|
|
Post by admin on Jan 4, 2007 5:17:42 GMT -5
Residents must find common ground and work together
I am very disturbed by recent comments that have appeared in the News Transcript in which my town and its elected leaders are still under attack by a small but vocal fringe group of people.
I found it disturbing that Freehold resident Tom Baldwin asked two of our town’s popular elected leaders, Mayor Michael Wilson and Councilman Marc Le Vine, to step down from their elected positions. Mr. Baldwin is a part of a small group of people who brought the nonsensical lawsuit against our town. It may be his right to disagree with the elected body, who believe as most Americans do, but it is an insult to think they will step down or stop representing the popular will of the Freehold citizenry.
As if that nonsense wasn’t bad enough, the News Transcript followed through with an article titled “Inspection Complaint Forms to be Circulated in Borough” where another illegal immigrant activist, Frank Freyre, also went on the attack.
Mr. Freyre is also another person associated with the lawsuit. He went beyond bad taste. He made the hateful statement that Mayor Wilson would like to “displace the Latino population,” among other hateful statements. What makes all of this so disturbing is that Mayor Wilson has appointed Frank to at least two boards in our town, the Human Relations Committee and the Rental Advisory Board, which has been put together to address one- and two-family rentals in the borough.
For Mr. Freyre to hit the paper with these comments and actions, before the Rental Advisory Board has published its recommendations, reeks of improper conduct. Frank’s comments and actions are a cheap shot at all of the lawful residents of this town.
A good and fair approach to the rental issues will take all parties into consideration — the landlords, the tenants, and the surrounding neighbors. While I can respect Frank for looking our for some people, he is taking a hostile and divisive approach — exactly what our town does not need.
I hope Mayor Wilson will remove Mr. Freyre from his appointments to town boards. I also hope the mayor will replace Mr. Freyre with someone who is more tolerant and civil toward all of Freehold.
I can respect the fact that both Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Freyre are looking out for some people, but the lawsuit is over. Their words and actions over recent years have hurt this town for all the wrong reasons. Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Freyre do not reflect the majority of our town, and I am tired of self-serving people destroying the good name of our town.
The majority of Freehold residents are good people, and this town is an excellent place to live. It is time to move on. Some people may have differences, but we are in this town together. It is in all of our interest to find common ground and work together. I am confident that the good people of this town will move forward, and those who do not play nice will not be a part of our positive future.
I want to also publicly say to Mayor Wilson, Councilman Le Vine and the rest of the council, you have all weathered a couple of tough years. Freehold residents know that you are on our side. Thank you all for staying strong. I write this as we look at a new year and I am confident that our future in this town is bright now that the nonsense is behind us.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jan 4, 2007 5:18:16 GMT -5
Rental inspection plan is in place to protect residents
In my opinion, Freehold Borough instituted a “rental inspection plan” as a result of Freehold Borough resident complaints of overcrowding and unsafe conditions, and the overwhelming need for routine rental property inspections.
It is obvious to the “naked eye” which houses are rental property and which are owned by Freehold Borough residents. Indicators include no curtains on the windows, open doors, trash in the yards, overcrowding etc., etc.
If there are any complaints to be made, they should be made by the Free-hold Borough residents who are paying taxes and are having their “hometown” deteriorate from the lack of landlord and tenant care.
I believe that Mayor Michael Wilson and the Freehold Borough Council members are concerned about safety and quality of life for all. Code enforcement officials need to be able to do their job, without harassment.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jan 4, 2007 5:18:52 GMT -5
Mayor has sacrificed for the benefit of Freehold Borough
Cecilia Reynolds, how dare you judge anyone or state that someone’s comments are despicable (“Officials: Town Settled to Cut Flow of Legal Fees,” News Transcript, Nov. 21). Mayor Mike Wilson and his family sacrificed many years for the betterment of Freehold Borough and showed this once again by his decision.
Are you a Freehold Borough resident? Are you a taxpayer of Freehold Borough? Have you taken on the financial burden that the borough has? Are your children’s schools overcrowded?
