Editor makes same errors he attacks

Dear editor:

If I understand correctly, your solution to all the ills in this great country of ours is to have; "...reasoned debate and reasonable solutions to our problems, not the pitchforks and torches of mob rule that the hate-mongers are trying to incite."

With no facts to justify or to back up your logic, you claim, "The most reviled man in this country right now, by their standards, would be a gay Hispanic Muslim. If that poor man accidentally walked into a Tea Party convention he'd probably be stoned to death."

Wow, one can't get any more reasonable than that. But you did sir, you go on to use a huge brush to tar over 7 million voters in California who voted for Prop 8 as, "gay bashers." You claimed Prop 8 was a knee jerk and visceral reaction to a change in society's attitudes. Can't argue with that reasonable thought either. We the People are just too bigoted to vote in an enlightened way. We need judges and legislators to cram it down our collective hate-mongering throats.

You stated the mosque in New York has become a lightning rod for all those who believe all Muslims are evil, that they want to deny the constitutional right to freedom of religion in favor of their "hate" for Muslims. Then you wrote, " Granted, the people who proposed the Mosque could (and should) have been a little more sensitive and found a site a little farther away than ground zero of the 9/11 attacks." Pretty much the same reason I've heard on a daily basis of why those protesting New Yorkers do not want the Mosque built there. Oh, and I'm sure it was due to the lack of space you omitted saying there are very few Muslims living anywhere near the proposed site or that there are over 90 mosques in the greater New York area today so people of the Islamic faith have plenty of places to pray. Rats, now that I've reread those facts, they sound very anti-Islamic.

Next you dismiss the hate preached by "some" radical Muslim clerics by saying, "We've had nationally recognized Christian religious leaders in this country (many warmly embraced by the radical right) who have also preached messages of hate but that doesn't make all Christians evil people."

Sorry sir, given that I read articles written by Ann Coulter, Dr. Walter Williams, Michelle Malkin, Rich Lowry, Maggie Gallagher, Dr. Thomas Sowell and others on the radical right, watch FOX News, and never look at the Huffington Post, or other blogs, I'm not as well informed as you. Perhaps you could publish a few of those horrific stories about Southern Baptists flying airplanes into the Sears Tower, Lutherans killing military personnel on an Army post, or of any other Christian group committing atrocities in the last 20 years. I truly need enlightenment to be able to reasonably debate on this one.

Your laser-like focus on the truth is totally evident when you pointed out, "the significant problem of illegal immigrants in this country, most of them Hispanic, and the rising tide of narc-terrorism in Mexico that is starting to spill over into the United States, have resulted in a growing resentment (here comes that laser focus, amazing) -- egged on by the hate-mongers, many of them seeking personal political advantage we might note against anyone of Hispanic descent in the United States, citizen or not."

Dang it all to heck, here I was thinking I'm just tired of 12-30 million people breaking into my homeland when they cross the border illegally. They have stolen identities and used forged documents just to work here illegally. Nearly all are driving illegally. Sadly, one even killed a whole family here in Idaho. They have the gall to call me a racist and a few other choice words as they march in the streets protesting against my wanting to close the border while waving their national flag. Yet, in their own country, I couldn't do the same things.

Maybe I'm even angry at my own government, who has granted amnesty twice to millions of illegal aliens after promising to close the border. But, enough of my hateful thinking.

"They even turned to attacking children now, those born in the United States by parents who aren't American citizens." But then you state, "In that specific case, the 14'h Amendment probably does need to be clarified." The following is from an Aug. 4, 2010, article by Ann Coulter. Yeah I know, love her or hate her ,she's still a lawyer and does check out court rulings. In 1982, in Plyler v. Doe, Justice Brennan added a footnote, "no plausible distinction with respect to the Fourteenth Amendment 'jurisdiction' can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful." Prior to that in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) the court opined that, "children born to legal permanent residents of U.S., gainfully employed, and who were not employed by a foreign government would also be deemed citizens under the 14th Amendment."

So tell me, Mr. Everitt, how can I have a reasoned debate and find reasonable solutions to our problems with you and the rest of the enlightened ones, when your opinion of me is that I'm part of the pitchforks and torches mob, a gay basher, a stoner of gay Hispanic Muslims and a hater of all thing Muslim. Based upon your writing, anyone who doesn't think or believe exactly like you is part of the radical right. That would be over 60 percent of the people in Idaho, based on the results of the last presidential election.

Maybe it's time to lay your pen down sir. Arguments are never won by name calling and insulting opponents sir, it only makes you look petty and narrow minded. You persuade by presenting facts. Want to see the true hater in this story? Go look in a mirror!

-- James Binnell