166 thoughts on “WP: Facing a Court Hearing, Man Begins Removing Pro-Immigrant Billboard

  1. I usually enjoy your posts, WHWN, but you seem to hate “Palin Republicans” even more than you hate Emma. Aren’t you supposed to be a kinder gentler Republican????? You are so obviously holding your nose for political expedience with Palin on the ticket.

    If you are such a national security expert, how can you be willing to see the United States take the risk of having a “fanatical” novice (that you look down your nose at) a heartbeat away from Commander and Chief of our Armed Forces, which are already stretched to the brink by a fanatical novice for eight years?

    And if McCain survives his term, Palin is not going to accept being tucked away in the closet. She is going to try to take advantage of McCain just like Cheney took advantage of Bush. If McCain reaches the White House, he will be completely isolated with Palin snapping at his heels. He will either have to embrace Palin and the extremists who don’t believe in books or science, or he’ll have partner with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reed, and the Democrat controlled Congress. He’s flip-flopped so many times, I don’t know which he’ll do. I can’t imagine how you can pretend to know. And this is all assuming that he means what he says about governing from the middle. I don’t see any evidence of it. He talks the talk but his voting record is war, war, war, bomb, bomb, bomb, drill, drill, drill, and, after a flip-flop, corporate tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans while the rest of us foot the bill.

    McCain has wanted to be President for so long and so badly, he seems wiling to say or do anything. And you’ve wanted him to be President so long and so badly you’re willing to convince yourself of anything. I don’t trust McCain and I don’t trust people who apologize for his bad decisions.

  2. DiversityGal

    I agree with FortKnocks. I think that McCain will be much more a slave to his party than the public likes to think. We have to look at his record. We have to listen to his stance on the issues. We have to pay attention to his not-so-classy temper incidents. I’m not just going to take his word for it that he will change Washington once he is voted into office. We are told over and over again that John McCain is a maverick, but that doesn’t mean he really is one (unless you are defining “maverick” as a hothead).

  3. NotGregLetiecq

    WHWN, perhaps you are overly committed to the idea that McCain was robbed in 2000 and that it has to be McCain that cleans up after the Bush disaster.

    Is not Obama equally qualified to clean up after the Bush disaster? I would argue more qualified, since Obama had the foresight to know that Iraq was a lie and a death trap, the foresight to argue for diplomacy instead of bluster toward nations we don’t agree with (which even President Bush is now trying at the eleventh hour of his tragic presidency). Also, Obama was the first to argue for less troops in Iraq and more in Afghanistan, and Bush/McCain again followed suit after a period of ridiculing Obama for those very ideas.

    So, yeah, if foreign policy is your big concern, now there is Palin with no track record or even a public opinion on foreign policy other than she thinks God wanted us to go to war in Iraq!?!?!

    Obama can better clean up after the Bush disaster because everyone in the Democratic party WANTS to clean up after the Bush disaster. Only half the Republicans want that. You heard the crickets at the convention when McCain confessed for Bush’s sins.

    The bigwigs with the concentrated power in Washington, including the high priced lobbyists who run McCain’s campaign, are not going to go down without a fight. If McCain and Palin are our co-presidents, those high priced lobbyists will be in the White House fighting AGAINST the change that McCain says is “coming.” Palin was a whistle-blower in Alaska, good for her, but the whistle has already been blown in Washington. The question is who really intends to fix it, and who is just saying that to get out from under the dark cloud of the Bush disaster?

  4. Former COM employee

    Both sides of this issue are wrong, dead wrong. Greg’s side seems to believe that all brown people who try to get a job at the local 7-11 are illegal. There is a lot of hatred and the appearance of racism. On the opposite side, you have a bunch of people whom think that the borders have no meaning and we should just embrace any other country’s poor, sick and criminal citizens just because! You believe that anyone caught committing a crime here illegally should do their time and released back onto our streets. I find myself somewhere in the middle. First of all we can not afford to take on everyone elses poor, sick and criminal citizens. I think that we need to have a better way to have people become citizens in a faster way. We also can not be stopping everyone who has brown skin for spitting on the sidewalk and locking them up. The Federal government has not done its job so PWC has been trying to do something. As a country, we can not afford to sit back and do nothing. As for the sign, the City did everything right. Mr. Fernandez’s problem is he violated the State Building Code and the City’s zoning laws. Had he just kept the sign displayed the way it was and not start rubbing his beliefs in everyones face by having events on the property without a special use permit, the sign would be standing today. As aformer COM employee for many years until recently and after dealing with this man on many occassions I can tell you he is no innocent victim. His whole intent was to have this property rezoned to a commercial use and build some type of a commercial building on the property. I can say this because he told me as much. I for one am glad the sign is gone. I know many people who don’t live in the area but have to see that ugly structure everyday who ride the train. Another thing, I never killed anyone, never had slaves, never hired any hispanic individual to clean my toilets, so I resent the message it portrayed.

  5. Elena

    Former Com,
    I am wondering, what gave you the impression that many people here are so unlike you?