You call yourself a volunteer — I say you know how to take advantage of the system. I think you need to take a good look at yourself, as others need to look at you also, before you judge anyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jan 4, 2007 5:19:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jan 24, 2007 5:53:35 GMT -5
It looks like someone really hit a nerve
Posted in news Tranascript 1/24/07
Your Turn
Personal view does not mean member has to quit panel
Lazaro Cardenas
Guest Column
This is in response to one written by Brian Sullivan calling for the removal of Frank Freyre from the Freehold Borough Human Relations Committee for attacking the questionable civil rights record of the administration of Freehold Borough Mayor Michael Wilson.
Our democracy would be in a sorry state if a mayor or any chief executive could remove an appointed official because of a disagreement over fundamental issues ("Residents Must Find Common Ground and Work Together," Letters to the Editor, Jan. 4, 2007).
Mr. Sullivan evidently wants compliant appointees who do whatever the mayor and Borough Council want them to do. Should Mayor Wilson be able to remove a Planning Board member who disagrees with him on an application before the board?
Removing a sitting member of an appointed board before their term has expired is undemocratic, illegal and immoral.
The second question raised by Mr. Sullivan deals with the civil rights record of Mayor Wilson. As a former member of the Freehold Borough Human Relations Committee, I can write with some familiarity that not all is well when it comes to civil rights in Freehold Borough. There is also a complete failure by this administration in dealing with its Latino community, by some estimates 40 percent of the population.
Mayor Wilson should have himself appointed chief of homeland security because he is trying to implement federal immigration policy even though that is well beyond his authority. As mayor, he should bring all the residents of the community together instead of dividing them. He has totally failed in this regard and that will be his legacy if he should ever decide to end his 20-plus year tenure in office.
A quick look at his record is illuminating:
First, we have the unsuccessful attempt of this administration in Jan-uary 2004 to close the muster zone, and their botched attempt to prohibit residents from congregating in a public place.
Second, we have the issuance of summonses to individuals for loitering, dating back to 2001; money collected by those summonses the town has now been ordered to return to the residents in question. The administration has now also been ordered to establish a fund for reimbursement to those individuals who were unjustly ticketed.
Third, we have the attempt to intimidate and disrespect the renters of Freehold Borough, which a large percentage of them are of Latino origin. While housing inspections are a positive step to ensure the safety of rental properties as well as that of its renters, the town must conduct these in a manner that respects the civil rights of the residents.
Fourth, we have a recent settlement of a 3-year-old federal lawsuit costing the taxpayers close to $278,000, this on top to the town's own attorney's legal fees.
What the Latino Leadership Alliance of New Jersey is trying to do is to be admired and revered by all. It has confronted a consortium of people that are trying to displace the Latinos from Freehold Borough. The actions of the current administration have created a divide between the long-time residents of town and more recent residents.
In my opinion, this misbehavior on behalf of Mayor Wilson and his administration will not help cultivate a productive working relationship with this growing community.
Mr. Sullivan, while it is true that we must find common ground and work together, it is also true that we must continue to be vigilant of our government to ensure that the rights of all of us are protected. It is our obligation to call elected officials to task when questionable actions arise. We must make them accountable for their actions and demand that they respect our civil rights.
The Latino population in Freehold Borough and everywhere else is entitled to the protections of the Constitution and the laws of this United States and of the state of New Jersey. Today it is the so-called "undocumented," tomorrow the violations and abuses could extend to you and me.
Lazaro Cardenas is the deputy director of the Monmouth County chapter of the Latino Leadership Alliance of New Jersey. He is a former resident of Freehold Borough.
|
|
|
|
Post by fiberisgoodforyou on Jan 24, 2007 7:37:28 GMT -5
"What the Latino Leadership Alliance of New Jersey is trying to do is to be admired and revered by all. It has confronted a consortium of people that are trying to displace the Latinos from Freehold Borough. The actions of the current administration have created a divide between the long-time residents of town and more recent residents."
We all know...This is so far from the truth, statements like this are a clear diversion from the truth.
