You know what Paul Streitz's U.S. Senate announcement lacked?
Pie.
I've always thought "pieing" was a bit dopey, but I'll say one thing about the banana cream number hurled at the side of Streitz's head in September during one of his anti-immigrant diatribes: It made the affair memorable.
No such luck Tuesday, as Streitz read a six-page, single-spaced announcement that could have easily been summed up in two words: Mexicans bad.
Pie!, I thought as I watched him deliver the speech with as much charisma as a kid reading his "What I did last summer" essay. For the love of baked goods, somebody get me a pie!
You go girl! Oh, she's just getting warmed up.
You wouldn't have guessed that just days before, Streitz had met with Republican Party Chairman George Gallo, who had strongly suggested that he broaden his platform.
Economics, Gallo suggested. Health care. Taxes, even. Anything that might, say, appeal to the non-xenophobe types.
And I suppose, technically, Streitz made an attempt - though all roads eventually led back to Mexico. The economy would improve - if we just got rid of all the Mexicans. The heath care mess would be cleared up - if only we could bid adios to the free-loading Mejicanos.
"If the United States is economically destroyed tomorrow, the Mexicans will rejoice," he declared.
Gallo didn't seem surprised when I reported back Wednesday that Streitz had failed to take his advice.
"I guess he's a disciplined candidate," Gallo politely offered. "But that's not how you win elections."
He might not win the election, but we'll have fun joking about the 80 dollar wonderkid.
...and Helen, we'll buy you a pie anytime...as long as you allow us to videotape the throw.
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.
Helen asks "where's the pie?" 
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.
