Fred Lucas in the Danbury News-Times, under the headline "Congressional scandal makes incumbents vulnerable," writes an article about how there's really no reason to be mad at the likes of Johnson, Shays, and Simmons and how Democratic efforts will most likely fail.
First of all (according to Lucas) these aren't really Republicans.
But it may be tough to paint all Republicans with the same brush in Connecticut.
U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays, R-4th Dist., was the first House Republican to call on DeLay to resign as House majority leader in April – well before the leader was indicted by a Texas grand jury for money laundering and violating campaign finance laws.
Aha! So, for Lucas, managing a PR disaster by getting an equally corrupt but less obviously corrupt Roy Blunt into the leadership position passes for high moral principle.
The article goes on in a similar vein. Read it if you wish. Lucas' email address is at the end of the article, if you want to bitch.
If you're as upset as most bloggers are about this story, send Lucas an email and let him know about it (be polite).
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