Honestly, the actions by this current administration are clear. About 8-9 years ago this administration CREATED a muster zone, at a time when NO OTHER municipality made any consideration toward doing the same.
Now this administration gets villainised by their attempts to manager what has become unmanageable, unruly, unseemly and in some case dangerous.
This Administrations “good will” has become a weakness that the Latino alliance, has used against as a political wedge for their hidden agenda, the importation and safe harbor of illegal aliens in small towns that can off no defense.
SHAME ON THE LATINO ALLIANCE! They have proven to be an unhealthy, unwelcomed detractors, instigators, baiter’s and their true “Hugo Chavez” Colors are starting to show…first by attacking our freedom of speech…al’la the op-ed by Lazaro Cardenas
SIMPLY...The residents of this Boro aspire to the expectation to not be lowered in to a 3rd world Quality of life, which is what the Latino Alliance's agenda would do to this Boro.
BTW, where did Lazaro Cardenas move to?
FIGFY
|
|
|
|
Post by Marc LeVine on Jan 24, 2007 9:15:14 GMT -5
Calliope:
When I read a letter like Laz', I always start from the bottom and work my way to the top.
The first thing I notice is that Laz Cardenas is a "former Freehold Borough Resident." Why is that? I'll leave that judgment to our posters.
Next, I see he is a "second in command" of the Alliance that blindly supports the cause of illegal immigration.
Thirdly, Laz works closely with and is very tight with Frank Freyre.
I do admire strong friendships and going to bat for your team.
The rest of the piece smacks of the same, tired illegal immigration advocate dogma (e.g CRAP), prevalent in most American communities suffering from a breakdown of law and order with regard to illegal immigration. Their alternate universe is one in which "law abiding" is the code name for "bigotry." And, what would you expect from historical revisionists, who believe that Abraham Lincoln freed all illegal aliens and that Martin Luther King "had a dream" that all Mexicans would cross our borders and live tax free. African American that I know are insulted by this. Just ask Barbara Oliver in our own town.
And, isn't it funny that Laz is studying to be an attorney at Rutgers University? Will our esteemed University of New Jersey teach him to defend our laws or circumvent them?
I know Laz and I actually like Laz. But, somewhere along the way he has been turned to the "dark side of the force." He does not seek a secure America in which all play by the same rules. He prefers a porous America, in which the illegal can triumph at the expense of stupid and weak Americans.
Marc
|
|
|
|
Post by LS on Jan 24, 2007 9:48:32 GMT -5
What concerns me is the much larger picture being painted for regional readers who will make their decisions on how they perceive FB -- and share this with friends and families. That misperception then spreads and becomes "factual," and therefore extremely detrimental to the potential for visitors/local tourists and of course potential residents. Long-term... yes, and to that extent, it was a successful letter. He got all the talking points in and delineated four factual points that make the borough appear to be the loser (interpretations of facts may differ, but the audience is a broad range of people who are not up on all the details) And this letter probably the last word on the subject for a while (in the paper) - I'll be surprised in the paper allows any more tit-for-tat on this. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jan 24, 2007 18:43:46 GMT -5
What concerns me is the much larger picture being painted for regional readers who will make their decisions on how they perceive FB -- and share this with friends and families. That misperception then spreads and becomes "factual," and therefore extremely detrimental to the potential for visitors/local tourists and of course potential residents. Long-term... yes, and to that extent, it was a successful letter. He got all the talking points in and delineated four factual points that make the borough appear to be the loser (interpretations of facts may differ, but the audience is a broad range of people who are not up on all the details) And this letter probably the last word on the subject for a while (in the paper) - I'll be surprised in the paper allows any more tit-for-tat on this. Sybill, I would not put too much concern behind that letter. It is only in the Transcript. Who reads it? Locals. The ones who do are likely very aware of the good the bad and the ugly of our town. Any person with half a brain can see that it was a feeble attempt at skewing facts to promote a crackpot agenda. Any sane person can see that it is full of distortions. On the plus side, that sad little response shows that a nerve was hit. It shows that the LLA cares. Not such a bad thing. Although I doubt there will be any further tit for tat, Laz's letter is far from the final word. Of that I am sure.  |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jan 25, 2007 6:00:14 GMT -5
Related to the above post. Out of the transcript readers, what do any of you think they may actually think? The Transcript readers are likely to side with the Borough, PEOPLE and the overall the original letter that Laz responded to. If anything the letter from Laz is so far distorted from the truth that he has easily undermined th credibility of the Latino Alliance. Don't think for a second that readers would be foolish enough to buy into it.
