Last night I was on a cable access show here in Danbury. Most of the 1/2 hour was taken up by a discussion of illegal immigration, the final few minutes were dedicated to development in Danbury.
It was interesting to see that some of the callers were local Democratic activists who are passionate about their beliefs (including one Democratic Councilwoman who forgot to turn down her T.V.), but don't always have all of the information at their fingertips.
I learned long ago as a candidate and as a public servant to always do your homework. I never ask a question that I don't already know the answer to. I'm not bragging, it is just necessary for my own political survival to make sure I have a mastery of the issues.
* This comes from a three-term mayor who couldn't remember the two short sentences from the city charter regarding his voting rights during the common council meetings.
Section 3-2 PRESIDING OFFICER.
With the Mayor presiding, the Common Council shall meet at eight o’clock p.m. on the third Monday in November, 1977, for the purposes of organization, and biennially thereafter, and shall choose one of its members to be President of said Common Council. The Mayor shall preside over all meetings of the Common Council and shall have no vote except in the case of a tie.
* This comes from a three-term mayor who is STILL lying attempting the mislead the public by saying that his parade ordinance can be used against spontaneous parades. This despite EVERYONE else (including his own Parliamentarian) who repeatedly stated (SINCE THE FIRST AD-HOC COMMITTEE MEETING) that THIS ORDINANCE WILL HAVE NO IMPACT ON IMPROMPTU PARADES.
* This comes from a three-term mayor who wants the public to believe that he was "running late" to the studio, refused to have a debate on the ordinance (or any topic) with a Democrat, and filibustered a majority of the show with long-winded answers (to the frustration of the host) in an effort to eat up time on the clock.
* This comes from a three-term mayor who apparently has no problem using the "immigration card" and brags about his conversation with the usual band of anti-immigrant callers who phone into every public access show (and are die-hard fans of BigT's show), while smearing the previous administration and/or smearing callers who challenge him because they probably showed up at the meetings and refuse to drink from the mayor's kool-aid.
Typical short-fused, arrogance from a politician who's been in office for too long and is out-of-touch with the city he governs.
The mayor said that he did his homework...fine, lets put the former history teacher to a good old fashion exam. We'll take a look back at the videotape, stack up his statements against the facts and let you, the reader, decide whether not not the mayor did his "homework."
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.
The mayor should take a lesson in hubris from Oedipus Tyrannus before he pokes his eyes out.
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.
