The battle is finally joined in CA-39, the race where half of Ed Royce’s district has been shoved across the Puente Hills into territory where his long legacy of attacks on “multiculturalism” are likely to fall with a thud.
The first real skirmish of this war has taken place, as first skirmishes often do, in an out-of-way place: an article in the Diamond Bar Patch.
Jay Chen, the Democratic candidate campaigning for the newly drawn 39th District’s House of Representatives seat this year, claimed his Republican opponent Ed Royce attended a “hate rally” aimed at an Islamic fundraising group in Yorba Linda last year.
In a phone interview, Chen also alleged that Royce, a 20-year veteran in the House and representative from the former 40th District covering parts of north and central Orange County, made comments at that rally rejecting multiculturalism in the United States.
“We want to let voters know who he is, because that’s just not going to fly in a district that is 30 percent Latino, 30 percent Asian. We can’t have that kind of representative,” Chen said.
“He’s made comments about wanting all federal service to be English only, including balloting, so he wants voting restrictions. And that’s a clear attack on minorities and those for who English is a second language…He attended the Muslim hate rally in Yorba Linda, and he spoke out about multiculturalism.”
Are all of the factual allegations above true? Well … yes. Let’s review them:
1) Was it a “hate rally”? That’s not a formal term, so there’s room for disagreement, but take a look:
From an Al-Jazeera report (by a well-known American-born journalist):
You can see the entire hour-long event here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJyt1gC4bNo
Note that its being a “hate rally” (in effect regardless of whether by design) doesn’t mean that Ed Royce himself engaged in hate speech. Nor did Jay Chen say that he did. But if you were one of the senior elected officials at a rally where these sorts of threats and abuse took place, and if you were a county leader of the political party represented there, wouldn’t you want to set things straight, to make clear early, loudly, and often that what happened was unacceptable? Not, apparently, if you’re Ed Royce! And that is a completely fair grounds for criticism.
2) Did Royce make comments about multiculturalism? He sure did — and he hasn’t stopped. It’s been a theme of his for years — long before he took a look at the new district lines, saw that he was being moved into a districts with a significant majority of minorities, and perhaps almost swallowed his tongue.
3) The “that’s not going to fly” comment is an opinion, not an assertion of fact, so we’ll leave it alone — but … it’s not going to fly!
4) “He’s made comments about wanting all federal service to be English only, including balloting, so he wants voting restrictions.” Yep. Royce co-sponsored H.R. 997, the “English Language Unity Act of 2011,” which would made English language the official language of the United States. If this were simply like making the eagle the national bird, it would be insulting but not injurious. It’s when it’s used to keep people — citizens — from voting or being able to make use of government services that it becomes truly awful.
Like many Republicans, Royce wants to exclude people from voting if they aren’t demographically likely to vote Republican. If this strikes you as a horrible charge to make against someone — good! We agree that it’s horrible; now, over the next six months, we can explore whether it’s true.
5) “That’s a clear attack on minorities and those for who English is a second language.” Yes it is — and it’s pandering to people who want to feel great about having been wise enough to have been born into an English-speaking culture, as oppose to those foolish newborns who opted for other lands.
It’s also cowardly — and extremely stupid as a matter of public policy.
Royce is cowardly because he’s fighting against people whom he would expect would be least well-equipped to fight back against them — especially if he can keep them from voting.
Royce’s position is extremely stupid because it sacrifices one of the primary advantages that the United States has in international affairs — that our people come from everywhere and that every citizen of the country theoretically has the right to expect to be treated with equal dignity. That is an extremely powerful selling point for the U.S. in its intercourse with other nations. China can’t do that. Japan can’t do that. Nor can Russia, Germany or even France. That’s our advantage — and no honorable politician should want to give it up for political gain.
Those Taiwanese up in Rowland Heights? They are part of our country’s bond to Asia. Our treating them like equals — even if they came here too late to learn English themselves (as their children generally will in school) — is one of the things that does lead much of the rest of the world to respect and admire the U.S. Our inclusiveness — our “multiculturalism,” if you will — is part of our strength and part of our success.
And yes, this applies to other Chinese in Diamond Bar, Filipinos from Walnut to Chino Hills, Koreans in Brea and Fullerton, Spanish-speakers from La Habra to Placentia, South Asians in Cypress and La Palma — and yes, to peaceable and patriotic Muslim-Americans from all over the world as well. This is a beautiful, multicultural district of which its residents can be proud. But yes, some people — largely having come here as adults — have trouble learning a new language (much like most Americans, who are among the least multilingual people in the world.)
You can make their adjustment to the U.S. easier — or you can ignore them — or if you’re really nuts you can punish them. It’s our showing some grace that pays off for the country. The benefit we get from bonds with other nations, with our residents from all over feeling that they truly are part of the United States rather than second-class citizens, far exceeds any cost of multilingual ballots and such. It’s a gesture of respect. And it makes us stronger.