Even if we were to put that letter in front of a person who is not familiar with recent events in the Borough, what would that person think?
It is actually quite flattering to see a response that is inaccurate at best, and full of lies at worst. That indicates a lack of facts on their side.
The door is wide open and the high road belongs to those who would want to respond to the sad letter from Laz.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marc LeVine on Jan 25, 2007 9:43:32 GMT -5
Each and every one of these propaganda letters need to be responded to in far greater numbers by the people of Freehold. The ratio needs to be at least 3:1 or better. Don't let a small handful of ultra liberal advocates dictate our way of life. Many of these people do not even live here, nor would they put up with the baloney they advocate for in their own towns.
These people need to be constantly reminded that they only represent a small fringe of society. They seek to silence us, take away our earned citizen rights and give them away for illegal aliens to abuse. Swamp them and prove that they are in the minority of thought. No one gets a free pass in the country. We all have to pay our own way. It's got t be our way or the highway for these people and their supporters.
If you want to Fight Back - Write Back!
Marc
|
|
|
|
Post by LS on Jan 25, 2007 11:15:11 GMT -5
which of these statements in the recent letter are incorrect:
"First, we have the unsuccessful attempt of this administration in Jan-uary 2004 to close the muster zone, and their botched attempt to prohibit residents from congregating in a public place.
Second, we have the issuance of summonses to individuals for loitering, dating back to 2001; money collected by those summonses the town has now been ordered to return to the residents in question. The administration has now also been ordered to establish a fund for reimbursement to those individuals who were unjustly ticketed.
Third, we have the attempt to intimidate and disrespect the renters of Freehold Borough, which a large percentage of them are of Latino origin. While housing inspections are a positive step to ensure the safety of rental properties as well as that of its renters, the town must conduct these in a manner that respects the civil rights of the residents.
Fourth, we have a recent settlement of a 3-year-old federal lawsuit costing the taxpayers close to $278,000, this on top to the town's own attorney's legal fees. "
The third is the only arguable point. The rest are facts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marc LeVine on Jan 25, 2007 12:09:31 GMT -5
I'm sorry - I have to respond to this one...
300 people and dozens of employers dealing in underground employment, from all over the region, would be undesirable in many other area communities.
The town moved to limit this activity, which is - by the way- illegal to support (it's just that the government is not enforcing their own laws). This is why the County of Monmouth never came forward to suggest an alternate location, despite the advocates pleas. I know this to be true. They wanted no part in aiding and abetting illegal aliens.
The muster zone WAS closed, because it belonged to Conrail, who hasn't since moved to reopen it. The remaining public property can not support the huge numbers that annoyed local business (just ask the businesses across the street if they were inconvenienced - I did) and cost taxpayers money to patrol for safety. Therefore, for all practical purposes the muster zone is no longer viable. AND, this was NEVER about gathering in public places - It was about the muster zone location on Throckmorton - PERIOD.
This argument has merit and the settlement takes this into account. But these laws were on the books for many years before the illegal immigrants arrived. Some of these charges were used to downgrade greater offenses (duh!!!) like disorderly conduct. Others, such as anti-loitering, were once viable, but only recently struck down by the courts. Freehold was not the only town to have these ordinances on the books, but one of the few area towns to be swamped by illegal aliens looking for work. In Manalapan, you can get a ticket just for idling your car engine outside of Wawa on Route 9. Other communities have much higher standards than we ever had.
