Lt. Gov. Democratic candidate Mary Glassman took the gloves off and had this to say about Rell's lack of concern (via press release).
"With less than two months away from Election Day, voters are still waiting for to hear from the Governor about how she will address the critical issues facing Connecticut 's families," said Mary Glassman - Democratic nominee for Lt. Gov.
"Not only is the Governor silent when it comes to energy and health care concerns, but voters have no place to go to get information on her positions on other issues. Incredibly, her campaign website provides only a blank issues page."
[...]
"I am proud that since the campaign season began Mayor DeStefano and I have been talking about important issues facing the citizens of Connecticut - stagnant job growth, lack of affordable and adequate health care and stronger support for education from preschool to higher education," said Glassman. "John and I challenge the Governor to run a campaign of ideas and to lay out a vision for Connecticut . Voters deserve nothing less."
I ask again, why should Jodi Rell be re-elected and when will the media stop the love-fest with the governor and start asking her some real questons regarding the issues that voters are concerned about?
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.
