An April 6-9Washington Post/ABC News poll shows that 63 percent of respondents said they would prefer to "[l]et immigrants who have lived here a certain number of years apply for legal status and eventually become permanent citizens if they meet specific conditions, like paying a fine and back taxes." Twenty percent said they would prefer to "[d]eclare all illegal immigrants to be felons and not allow them to work here legally," and 14 percent stated a preference for letting illegal immigrants "pay a fee and work here for a limited number of years after which they'd have to leave the country."
An April 6-9 CBS News poll found that 49 percent of those polled favor allowing illegal immigrants to apply for permits to stay and work in the United States; 43 percent opposed. Also, when CBS asked those polled if they would favor or oppose granting legal status to illegal immigrants who have "paid a fine, been in the U.S. for at least five years, paid any back taxes they owe, can speak English, and have no criminal record," 74 percent said they would favor allowing them to stay, while only 23 percent opposed.
An April 4-5 Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll found that 69 percent of those asked said they would favor "[a]llowing illegal immigrants who have jobs in the United States to apply for legal, temporary-worker status," while only 25 percent opposed.
A March 23-30Timepoll found that 72 percent of respondents believe that the United States should let illegal immigrants "get temporary work visas," while only 25 percent believe Congress should "make illegal immigration a crime and not allow anyone who entered the country illegally to work or stay in the U.S." The Time poll also found that 72 percent of respondents "favor allowing illegal immigrants in the U.S. citizenship if they learn English, have a job and pay taxes."
Based on the data, the views of the small anti-immigrant crowd are clearly in the minority (how ironic is it to use that term to describe them). For an anti-immigrant group (that was established almost a year ago) to only attract 80 people to their highly-advertised illegal-immigration forum last month should tell you that their views are clearly not those of the general public (FYI: the city population is aprox. 80,000) . The polling data from several different news outlets (including FOX News) only reinforces that point.
Based on this reliable and credible data, can someone please explain to me again why Nancy Johnson even bothered to meet with the anti-immigrant hate mongers as opposed to Mayor Boughton?
We'll have the full roundup of Nancy Johnson's visit to Danbury and after you're done, I promise you that you'll be asking yourself the same question.
Ned Lamont had a busy day Monday as started the day meeting with student at Southern Connecticut State University, then with delegates in New Britan, and ended his day addressing the people from Newtown.
We caught up with Lamont as he made talked in Newtown and we'll give a full report of his visit shortly.
Nancy Johnson touches the political third rail today
Time: 11:01 AM
What is Nancy Johnson thinking? Doesn’t she realize that she’s handing Chris Murphy a gift when she visits Danbury today?
This evening, Nancy Johnson is about to do something that NO other political person facing re-election would ever think of doing...she's meeting with a radical anti-immigration group that many people in Danbury consider to be racist and out of touch with the majority of the population.
Today, Johnson is meeting with the U.S. Citizens for Immigration Law Enforcement, an anti-immigration group that was originally part of Paul Streitz's group, Connecticut Citizens for Immigration Control (CTCIC). Although the group is no longer a part of Streitz clan, many of their members belong to both groups and their message is basically identical to CTCIC's (as well as irrational): throw the illegal aliens out period (no compromise).
When the CTCIC formed last year, many politicians distanced themselves from them because of their radical ways and outlandish publicity stunts. To this day, Mayor Boughton (the person who started the campaign against illegal immigrants and the immigration system) hasn't met with these people and for good reason...they're basically nuts and meeting with them would be political suicide. No other political figure has met with this group of wackos...not until today that is.
If Nancy Johnson is so concerned about immigration, why isn't she meeting with the person who raised the issue (Mayor Boughton) and meeting instead with a group which many people in Danbury consider to be racist. They are also well known for spreading misinformation (immigrants bring diseases, linking illegal immigrants to 9-11) and many people consider them the root of the racial tension in the area?
If Johnson thinks that her meeting with these anti-immigrant extermists will win her votes come November, she should think again. She's meeting with a group of folks who couldn't even get more than 100 people to come out to their anti-immigration forum a couple of months ago (which they highly publicized) whereas the last thing the pro-immigrant groups did in Danbury attracted over 1,200 people (look at the photo below). Many in the area do not want to have anything to do with the anti-immigrant wackos and many in the city wish they would just go away as their hate rhetoric was assisted in placing a dark cloud over Danbury, a city which was onced named the number 1 city to live in America.
