Yeah, I could have done a post on how pathetic the Republican party is that they had to go out and find a former Kaback supporting Democrat to will their Treasurer slot or I could have ran off a list of questions surrounding Delohery but in the end, you have to ask yourself, what's more important, the issues that are not being covered, or the political desperation of a party that grabbed a candidate to run for Town Clerk not because of experience, but on the gamble that she's "popular" enough to beat Kaback, a person who actually collected more votes than Mayor Boughton in some wards and was second only to the Mayor it terms of total votes in '05.
Yeah, I could have written about that or the countless tips and bits of info I've received over the last month but my interest is elsewhere right now. My thoughts go back towards an interview I did with Jesse Jackson one week before the '06 primary. During the interview, I asked him for his comment on a political dirty trick the Lieberman camp was doing to Lamont supporters and he told me something I'll never forget. Basically he said it's not important and the only thing that was important was to "keep your eye on the ball." In other words, that silly stuff is of little meaning when it comes to what's important to people and to the big picture...A CHANGE IN THE WAY THINGS ARE DONE.
In '06, Jackson's "eye on the ball" was the war and making a statement by beating Lieberman in the primary... in '07, my "eye on the ball" is putting a spotlight on the political stubbornness of a Republican Party that has gone out of control.
So, what's more important, silly political nonsense or a change in the way things are done in Danbury. This election will not be about a popularity contest, it won't be about who can throw the most dirt, it won't even be about illegal immigration. It WILL be about the mayoral record of Mark Boughton and the record of the Republican majority of the Common Council and the job they done in the last two years.
NOTHING ELSE MATTERS...period.
Let other babble about stupid stuff, I haven't the time for that type of stuff and the readers who email me with their concerns about the condition of Danbury don't have time to read silliness either. The people I talk to, who are Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, are VERY concerned about a number of issues in Danbury that are either not being addresses, or created by the current administration and are looking for answers to their concerns so they can make a sound decision come election day in November.
I've learned from my interview with Rev Jackson and I'm interested in only one thing, doing what I can to lay out a case for change and with my years of material, I plan on presenting my case to the residents of Danbury who have been let down by a mainstream media that stubbornly refuses to report properly on what's happening in this city.
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.