Here, by the way, is part of what Royce said at that Yorba Linda rally:
“A big part of the problem we face today is that our children have been taught in schools that every idea is right, that no one should criticize others’ positions no matter how odious. And what do we call that? They call it multiculturalism. And it has paralyzed too many of our fellow citizens to make the critical judgement we need to make to prosper as a society.”
What? Who’s teaching children that “every idea is right” and nothing should not be criticized? This is pure demagoguery: he’s just making stuff up out of thin air to scare people. Why does Ed Royce pick on “multiculturalism” — a word that he seems to use to refer to something like “situational ethics” — even though he knows that it’s a hot-button issue that will be interpreted by racists (and also by mere xenophobes) as giving them support? It’s simple: he wants their votes.
Here’s how he plans to get them. His consultant, Dave Gilliard, says “if Jay Chen wants to call that a ‘hate rally’ then it shows a very shallow understanding of global terrorism.”
That’s right — tell Muslims who are gathered (with their children) to raise money for battered women’s shelters that they are terrorists. Do it often enough and maybe — despite the legions of Muslims who have served honorably in American government and the military — maybe they’ll believe you. I’d love to know what Gilliard’s “deep” understanding of terrorism is. Since Royce is afraid to debate anyone, maybe I can debate him myself.
(Meanwhile, I think that the Republican Party’s embrace of Ted Nugent shows a very shallow understanding of terrorism — as well as of pedophilia. Perhaps Gilliard has an opinion on that?)
But here’s the hilarious part of the Patch story — the part where you can see Gilliard earning his consultant’s fee by making a straight-faced argument that requires destroying the part of the brain that generates shame.
Gilliard said that Royce is not against multiculturalism in the U.S., and that he has a track record of working with ethnic communities.
“He’s been very involved with the Vietnamese community, he’s been very involved with the Korean community, he’s been very involved in the Indian-American community,” Gilliard said. “And we don’t give up one inch of ground to Jay Chen on any of those. It’s sad and telling that he’s trying to run a racial campaign here.”
Right. He’s not against “multiculturalism” — he just thinks that multiculturalism is the idea “that our children have been taught in schools that every idea is right, that no one should criticize others’ positions no matter how odious.” But he’s not against it.
Ethnic communities with whom Royce has been “very involved” can decide whether his trying to lap up their votes is a measure of respect — or just a sign that he’s using them.
For me, though, the Patch article becomes classic when you get to the comments. Here’s a sampling:
i have never voted republican but i like this republican…it’s already too late..islam has already taken away our free speach…i hate islam..i should be able to say that out loud…not be killed or threatened…islamaphob:why?islam..that’s why….
A Royce voter! Mission accomplished, Dave Gilliard! By the way, it anyone is threatening to kill this writer, as opposed to thinking that he’s a brainless, anti-American jerk, I reject their position. (And unlike Royce, I’m offering that condemnation quickly and clearly.)
This next commenter is much less offensive:
Being the daughter of a Hispanic ESL parent I am qualified to state that Jay Chen is misguided in many of his conclusions. My mother, who didn’t speak English on a daily basis until her mid-twenties, believed that the most important skill a person needed to have in this country is English.
Let’s get this straight: no one is saying that learning English is undesirable — although plenty of good Americans get by without this “most important skill.” It’s that, for a variety of reasons from age to the demands of life that get in the way of throwing oneself into ESL, a lot of people can’t do it even with reasonable effort. So the question then becomes: how do we treat them? As full members of our society — or as pariahs?
Mr. Chen is using the same technique that most Imams use of call that which is bad, good and that which is good, bad when it comes to rallies about Islam. The so called religion of peace that all Muslims follow has Sha’ria Law as its legal foundation. Sha’ria allows honor killings of those that leave the religion, the killing of Muslim women that marry outside the religion, even though Muslim men can marry Christians, and the killing of gays, Jews, and Christians. Desecration of non-Muslim graves and burning of churches are also part of the peaceful religion.
Another Royce voter for Dave Gilliard! As a candidate in an overlapping district myself, I will say that I am entirely opposed to “honor killings.” (My guess is that Jay Chen would agree.) I’m also opposed to most of the capital punishment and other punitive horrors that my own Jewish religion spelled out in the books of Leviticus and Numbers — and I know that grave desecration and burning houses of worship have been common historically even in the absence of Islam. I don’t condemn all of Judaism (or Christianity) for it, though. And I have to admit that the segue that suggests that Jay Chen does accept such things is awfully strange. Hey, Dave Gilliard, does Ed Royce think that Jay Chen favors honor killings? He should have the guts to say so out loud then, right?