This is just plain BS. The advocates only want to insure that the population remains here by pressuring the town to lower its housing standards. Sorry. No overcrowding or sleeping in attics and basements - or in unsafe conditions. Most of the abusers just happen to be opportunistic slumlords and inconsiderate tenants. If the majority are the tenants are of Latino origin (mostly here illegally), then I suppose that fact should make it much easier for advocates to target their message as such - "if you can't afford to live here according to the rules then, in the words of Yul Brynner to Eli Wallach - "ride on." We don't change our laws to accommodate a select group of people. We enforce them for the greater public good. Abd...we ARE going to do this to the letter of the law an until this mess is cleaned up.
A settlement is a stalemate. The case was tried with pro bono advocate attorneys that found some ultra-liberal federal judges, who publicly agreed that illegal immigration hurts our society. They are not legislators and can see no federal will to change the landscape in a fair way. They only have to work with - that which sorely needs amending.
The advocate attorneys outclassed one poor town's insurance attorneys and found loopholes within antiquated laws, of which there are many (e.g. anchor babies, etc), against a small town trying to defend itself from a terrible "free for all" that is crippling us.
I was not on Council when this whole thing got started, but I respect the, then, Mayor and Council for standing up for all of us by doing what 50-60 other American towns have also done or are currently doing. Only, by these actions, will the government wake up and level the playing field. Advocates aren't interested in stemming the flow of illegal aliens or stopping the bleeding they are causing in America. They are part of a conspiracy to protect the needs of business, help Mexico and other third world countries to strip us of our wealth and to create a new majority that will overtake American society and dictate a new agenda far different from our original, founding principles. Advocates for illegal immigration are treasonous.
Marc
|
|
|
|
Post by LS on Jan 25, 2007 13:22:39 GMT -5
Look. We can argue here on the finer points, but even Calliope acknowledged that points 1,2 & 4 were facts. The larger story may be hidden, and there are interpretations, but they were essentially facts.
This letter was successful it made points and redirected everyone's attention to "those facts" as Calliope noted.
That letter failed to address the issue at hand - whether Frank Freyre was wrong to go to the papers instead of using his committee appointments (or even going to the boro council or other avenues). What Cardenas did was gloss over that whole issue, and here we are debating the same old sh!t again.
Forget Baldwin. He is just a pain in the a$$. If you really want to hit back - reiterate in your letters that Freyre is using the wrong channels despite his own (several) positions of power, that Freyre runs to the paper first to get his name in there instead of trying to make real change, that he therefore does not work with the town but only against it. Brian brought this up, but it needs to be reiterated in any future letter to the editor on the topic. And point out that Cardenas failed to address this point.
BTW, who reads the Transcript - just locals? you mean those people from Colts Neck, Manalapan, Marlboro, Englishtown, Freehold Borough and Freehold Township? What about those people who might want to know what is going on in a town before they move here? How about business owners that get the paper delivered, or bars and restaurants that may have free copies for their patrons?
|
|
|
|
Post by Marc LeVine on Jan 25, 2007 14:27:03 GMT -5
With all due respect, I'm not certain that Calliope is well enough informed on this matter, historically, to certify that these points as factual. But, you are correct that we are rehashing the same old doggie do, again. We must all move on.
Your points regarding Frank Freyre are well taken and it is generally accepted, by most, that his recent actions are classically characteristic of his standard operating procedure - to be SNEAKY, DISRESPECTFUL ( to his committees) AND DIVISIVE.
I'm am not sure that he should be removed from any committee on which he currently serves, but I will not vote for any future appointments for him. Not because he disagrees with town policies or publicly objects to them. That's OK. It's his disingenuous manner of trying to upstage his fellow committee members by taking an end run on them. He rarely voices his direct concerns within the committee meeting context and then he burns his colleagues on the outside. Not very professional.
We need to find a better representative for the Latino community. There are real issues with that community. But, it is not all one sided. The uninvited guests, among our Latino population, need to make some compromise rather than ignore us and our ordinances. They are very selfish in this way. I accept no excuses from them and compliance is non-negotiable.
