>>>"Jews set themselves apart from their communities. Jews create organizations to look for, find, and expose anti-Jewish expression. Jews create entire industries focused on their persecution. If any other culture in the world did these three things, then they would feel the same way Jews do, and they would build resentment in the communities in which they live, just like Jews do. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy. You tell the world who you are. Ask any psychiatrist – if a person walks around all day telling themselves that everybody hates them, and that their whole lives everybody has hated them for who they are, then everyday they will have those feelings validated by their experiences. It is a pathology of the individual, applied to an entire culture." --Steele

You wrote the above a while back, saying it is Jews' own fault that everybody hates Jews. Needless to say, this goes just a tad beyond criticizing the actions and policies of the government of Israel.

I went thru a small sample of your past writings (even now, after scraping off my shoes and taking a long hot shower, I still don't feel really clean), and it is clear you have some irrational obsessions that border on pathological. There is sometimes a fine line between traditional vicious bigotry and actual mental illness, and I honestly don't know which side of that line you are on.

You asked me before why I called the Pope a "fucker." Well, because he was in Hitler Youth, for starters. Irrespective of the circumstances of his paticipation in that organization, the idea of the Holy Father running around heiling Hitler while Jews were being herded into death camps does not sit well with me. Nor does the Pope's recent embrace of a Holocaust denier, nor his bigoted remarks about the Islamic faith, nor his and his institution's bigotry against homosexuals and women, nor his deranged and incredibly damaging insistence that birth control is a sin.

Henceforth, I will make a point of calling him a fucker and other choice epithets when the opportunity arises, just because you don't like it.

I acknowledge your logic and hope you're right -- if Obama can't be relied upon to nominate a justice who is reliably pro-choice, then damn near my last reason for liking the guy will be sliding away like rivulets of blood down a back alley.

HOW COME YOU NEVER WRITE ABOUT GATOR FOOTBALL??!!?? I LOVE GATOR FOOTBALL, SO YOU SHOULD WRITE ABOUT IT!!! AND IF YOU DON'T, YOU'RE A BIG JERK!!!!

He won't answer your question regarding whether he would have women who obtain abortions prosecuted for murder. They never do...

what criminal penalties do you think should be imposed on women and teenage girls who murder their children by obtaining abortions?

I told you Reallynow wouldn't answer your (and my) simple question as to whether women who obtain abortions should be prosecuted for murder. I've seen plenty of so-called pro-lifers gobsmacked by that question, but I've seldom seen one bob, weave and bluster as hard as he did after I went to bed. ("I answered your question!! No I won't tell you where!! No I won't re-post it!! No I won't answer it again!! Moron!!")

Funny stuff.

She is Hispanic -- therefore she is either selling vegetables by the side of the road or she is an elitist snob out of touch with the real Murkins.

If I may expand on Glenn's point a little, appellate judges make new law all the time, but only when there is no clear binding precedent telling them what to do. If there is clear binding precedent that applies to the situation presented to the appellate court, the appellate court is not free to disregard it, even if the appellate court thinks the binding precedent is ridiculous.

I have, any number of times, seen trial and appellate courts follow controlling precedent with which they disagree, while stating explicitly (and sometimes quite heatedly) that the controlling precedent is wrong and should be changed. Sometimes a higher court will even come around to their point of view in a later case on the same issue.

>>>impute more evil to them than they could commit in their wildest collective dreams.

I dunno Holly -- our dreams are pretty wild.

>>>since I'm an American Jew and therefore apparently required to state and justify my policy on Israel repeatedly though I've never been to that country,

>>>I don't know where you think that "requirement" comes from - I'm not familiar with it

Bullshit. You have explicitly imposed it on every Jew who disagrees with you in these comments regarding any Israel-related issue, by accusing him or her of irrational bias and blind tribalism. The effect, and the obvious intent, of these accusations is to place an extra burden of explanation and justification on the Jew-who-disagrees-with-Glenn. Gentiles ordinarily don't have to do this, hence Melinda's comment.

I received an e-mail last week from Isaac Luria, president of the J Street group, asking me to add my name to a petition urging Pres. Obama to stand firm in insisting on a full settlement freeze. I wasn't sure whether the petition or the freeze would do any good, but I added my name. So there's that.