I’m surprised that Mr. Chen is starting off his campaign by attacking his opponent. Business as usual for a Democratic candidate? Disappointing VERY disappointing! Is this the platform you are running on — anyone but a Republican for the 39th District at any cost!!!! Is this the type of representation that our District needs? I am also surprised that Mr Chen isn’t more supportive of English only. I was under the impression that when someone is naturalized they need to show that they have an understanding of the English language.
When one’s opponent says something as wrong as Royce’s weird attack on supposed multiculturalism, what’s wrong with noting it? Evidently Dave Gilliard wishes that it would go away, but Royce should have to answer for what he says to earn votes from bigots. As for the requirements for naturalization, allowances are made for people who are older. (Citizenship also doesn’t require that one have the sort of fluency in English that would allow one to make it one’s primary mode of communications.) So this letter (which goes on and on) is based on a fundamental misconception — that if you’re a naturalized citizen, you must have learned English. Those who come here younger do so as a matter of course — but not everyone does it well enough to use it for voting.
The CA-39 race is going to be very interesting as Royce tries desperately to unsay much of what he said when he had more favorable district lines. He’s got a lot of money — but convincing voters that he’s not just trying to capitalize on bigotry might cost even more than he can raise.
[Disclosure: I’m a Democratic candidate in Senate District 29 and portions of my campaign and Jay Chen’s will be housed in the same facility. I do not, however, speak for his campaign here in any way.]
*Is this article really about our pal Deb Pauly – or a Member of Congress? Ed probably attended a great 4th of July picnic last year too! Why not a great photo of Ed with a hot dog? What is the message here?
Deborah Pauly is, like it or not, “the face” of that rally; I think that the photo is appropriate.
Royce, Miller, and others gave the event their imprimatur by appearing there. That, in itself, might not have been such a big deal if all that had happened was people registering their opposition, in temperate language, to the two speakers. What happened instead, though, was Pauly offering up a very broad-brush condemnation of Muslims-as-terrorists — can I get your agreement on that being offensive — AND jeering onlookers abusing Muslim families and their kids.
As you know, I’m running for office. What I’d hope I’d do if I were in that situation (and had the prestige and influence that comes with being a member of Congress) is to take the lead in condemning the actions that took place at a rally where my presence helped to bring out the crowd. Royce didn’t do it for a long time — and then, when he did it at all, did so quietly half-heartedly. I know that you don’t think that anything Pauly said there was that bad, but I encourage you to view her remarks not from the perspective of a terrorist, but from those of a Muslim citizen of the U.S. bringing his or her children to a fundraiser for battered women — or from the perspective of those children themselves.
There’s a huge problem with the Republican Party these days, one that you just don’t see anywhere in the Democratic Party except for some fringes: people who fundamentally embrace violence as a solution to internal political disputes. (You can start with Ted Nugent, if you want to be topical.) Republican political officials have a responsibility to rein in the excesses of those whose political fervor they try to stoke. When they do it, I’ll compliment them; when they don’t, I’ll slam them. I want a respectable Republican Party — despite that I want it to be in opposition.
*Dr. Diamond, we applaud many of your stories and musings, however calling Ed Royce a Multi-Cultural Hate Monger is neither accurate nor fair to real Mult-Cultural Hate Mongers! If you have photos of Ed leading a march, carrying a flag or sign or some sort, spouting ephiphets…you may have had a good little news item. Among Ed’s failings,(which we believe, there are not that many)….being a MCHM is not one of them and we have known him for many years and think we would have picked up on any of that behavior – if we had seen it.
Ed said what he said that day in Yorba Linda. You can’t erase it just because you like him. I wrote about it myself.
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2012/04/royce-off-chen-vs-mulattieri-who-will-survive-june-5-to-face-the-ocs-blue-eyed-pigmy-warlord/
Quiz, Winships. Who said, “When fascism comes to the USA it’ll be waving a US flag and holding a cross?” Or something like that. Of course Pauly and Royce are gonna be likeable when you meet them.
You wanna try defending what they actually said, instead of talking about the warm feelings they give you?
Ronananna, what am I to make of his statement on “multiculturalism,” quoted in the article?
I can understand it as an attack on “situational ethics,” which (is unfairly presented as the argument that) all ideas are equally valid. That’s a load of hooey, but it’s not destructive hooey. But that’s not what Royce is saying. He is taking the argument and specifically calling it “multiculturalism” — a term that generally means understanding, incorporating, and appreciating different cultural perspectives.
HE chooses to use that term, not me, not his other critics.
Why does he choose it? I think that we can all agree that the man is not an idiot. He understands that he’s capitalizing on other people’s xenophobia — their suspicion of (at best) and bigotry towards (often) cultures foreign to their experience — and through this choice of language is channeling their fear and anger into political support for him.
