehemently with a current President’s policies or beliefs — to call for demonstrations against the President rather than graciously host the President despite differences of opinion.
This is all just politics and what would America be without demonstrations? Sure, Anderson might not have very good taste in rejecting his role as gracious mayor, but, again, that’s politics. What is alarming, however, is the “Death to Israel” demonstration that has been approved by Salt Lake City and will take place tomorrow as well. The Tribune reports that the “Death to Israel” demonstration has been organized by local defense attorney Robert Breeze. In defense of his demonstration, Breeze stated,
The President of Iran has an excellent idea. . . . I would like to see them move Israel to Virginia and put all the current Virginians in a concentration camp. Then we’ll see how popular Israel is [in the United States]
Despite his plans to hold a “Death to Israel” demonstration, Breeze stated that he is not anti-Semitic.
As a resident of Salt Lake City, I am ashamed that a “Death to Israel” demonstration will occur tomorrow. As insignificant as it might be, I offer my own apology on behalf of Salt Lake City to all Jews, especially those who live in Utah, and to Israel that this demonstration will occur tomorrow. However, I must also point out that, although it might sound counter-intuitive, as a practicing, faithful Latter-day Saint, I am not actually representative of Salt Lake City.
If I were you, John, I would be thanking Rocky Anderson profusely for diverting attention from the other protest.
Comment by Last Lemming — August 29, 2006 @ 2:53 pm
Interesting point. My guess is that the “Death to Israel” protest isn’t going to draw much support. At least I hope not.
Comment by john f. — August 29, 2006 @ 3:01 pm
Since a large percentage (perhaps one-half) of the world’s Jews live in Israel, it is extremely deceitful to make the argument that one can actively support a “Death to Israel” stance and not be anti-Semitic. It’s one thing to oppose Israeli policies and another to support the destruction of a vital Jewish nation-state.
Furthermore, I think it is disgusting that any American would find comfort or value in any ideas being pushed by Ahmadinejad.
I better stop writing now because I am tempted to use extremely inappropriate language and this Robert Breeze’s name in the same sentence.
Comment by danithew — August 29, 2006 @ 3:10 pm
What/where is this “Salt Lake City” of which you speak? Utah? Never heard of it!
I think that Bush is probably pretty correct in assuming that SLC — and an American Legion convention — is safe. Probably the only other safer place would have been Provo (but sadly, the AL didn’t see fit to hold their convention *there*).
In a weird way, I think the whole Rocky gambit probably works to Bush’s advantage — GOP faithful are now rallying to the cause of how Bush is being *mistreated* (“In Salt Lake City, even!”).
As for Sheehan, she has already bowed out due to illness.
Comment by queuno — August 29, 2006 @ 6:33 pm
Haven’t you Salt Lakers had enough of Rocky Anderson’s antics? This guy is a cartoon character. He’s clearly unfit to be mayor. Why don’t you guys start a recall campaign against him?
Whether one agrees with President Bush or not, he deserves respect on a visit simply because he is the President. As the “chief elected representative” of Salt Lake City, Anderson’s job is to host the President without fear or favor. That’s what professionalism is all about.
Comment by Anchorage Activist — August 29, 2006 @ 8:06 pm
No one deserves respect without earning it. A title isn’t enough.
Comment by jjohnsen — August 29, 2006 @ 8:23 pm
I’ve been amazed at some of the rabid anti-semetism I have encountered recently. The mind boggles, then is sad.
Comment by Stephen M (Ethesis) — August 29, 2006 @ 8:34 pm
I despise Cindy Sheehan.
Comment by annegb — August 29, 2006 @ 8:47 pm
jjohnsen -
I think having been elected by a clear majority of the American people is reason enough for a bare minimum of respect. Your comment comes across more as sour grapes and BDS than actual, reasoned ideals.
Comment by Somebody — August 29, 2006 @ 9:11 pm
In response to #3, let me prove its fallacy by saying that I would be inclined to support a “Death to Utah” campaign (destroying the state itself, not killing anyone) but I am certainly not an Anti-Mormon, rather an active member!
Comment by Jeff Day — August 29, 2006 @ 9:22 pm
Jeff Day, you must be joking. But I’ll humor you a little and ask what you mean by “destroying the state itself” …
Comment by danithew — August 29, 2006 @ 9:31 pm
Somebody,
I think you by elected by a clear majority of American voters. Sadly, there is a big difference.