In the end, Johnson's meeting with the members of U.S. Citizens for Immigration Law Enforcement will only give the anti-immigrant advocates a false sense of legitimacy.
You can bet that her visit will become a political issue as the election season heats up. Somewhere, Chris Murphy's campaign is just grinning.
In the end, Johnson will regret ever meeting with this group and she should fire whoever told her that meeting with the anti-immigrant extermists was a good idea.
Although it's great to see that the publisher of the News-Times took responsibility for the fake news story that made it's way to the front page of the paper last week, there are many questions that remain unanswered in regards to the Neo-Nazi hoax.
Here are just a few of them:
Did the mayor jump the gun when he pulled the rally permit?
Why didn't the mayor wait until the police department did a full investigation into the matter before pulling the rally permit?
Did the mayor pull the plug on the rally before verifying the claims that a Neo-Nazi group was planning to attend a rally downtown?
Do the people who had their rally permit pulled have grounds for a lawsuit?
Why didn't the News-Times properly verify the information given to them by the "idiot" who claimed that he was a Neo-Nazi? Why didn't alarm bells sound off at the News-Times when The Southern Poverty Law Center, (which tracks hate groups in the United States), informed them that they had no knowledge of the Grey Wolves?
What discipline action was taken towards the editors and reporter at the News-Times who dropped the ball in regards to verifying the Neo-Nazi claims and what steps are being taken to ensure that something like this doesn't happen again.
Is Nancy Johnson meeting with anti-immigration extremists?
Time: 10:44 AM
(bumped to top of page) Reports circulated that Congresswoman Nancy Johnson is planning this week to meet with US Citizens for Immigration Law Enforcement, a group that has close ties to the infamous Connecticut Citizens for Immigration Control (many members are in both organizations).
You say this can't be true? We'll think again. Johnson plans to meet with members of the US Citizens for Immigration Law Enforcement on April 18th at the Concordia Society, 6 Crosby Street Danbury CT at 7 P.M.(Google map).
News-Times publisher steps up for Neo-Nazi screw-up
Sunday, April 16, 2006 Time: 7:54 PM
Hat tip to News-Times publisher Sam Gett as he steps up and takes the bullet for the Neo-Nazi article. Although this statement should of been in the editorial and not in the community forum section, it's always a good sign when a paper steps up and admits that it made a mistake.
We were duped. There evidently is no "Grey Wolves" white supremacist group planning to disrupt a Christian organization's rally in Danbury this Tuesday.
A self-described idiot from Fairfield County admitted Friday the whole story was a hoax. The man concocted the neo-Nazi story because he's a strong supporter of the separation of church and state, a philosophy the rally organizers oppose.
The fake Nazi didn't pry money from unsuspecting readers, but he did cause local law enforcement to waste time and energy trying to avoid a confrontation. He also caused anxiety for the organization that planned the rally and scrambled to distance itself from the Grey Wolves.
Regrettably, The News-Times played a part by publishing the man's claims. The story started innocently enough, with details of the rally appearing on our Web site, NewsTimesLive.com, Wednesday afternoon.
The news landscape has changed and, like many media outlets, The News-Times sometimes posts information on its Web site before it appears in print. The man from Fairfield County read the story online and called the newspaper, claiming to represent the neo-Nazi group.
He answered questions and followed with an e-mail; his comments appeared in the print story published Thursday. After the city of Danbury acted quickly by pulling the organizer's rally permit, the hoaxer confessed and apologized.
The idea of a white supremacist group in the region was plausible enough. The Connecticut White Wolves, a white nationalist skinhead organization, has grown in recent years.
In hindsight, we should have checked the man's claims more thoroughly.
That's easy to say now. There will be those who chalk this up as further proof of some grand conspiracy.
In reality, it's a reminder of the need for skepticism because, for some people, lying comes far too easily.
There are many questions that are still unanswered such as what steps did the mayor do to verify that the claims of the self-described "idiot" were true before he pulled the rally permit. Also, what steps are being taken by the editors of the News-Times in terms of fact-checking so something like this never happens again.
Regardless, it's a rare thing to see anyone step up and admit a mistake and that's exactly what Gett did so he's off the hook.
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.