That is the sort of thing that, if you’ll pardon the violent metaphor, ought to blow up in one’s face. Responsible political leaders, especially in a time of social ferment, should stand for tolerance and non-violence. He’s trying to have it both ways, profiting from the stoking of ethnic strife and then backing away from his implications. My job — not just as a candidate or a blogger but as a thinking human being — is not to let him get away with it.
*You know folks, when they give out the Academy Awards….it is usually for the complete body of work, not one isolated performance. When you have been in office as long as Royce or Rohrabacher…..you are bound to utter some “come back to the five and dime” comments. It is being rather kind, to mention in passing when someone fouls the air…when they didn’t need to. On the other hand, flogging the fellow or frau on a pillory is probably presenting a punishment which hardly fits the crime.
Royce and Rohrabacher bring home the bacon to their districts. They are consistent and play the bi-partisan card when they have to. They also play the to the local crowd when they have to. What do they say? Welcome to politics!
Jay Chen is a compulsive liar. While he was running for his current position as HLPUSD School Board President, he repeatedly stated to constituents and his opponents that he would not stand for election for Congress. This man cannot be trusted.
I can’t trust him as far as I can throw him. He also shows no understanding of the current problems faced by our country and offers no REAL solutions. He’s just as bad as any other career politician!
He will end up being a lap dog to the entire Democratic machine. I will NOT be voting for him on election day.
Our policy is to lean as far as we reasonably can towards approving comments, Molly, so I’m approving this one, but you’ve earned some pointed questions.
(1) The number of candidates who have campaigned for Office A stating that they would not run for Office B if elected is legion — actually, more like legion to the third power. Some of them are hiding an intention they hold at that very moment to run for Office B. They’re certainly open to criticism for lying, though it really depends on exactly what they said. Other making such statements have no expectation that they will run, but circumstances change and opportunities are unveiled. One such circumstance would be redistricting — and for him it was.
Jay ended up in a district connecting Hacienda Heights not only to Rowland Heights and Walnut (no shock there) but to West Anaheim through Chino Hills, where I don’t think many (if anyone) expected Hacienda Heights to end up. Crossing into North Orange County created an opportunity for him in three ways: (a) the electorate was reasonably Democratic and with work could become more so; (b) the electorate was very multicultural, and Jay (fluent in both Mandarin Chinese and Spanish) would be a great fit — and where Ed Royce has significant problems; and (c) the Democrats in this area had no other really good plausible candidate. My presumption is that the composition of the new CA-39, rather than hidden ambition, is what drew him in.
(2) Even if he did secretly plan to run, that would not make him a “compulsive liar.” Your use of the term suggests that you either don’t know what it means or don’t care what it means. Your saying that he has no understanding of our country’s problems and has no REAL solutions, that he’s a lap dog, etc. is so far removed from the man I’ve come to know over the last three months that either you really don’t care what anything you say means. You sound like you just want to throw out nasty conclusions about him in hope that they somehow stick. Any time I see this many conclusions without evidence my Darrell Issa-commenter alarm goes off: “MOVE AWAY FROM THE ARGUMENT.”
(3) My positive assessment of Jay comes from talking to him a lot this year and pressing him on issues and analysis. We don’t see eye to eye on every last thing, but I find that he has great character, a first-class mind, and the work ethic that I would absolutely love to see deployed on Orange County’s behalf. My declaration of interests: we’re running in districts that substantially overlap, we share an office, we receive support from similar sources. But even if all of that weren’t true, an hour’s conversation would have turned me into a fervent supporter. So now that I’ve declared my relevant interests and my specific basis for my opinions about him, let’s hear you declare yours. What specifically induced you to go off on this rant — and whatever possessed you to think that you had a rational basis to say any of it?
See, isn’t this much better than just tossing your comment onto the trash heap?
Multiculturalism is a weapon used by marxists/communists (at the same time capitalism was compromised thus becoming crony capitalism) to destroy nationalism. In other words too many cultures makes it almost impossible for all cultures to come together for the country. Too many immigrants brought their way of life and views here and were used to demand freebies creating a class that is dependent on the state. The state then uses that to control the people; if you want to receive this then you have to do that. What’s ironic about this is all that changes is their location.
Multiculturalism was one component that brought down the democratic Roman empire.
I never liked democracy because it is mob rule and it aided in the destruction of the middle class that once upon a time saw one income families sending their children to college and owning a home. The elites who want a two class society have gotten their way. The rich and the poor and plenty of cannon fodder to use in their wars of aggression!
Want a better way of life, then fight for it in the country you want to leave.
I was a life long democrat, despised Republicans, now I despise both.
We were a republic, which prevents 51% of the people violating the rights of the other 49%.
Anyone out there want to sign onto this? Rep. Royce? Anyone?