    You said:

    On the opposite side, you have a bunch of people whom think that the borders have no meaning and we should just embrace any other country’s poor, sick and criminal citizens just because! You believe that anyone caught committing a crime here illegally should do their time and released back onto our streets. I find myself somewhere in the middle. First of all we can not afford to take on everyone elses poor, sick and criminal citizens. I think that we need to have a better way to have people become citizens in a faster way. We also can not be stopping everyone who has brown skin for spitting on the sidewalk and locking them up. The Federal government has not done its job so PWC has been trying to do something. As a country, we can not afford to sit back and do nothing.

    First of all, I, like many others, are for a safe border, not allowing people who have committed felony crimes back on our streets, and additionally supporting immigration reform to deal with the obvious need for an immigration system that works. I would also add, that I believe NAFTA may have created an even worse economic consequence to Mexico, in particular, and that we need to deal with that. Having said that, there are many “illegal” immigrants, approximately 30-40 % who are NOT from our South. This is not just a “border” issue, this is a much broader problem and we need to deal with it a socially responble, fiscallly sound, and humane approach.

  6. Censored bybvbl

    Former COM employee, Please show any data you have to back up that most people on this blog are for open borders. That’s a smear tactic used by posters from BVBL. As Elena said most of us want immigration reform, a speedier process for citizenship/work visas, secure borders, felons off the street. How do you propose dealing with 12 million people who are here already?

  7. Moon-howler

    Former COM employee,

    I for one am not for open borders and I don’t know anyone here who is or has said they are. Wanting immigration reform does not mean we want to ignore who is in our country and I certainly do not the people of the world to have free access.

    I am glad you are here. I had read your contributions on bvbl. But please get to know us and what we are all about rather than believing the lies that have been told about us.

  8. Alanna

    “You believe that anyone caught committing a crime here illegally should do their time and released back onto our streets.”

    Anbody know who the ‘you’ is that he is referrring to? I don’t have any problem with shipping the criminals back after they’ve served their time. I do want the borders secured. I have even suggested changing the Constitution to end birth right citizenship should be considered part of an overall comprehensive immigration plan.

  9. NotGregLetiecq

    Certainly, Former COM has never met someone in favor of open borders or releasing criminals. But it could be that she heard this from Gospel Greg (the classic straw man argument) and for some reason actually believed it. Or, it could be that she is unconsciously self-aggrandizing. “Everyone around me has a really extreme position on one side or the other, but I just find myself the only sane one, me-oh-my.” To give her the benefit of the doubt, this could just be an attempt to sound thoughtful and relevant.

  10. NotGregLetiecq

    Former COM, not saying we don’t welcome your opinion here. On the contrary, we’re glad you joined. But you have to raise the level of your game on this blog. It’s not BVBL.

  11. Moon-howler

    NGL and Alanna,

    I have read former com (not to be confused with ignorant, arrogant com on bvbl) and former is very informative. I think we have just been mischaracterized by the fearless leader over there.

  12. NGL, FK, Censored, and DGirl,

    I never said I was a national security expert. I was just as critical as you about McCain’s choice of Gov. Palin for VP, particularly in a national security context.

    Politicians on both sides of the aisle make calculated decisions during campaign season. Obama’s VP choice could also be said to be politically motivated, to balance out the ticket with someone who has national security experience. Obviously, Palin was designed to pander to right wing extremists. I’m the one who spelled that out, remember?

    You are free to support Obama. I am holding out hope for McCain. The man gets beaten up on this blog. He gets beaten up on the other blog. Where are the McCain supporters of PWC?

  13. DiversityGal

    WHWN,

    There may be a select few beating McCain up on the other blog, but recent threads show that a seeming majority of posters there are in support of him. Obama represents some horrible antichrist to some of them. Rick Bentley is quite a vocal opponent of McCain’s, and he posts many things on him back to back (which may make it look as though McCain doesn’t have a lot of support over there).

  14. Thanks for the update. I have not read the other blog myself, but only heard complaints from associates.

  15. WHWN, you have ducked most of our questions, but okay….

  16. Michael

    To all whom it concerns,

    I’ve been away for awhile, so simply could care less about answering all the Michael bashing you all love to claim is justified. I see it as pathetic. Simply, most of your personal attacks and personal reasons for saying the things you do are not justifiable bahavior in any way.

    I don’t care about sympathy and empathy when it comes to “law” as some of you have displayed incredible naiviety to most lawful people, by creating characters and personalities that believe law is “negotiable” outside of congress.

    It is not. Empathy for lawlessness is a path few people who wish to succeed will ever take successfully.

    Like I said before, I don’t care what you say or how mean and malicious your behaviors and perspectives are (again I see none of this behavior as justified),

    The law is the law, and it needs to be enforced, not begged for empathy and sympathy.
    Once you do this you have terribly undermined Democractic and Justice legal concepts.

    Law enforcement is never a “threat”. It is simply just moral and immoral, good and bad, harmful and harmless. Even kids are taught to obey rules and laws or they grow up to be criminals, thugs, thieves or pathetic members of good communities.

    I only have two issues:

    1. Stop “illegal “immigration, llegal breaking of the law, and deport “illegal” people who have broken the law.
    2. Stop ethnic hatred, racism, and racist politcal activist groups that harm and damage society by breaking law and hurting “individuals” not like themselves or members of their “group” even if they are a “majority” of the “Democracy”.

    I see this blog dedicated to undermining and ignoring both of the above moral concepts.

Comments are closed.