Comment by Doc — August 29, 2006 @ 9:35 pm
Re #3: “Since a large percentage (perhaps one-half) of the world’s Jews live in Israel…”
Just an interesting fact: only about 1/3 of all Jews live in Israel. The country with the greatest number of Jews is the United States (by a slim margin). And the country with the highest percentage of its population being Jewish—well, of course it’s Israel.
(Check my facts here, here, or here)
On the other hand, nearly all of the Israelis in the world live in Israel….
Comment by BrianJ — August 29, 2006 @ 9:50 pm
Lets all get our heads out of the sand… What will go down in Salt Lake occurs worldwide on a massive scale and out of resentment and hatred for the violence and bloodshed we’ve exported… Travel the world and talk to our international brothers and sisters and get their opinion of our great Nation and what we’ve been involved with.
The U.S. opinion polls state a similar message regarding the war in Iraq and Bush’s dwindling popularity. We back Israel out of political and military expediency and we’ve financed the Israeli State to the tune of billions of dollars since 1948 and to the detriment of many of our waning and broken down social programs we have here.
There are illegal international issues that Israel continues to disregard and ignore. Violating UN sactions and World Court decisions regarding the ill gotten territories, use of torture, and the walls they continue to build.
Theres a lot to complain about. Theres alot of pain and misery we contribute toward. This is why Rocky Anderson isnt calling for a pioneer parade with keys to the City in hand and banquet room full of punch and cookies.
Comment by David — August 29, 2006 @ 9:56 pm
To jjohnsen – we’re not talking personal respect, but official respect. For example, the mayor of Anchorage, Mark Begich, is a Democrat, yet whenever Federal officials like the President or, more recently, the Secretary of Defense pay an official visit, Begich serves as a gracious host. That’s called separating personal feelings from the mission. You don’t have to respect the officeholder, but you should respect the office. I learned that from 22 years military service. That was the one bad thing about killing the draft; too many men nowadays don’t understand the concept of service, namely, service to something other than their own selfish gratification.
Unfortunately, with our terminally corrupt “do what thou wilt is the whole of the law” culture, etiquette and graciousness have gone flying out the window. We as Americans need to learn some class. Rocky Anderson could easily shut his mouth and play the gracious host for a mere 24 hours. Then he can go back to his contrarianism and demagoguery all he wants.
Comment by Anchorage Activist — August 29, 2006 @ 9:59 pm
I was always told by democrats that “even if you don’t like Clinton you should respect the office”
Of course, now that a Republican is in office, it doesn’t apply (naturally).
Basically, I get the idea there’s nothing Bush could do to get respect from the left wing.
Comment by Ivan Wolfe — August 30, 2006 @ 7:25 am
As much as we like to be cynical about professional politicians, this is an example that such people serve a valuable purpose. A competent professional local pol would have State wide ambitions, and wouldn’t be caught dead organizing such a protest. This guy is obviously a clown and likely serving his city poorly in general.
Comment by Steve EM — August 30, 2006 @ 9:53 am
Re # 5, Anchorage Activist: Whether one agrees with President Bush or not, he deserves respect on a visit simply because he is the President. As the “chief elected representative†of Salt Lake City, Anderson’s job is to host the President without fear or favor. That’s what professionalism is all about.
You make an interesting point — the same point the democrat mayor of Bridgeport Connecticut has made in the linked SL Tribune article (sorry, I just noticed the first link was broken and have fixed it) with regard to Rocky’s decision to protest:
Moreover, the Tribune quotes the Republican mayor of Charlotte, North Carolina as stating that
So, the fact that numerous mayors across the nation have made a similar point as AA in comment 5 lends support to the idea of a mayor being a gracious host: “But mayors whose cities have hosted the president this year — be they Omaha, Neb., or Charlotte, N.C. — say the mayor’s job is to be a gracious host even when you disagree with the guest.”
Re # 14, David, my post does not actually complain of Rocky’s decision — he is free to do whatever he pleases. This post actually focuses on the “Death to Israel” march that has been approved and will occur today. That is what is shameful.
Comment by john f. — August 30, 2006 @ 10:42 am
Those who are on the political front opposing the Bush administration’s policies in general, and the Iraq war in particular, would do well to cut their ties to Cindy Sheehan. She and people like her are rightly seen by mainstream Americans as deranged fanatics.
I would like to be more politically active and involved against the war, but I haven’t found a group that does so without getting completely unhinged.
Comment by Mike Parker — August 30, 2006 @ 1:50 pm
I must have mised something, because even though it may have been said back then, I don’t remember alot of respect being given. Same as above though, if Clinton deserved respect it as because of what he accomplished, not because he was elected by a slim majority of people.
