Big Mistake: Don't Fire Rahm Emanuel

I grew up in Chicago and I know Chicago politics. The original Mayor Richard J. Daley couldn’t control the police. Blaming a strong mayor and demanding his resignation, just when the police union is vulnerable is a fundamental political strategy error. Mayor Emanuel’s resignation would be followed by a weakened political structure until there could be elections and Emanuel would necessarily be replaced by a weaker Mayor. The time needed to accomplish this deficient political shift would create dead time and an opportunity for the police union to regroup, including assertion of the rank and file as an election force able to manipulate a successful mayoral candidate. And there is the real problem: the power of the police union and their rank and file officers wagging the dog.

I can think of no political action dumber than forcing Rahm Emanuel to resign, just when he has the forces behind him for meaningful reform of the police command structure and a measure of control over the police union and their rank and file.

B'nai B'rith Where Are You

Where is B’nai B’rith when ethnic hatred is rearing its ugly
head and we have a presidential candidate campaigning using an Adolph Hitler
playbook strategy to promote his campaign of hate and fear. It is not Jews…this
time. It is Muslims who are the target. But how is that different? We can no
longer say it can’t happen here. It is about to unless all of the
anti-defamation organizations of whatever religion, race or ethnicity stand and
denounce what is happening right here in our own America. Can we wait until the
“incidents” of Muslim hate become a krystalnicht? Or should we wait until civil
liberties are suspended and communities are relocated for the security of the
nation. Already, the voices of hate and fear want to exclude suffering refugees
because of who they are. How does that differ from when it was Jewish refugees
being denied?

Where is B’nai B’rith?

I have not heard your voice. The voice of my people

Republican Shame

So let me see if I get this? The Republican Party, now so very unified, has passed legislation in the Senate to deprive millions of Americans of access to medical care due to poverty, limited income or pre-existing conditions by shutting down Obamacare. The same legislation would deprive millions of American women access to essential medical care by shutting down Planned Parenthood as punishment for the 3% of their services that go to abortion. All of this for ideological reasons.

At the same time, the Republican Party has asserted that there will be no consideration of gun law legislation in the wake of mass shootings of innocent people, most recently in San Bernardino. They blame mass shootings on the mentally ill, a disenfranchised and helpless population and on domestic Muslims. We never know which Muslims. There are certainly good Muslim citizens in this country, but how can we tell which ones? the Republican Party will make sure that suffering Muslim Syrian refugees cannot find sanctuary in this great country.

Clearly, the language of the Second Amendment is simple and clear enough that those touting the right to bear arms also know that the same right bears the limitation of regulation for "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...". Clearly, it was never intended that everybody getting a gun can have one without responsibility and accountability. The resistance to gun law regulation has nothing to do with the Constitution. It is ideological.

Again and again, the Republican Party solution seems to be to marginalize vulnerable people in our society by doubt and fear. The very same tactics that Hitler used to attain power. Shame on them and everyone who chooses to support this kind of thinking.

And we wonder how ISIS can attract recruits to their ideological movement from among the marginalized Muslim populations around the world? Is there a difference in their political strategies?

By the way, all of the comments about the Republic Party above are in today's newspaper. I would find it shameful to support that political party in any way given just those three planks of today's political agenda.

Speaker Boehner's invitation violates his oath of office

John Boehner's invitation to Netanyahu was a prepared and a deliberate move to undermine the Presidency. Only the President is Constitutionally charged with the conduct of foreign policy with the advise and consent of Congress. Not the other way around. Speaker Boehner has violated his oath of office. Netanyahu is prepared and agreed to abet Speaker Boehner to disrespect the Presidency of this country.

President Obama and the State Department ought to advise Prime Minister Netanyahu that he is not welcome in the United States under these circumstances and there ought to be a threat to recall our ambassador and to expel Israel's ambassador if Netanyahu insists upon this path. Then there needs to be talks to heal the damage that has been done here by the Speaker and the interference with the protocols and policies of the United States by Israel’s Prime Minister.

Prime Minister Netanyahu faces elections. It may be that he expects that this power play with Boehner and against President Obama will win him stature and votes at home. Strengthening Prime Minister Netanyahu can only be prevented if his move results in embarrassment and consequences for Israel.