I am, however, a little more refreshed that after talking to Frank about these issues, he has agreed to use his face time with his audience for education (bike safety, overcrowding, etc). This is most of what we expect from Frank and the other advocates - we are looking for positive behavioral change to lessen the negative impacts on our town. Hopefully, it's a beginning and a good starting point from which to go forward.
Marc
Marc
|
|
|
|
Post by Marc LeVine on Jan 25, 2007 15:14:41 GMT -5
I find that the topic of Transcript readership is very interesting. As a lifelong resident of Western Monmouth County - I love reading the Transcript. In fact, my whole family is hooked on the little paper. We wait all week for it to arrive and often grab extra copies to bring down to my mother and my sister, both of whom now live down in Manchester Township.
Yes, I admit to having "stolen" a Transcript or two from someone's driveway, on the other side of town, to read the night before our own copy's delivery. Or, when it doesn't hit my driveway on time or at all.
It's the consummate "town rag" and offers the local stories and area gossip that the Press unusually misses. A good issue will keep me in the bathroom for an hour. I won't come out until I finish reading the paper or if my wife tells me she sold the house!
Sad fact is that it is only those of us, who grew up around "these here parts," who read the Transcript. New folks seem very content letting it get soggy out at the curb. It seems like every time we get a new neighbor, another Transcript copy becomes an "orphan," left out in the cold. I can never understand this.
Since the Borough's own communication channels leave something to be desired, Clare Celano offers a great overview of what is going on around town each week. And, the other GM reporters keep us up to date on the surrounding towns.
Even the advertising is a great way to hear about new stores, restaurants and area professionals that specialize in whatever you may need. Need a handyman or painter? I've hired many from the Transcript.
I fear that if the paper's readership ( I don't mean drop offs), declines, we may lose a valuable informational resources for Freehold Borough. I wish we could find a way to interest newcomers in reading the paper. The town council and board of education work hard for the town and it is good to know that - agree or disagree with us, editorially - there is a way to keep everyone informed.
Marc
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jan 25, 2007 19:06:16 GMT -5
I don't know here -- but I do believe that Lazhole's letter needs to be addressed here. It is rife with mis perceptions. It appears to me that all those decisions made by Mayor Wilson cited by Lazhole are not unusual by an elected official to ensure public safety, i.e, excessive loitering, closing a gathering on a small parcel of land and a narrow road that has attracted daily swollen numbers of people and vehicles to pick those people up. Makes perfect sense to me. When it comes to obvious overcrowding -- 10 or more people in a one-bedroom apartment, does it matter the ethnicity of those lawbreakers? I lived next door to that and it was not peaceful. Constant shower activity caused many pipe and backup problems in my apartment, as one example. I wonder would Lazhole et al be so passionate and protective if most of these people emanated from Poland or Norway? Maybe the members of the Alliance should set up their shop in their home countries -- to fight to improve the conditions there to help their people. Or, change their name here from Alliance to Defiance. This word is much more reflective of their attitudes. Calliope, While I got a good chuckle out of your play on words, or in this case a name, ( Lazhole) please use caution. If, or when we get a person who supports the LLA on this site, we would not appreciate it too much if the roles were reversed. Let us all not set a precedent or develop bad habits, even though it is tempting and fun.  |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jan 25, 2007 19:37:44 GMT -5