Comment by jjohnsen — August 30, 2006 @ 2:44 pm
jjohnsen:
2 things:
1..Clinton was never elected by a majority of the people – third party candidates (i.e. Perot) always took away enough votes to ensure that.
Bush was the first to be elected with a popular majority in over a decade.
2. I’m not saying that Clinton recieved a lot of respect from Republicans. I am saying that many of the same liberals who used to tell me to respect the office if not the person are now claiming there is no way they will respect either in regards to Bush.
And the left wing now is much more badly behaved than the right wing was during Clinton’s era.
Comment by Ivan Wolfe — August 30, 2006 @ 5:55 pm
Part of the speech
Comment by jjohnsen — August 30, 2006 @ 10:34 pm
Republicans tried to impeach Clinton for misleading comments about his marital indiscretions and wasted millions of dollar, via Ken Starrs bogus legal agenda, and he still came out smelling like a rose. He left the Office with a lucrative best selling book bio deal, loved around the world and respected enough to perform ambassador tsunami work side by side former Pres. George Bush Sr.
Compare that with Bush Jr’s. illegal Iraqi war, based on fabricated intelligence that has resulted in the thousands of US soldier deaths and innocent Iraqi woman and children. Add to that his domesticate agenda with illegal wire tapping and Geneva Convention violating detaintment of Arabs at Guantamo, Cuba and we have the makings of dictator who marches to his own drum. Compassionate Conversatives have called him out. Former party loyalists who feel he has bastardized Republican principles for his own class’s and party’s self serving agenda.
I can go on and on. Do the research. Its pretty clear what a popular elected President can get away with in our name.
Comment by David — August 31, 2006 @ 1:32 pm
David,
While I thought impeachment was a misguided effort, given that there wasn’t a reasonable chance of conviction, I must point out that Pres. Clinton was impeached. Moreover, had Clinton come clean and stated he made a mistake and lied about a personal matter and wouldn’t lie under oath again, the votes even to impeach wouldn’t have been there. The thing was a train wreck, but Clinton was a major contributor. I’ll also add that had Clinton made the Paula Jones case disappear via settlement from the get go, we never would have known about Monica Lewinsky.
W is a moron, nothing more or less, and there’s nothing illegal about the war. Moreover congress, including Democrats, continue to fund the war, which they could stop doing at any time if they had the balls too.
Comment by Steve EM — August 31, 2006 @ 9:10 pm
Wow. I actually agree with Steve EM. Who’d have thought that would ever happen.
Comment by Clark Goble — August 31, 2006 @ 11:50 pm
Thousands havent died over Pres. Clintons indiscretions or cost us billions. I think we can all agree on that.
Comment by David — September 1, 2006 @ 2:22 am
Moreover, Americans are poorer, wages are falling, our infrastructures are crumbling and we are massively in debt. George W. will go down as one of our worst Presidents who did much to enrich his own class and hurt the very voters who put him there as well as the ones who saw past his folksy, Im one of you facade.
We have failed tomorrow’s generation and somebody should pay for that.
Comment by David — September 1, 2006 @ 3:05 am
Clark,
Never agreed w/ me? Don’t tell me your one of those Jones 9/11 conspiracy theorists?
Comment by Steve EM — September 1, 2006 @ 12:13 pm
LOL. Good point.
Comment by Clark Goble — September 1, 2006 @ 1:08 pm
BTW (#27) – Americans aren’t poorer. Far from it. Debt I’ll grant you although even that is more complex than it appears.
Comment by Clark Goble — September 1, 2006 @ 1:09 pm
Clark I want you to go take your greenback to Europe and see how much purchasing power we have. American savings rates are in the negative. They havent been like that since the Great Depression. High debt and a declining dollar doesnt bode for future prosperity.
I guess it all depends on your tax bracket and what side of the tracks you live on.
Comment by David — September 1, 2006 @ 3:27 pm
I get a lot of this – I’ll constantly have students say things like “we live in the worst economy ever, and it’s all Bush’s fault.”
And I’ll ask them to clarify. Ever? Worse than the Great Depression? And they’ll, unironically, state “yes. The worst ever.”
They just believe what the media tells them, and most reporters don’t even understand what supply and demand are. And since the media’s current meme is that the current ecomomy is in the tubes (despite low unemployment and constant job creation), most people aren’t any wiser to just how well the economy is doing.
But if you suffer from BDS – well, you have to believe the economy sucks – otherwise you might actually have to do some real thinking for once.
Comment by Ivan Wolfe — September 1, 2006 @ 7:34 pm