which of these statements in the recent letter are incorrect: " First, we have the unsuccessful attempt of this administration in Jan-uary 2004 to close the muster zone, and their botched attempt to prohibit residents from congregating in a public place. Second, we have the issuance of summonses to individuals for loitering, dating back to 2001; money collected by those summonses the town has now been ordered to return to the residents in question. The administration has now also been ordered to establish a fund for reimbursement to those individuals who were unjustly ticketed. Third, we have the attempt to intimidate and disrespect the renters of Freehold Borough, which a large percentage of them are of Latino origin. While housing inspections are a positive step to ensure the safety of rental properties as well as that of its renters, the town must conduct these in a manner that respects the civil rights of the residents. Fourth, we have a recent settlement of a 3-year-old federal lawsuit costing the taxpayers close to $278,000, this on top to the town's own attorney's legal fees. " The third is the only arguable point. The rest are facts. Facts? The points are skewed to push an agenda. I still maintain the stance that the law suit was a minor one. Put it in context and take out the emotion driven illegal immigration element. Government agencies get sued all the time. This was just one more. Think about it. If one were to look at laws and ordinances all over the nation, there are many outdated, and at times, outlandish ones still on the books. Ordinances do get challenged. Sometimes they have to change in order to comply with a higher court. Freehold did just that, years ago. At the end of the day, the suit only did two direct things. Lawyers made money and a few people are getting reimbursed for bad tickets. Big deal. Ask any law enforcement person if they ever lost a ticket. It happens. The only part I do not like is the fact that a court will now watch the town for two years. What happens next is up to Freehold. I believe that this town had better be prepared for the next suit, judging by the recent antics of the LLA. As far as the rebuttal from Laz, there are many skewed view points. The unfortunate thing is that he is living in the past, trying to beat our town moral with a false victory. Although the Mayor is an elected figure, and will take heat in that position, it is unfortunate that his name has again been dragged through the mud by self -serving individuals. Any person who reads that article, and/or knows what has gone on, will not view Laz in a favorable way. Both him and Frank have lowered themselves in the public eye. They are setting the LLA up as a fringe group that will continue to lose credibility and lose any sympathy for their cause. That is a shame because they are in a position where they could do a great deal of good. Sybill, that brings me back to the Transcript comments I made. If the same piece was in the AP, I would share your concern a bit more. As Marc put is so well, the Transcript is a local paper with a precision audience. Most of it's readers are going to be more in tune with the issue. Want more facts? Freehold made decisions on the advice of the Feds, who have neglected us. Go back and review Mayor Wilson's May 1 speech and his settlement speech. Any reader will see that he is well in tune with the common sense view points of the majority of the American public. I believe that most people understand that he has had to deal with some tough issues and made tough decisions. I bet most people are still on his side. Another fact. The Mayor and Freehold have worked with the LLA and the illegal immigrants far more than they have done in return. Another fact. What the LLA is doing is very dishonest and insulting to all parties. They continue to treat illegal immigration as a Latino issue. It is not. Illegal immigration is an issue of government failure, regardless of where the illegals come from For the LLA to equate the two, they insult the many good law abiding Latinos we do have, and have had here in this country since it began. It is safe to say that the majority of Americans' do understand that. If the LLA keeps shooting their mouths off in such an irresponsible way, they are only hurting themselves and the people they claim to represent. |
|
|
|
Post by Marc LeVine on Jan 25, 2007 20:12:50 GMT -5
And, perhaps, most important- the editorial policy of the Transcript, driven by Mark Rozman, is squarely in the corner of those who oppose Illegal Immigration. Matter of fact, he APP also shares the position of right.
Listen quietly and you'll hear our advocate friends shouting "d**n them," in the distance. At least, they are consoled knowing that their views are supported by the editorial staff of the "SocialistWorker."
Marc
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jan 26, 2007 5:50:05 GMT -5
As an addendum to my previous post. I recall that at least one or two individuals on this site mentioned that the illegal immigrant activists are now going to shove the settlement down the town's throat every chance they get. So far, that prediction has proven true. The town had better be better prepared to deal with that.
The above highlights the differences between the LLA and PEOPLE. PEOPLE supporters are looking to the future, as opposed to dwelling in the past. PEOPLE will be, and are, involved in a multitude of positive things for the betterment of all of of Freehold.
I also want to mention that we are not apologists for the town. I would never have sanctioned a muster zone, for example. Those of us who did not agree with that decision have been proven right. The point behind that is what is done is done. There is no purpose in saying I told you so at every turn. We are going to look ahead.
|
|
|
|
Post by fiberisgoodforyou on Jan 26, 2007 8:49:38 GMT -5
hummmmmm...has the settlement been posted anywhere? This would be an interesting read to me! More importantly, I'd like to see the language, and hope that it is geared to take the "Negative-Rhetoric WIND" out of the sail of the not so good ship M.E.S.S. "I Won the Battle" , because that ship is heading on a course to nowhere for all on board, truly a ship of fools! Like fooling with the cork used to plug the leak...Time to leave it alone and sail on! ARRRHHHHH...  Cptn. FIGFY "Arrrhhhh" |
|
|
|
Post by fiberisgoodforyou on Jan 26, 2007 9:11:33 GMT -5
Brian, I understand -- I get in moods sometimes, and the continued bashing and baiting by these folks is making me very angry. ...he used specific past occurrences, twisted them, and put them into a spin to push an agenda of bias and prejudice. I won't agree that anything is a fact unless I fully know it is. I'm a writer for a living, for Chrissakes. OK...here are are how facts are spun by our Cousins north of the boarder... DID YOU KNOW...THE ONLY NATION TO EVER DEFEAT THE USA IN WAR IS.......OHH CANADA!!! YES THIS A (Canadian) FACT!!!  Let them spin them selfs dizzy, there goal is to anger you and PLEASE DON'T let them!!! What is spin after all? Idol circling, so if folks continue to spin while you move forward, they leave themselves behind, so let them! Lets all take the HIGH ROAD, the spinner will have a LOT of catching up to do! Their spin is a by product of anger and misery, and you know what the say about msiery... lifes to short for that! CHEERS FIGFY!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Marc LeVine on Jan 26, 2007 9:23:25 GMT -5
Thank the, then, INS for making that recommendation. Who was the Mayor and Council, back then, to argue with their volumes of experience in these matters. They have returned to FB, since, as Homeland Security's BICE. They saw what went wrong with their suggestion. It didn't provide a safe place for FB's day laborers to gather, it became a magnet for many more to come here!
Even PEOPLE representatives met with their Chicago attorney and NYC conciliator in 2003. Their response to us regarding their mistake was - "Whoops!" and "sorry about that, but we can't help you."
Your federal government at work.
Marc
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jan 26, 2007 18:02:17 GMT -5
Thank the, then, INS for making that recommendation. Who was the Mayor and Council, back then, to argue with their volumes of experience in these matters. They have returned to FB, since, as Homeland Security's BICE. They saw what went wrong with their suggestion. It didn't provide a safe place for FB's day laborers to gather, it became a magnet for many more to come here! Even PEOPLE representatives met with their Chicago attorney and NYC conciliator in 2003. Their response to us regarding their mistake was - "Whoops!" and "sorry about that, but we can't help you." Your federal government at work. Marc Marc, I am aware of the history and that is a big part of the problem we are seeing. The town tried to do what it could, although I disagree with the decision to sanction a muster zone, and what thanks have the illegal immigrants and their supporters given back? Nothing . There has been a one side approach to whole issue from day one. That, again, brings me to my original point, only one side is living in the past. The rest of us are moving ahead. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Jan 26, 2007 18:07:29 GMT -5
Brian, I understand -- I get in moods sometimes, and the continued bashing and baiting by these folks is making me very angry. They just do not understand the spirit of cooperation and collaboration, all they seemingly want to do is hurt the reputation of the town's governing body and distract residents with their propaganda -- which in the long term hurts every one, including their precious charges. I get very frustrated. Second, my message posted above was about pushing propaganda than me "agreeing that those were complete facts." I was not clear in my composition -- my point was in taking those things he wrote -- he used specific past occurrences, twisted them, and put them into a spin to push an agenda of bias and prejudice. Sybil, who for some reason, doesn't want to spend the milliseconds to fully type his moniker anymore, said that I "even agree that those were facts." I won't agree that anything is a fact unless I fully know it is. I'm a writer for a living, for Chrissakes. Calliope, the bashing and baiting should get you and every other resident angry. It is cheap and old. Also, the precious charges, as you say, remind me that you are great at always remembering the very humane element of all of the issues we face. No person should ever forget that. |
|
