Billboard Hearing Postponed To September 5th
By Greg L | 3 July 2008 | Manassas City | 70 Comments
Gaudencio Fernandez gets a sixty-day reprieve courtesy of the courts, according to the MJM. That will make this act of civic vandalism a two year ordeal for the City of Manassas, at best. Such is the nature of the courts. They take what seems like forever to fix problems.
No word yet on whether Manassas City’s elected officials are regretting taking so long to do anything about this outrage. Had they simply proceeded when Fernandez’s first demolition order expired, this would have been resolved months ago. Let this be a lesson: accomodating radical race-baiters like this in hopes they will appreciate such deference and subsequently behave in a responsible manner never works.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.
70 Comments
Views: 1393
Loading ...
RIDICULOUS!!!!!
One question: WHY? Why 60 more days? I would like to know the excuse this time around!
If I had my guess it would be because of the most powerful people in PWC. Lawyers! PWC is scared to death of them. That’s why the billboard has been a fixture for so long. A nation full of minority support groups with starving lawyers wanting to make a name for themselves is all it takes.
I contend that Nancy Lieall just skipped one of her perpetual menstrual cramps.
As I have said before, many members of the Counsel, namely Wolfe and Smith, believe illegal immigration is no longer an issue for the City. They and their fellow elitists want to turn the City into a mini Georgetown or Old Town Alexandria. They simply do not see a problem with illegals, they are more concerned with the opinion of non tax paying Citizens of the City.
Anonymous 9:40, what does PWC have to do with this situation. The sign is located in Manassas City. It is not uncommon for defendants or the plaintiffs to request an extension and for it to be granted. I took several cases to court and in land use cases it is even more common. I wouldn’t be so hard on the City. I often took many a months and in one case a year before I took someone to court. There is a motive behind it also. Judges do not want to hear these type of cases and they want to know that the Gov’t did everything in their power to settle before it goes to court. I remember standing before a judge on a citizen that had 13 inoperable (junk) vehicles in his yard and I can remember writing no less than four letters to him and even had him write me a letter stating he needed more time to comply and requested 60 additional days. Of course, I granted the request so when I went to court I was able to present to the judge the City’s attempt to settle with the landowner. The Judge (Judge Smith) handed down the largest fine I had ever obtained. If my memory serves me right it was $100 per car and eventually had his license suspended because he did not pay the fine. Unless you have ever had to go to court and present a land use case, you shouldn’t be so hard on the City. The City has always presented itself well in land use cases and I do not remember us ever losing one. Yes, it takes time, but it is time well spent.
Total and complete BULL CRAP. I’m so sick of driving past that piece of crap grafitti billboard every day I can hardly stand it any longer.
To Manasas City officials that sign and the land plat it adornes is symbolic of the new colonialism. It may as well be a Mexican flag, and as long as it stands that is de facto Mexican soil. So they are essentially telling MC residents - go to hell, this land is not your land. They don’t want it come down.
Why another 60 days? Fernandez has thumbed his nose at the city and it’s citizens for amost two years and the COM has done nothing and looks like they are continuing to do nothing.
Former,
Come on, the city has given Fernandez more opportunities to correct his actions then I can believe. The list was posted here several times in the past. How many times should a police officer warn an individual before taking action? Ten times, one hundred times, a thousand? I mean it borders on insanity. So what prevents Fernandez from postponing it again come September?
The poster “former COM employee” is on target.
Nothing is going to change because council members
or bloggers beat their chest and say they’re
frustrated and fed up with delays.
It is in the hands of the judicial system. The
city legal staff must be persistent, but also use care
and prudence to prevail.
If one case takes two years to resolve, then I say we might as well abandon the zoning rules system and save taxpayer money. At this rate 100 cases could take a life time of effort. Meanwhile 100’s more cases arise. Everyone says the immigration system is broken well apparently it’s not the only thing broken. You say the city has to move cautiously, but just how much caution results in no action at all? I’d have to say the city is very near that point.
The City can run more than one case through the system at a time. They don’t have to finish one before starting another. It appears that the City has things under control. Former COM Employee’s explanation was very informative.
Dolph said on 4 Jul 2008 at 10:57 am:
It appears that the City has things under control.
They sure do. SEE NO EVIL, HEAR NO EVIL, DO NO EVIL! Close your eyes and it will all go away.
I still say that even if the city can process 100 cases in parallel and each case takes 2 years, then we’re sunk! The city needs to speed things up, take a slight risk once in awhile. This country wasn’t founded by timid people afraid to do what’s right! I say damn the lawsuits, full speed ahead! It’s about time the laws and courts reflect the desires of those that built and fought for this country, and the hell with all those who come hear and try to tell us this is how it’s going to be. I say no, we tell them this is how it’s going to be, or they can go back to where you came from!
Anonymous 11:09, I really don’t like to say things like this, but you are acting like an idiot. The City DIDN’T give him 60 more days, the courts did. So get off your soap box and let the professionals do their job. In addition, 99.9% of land use cases never see the courroom because they are tken care of before that time. 99% of the people do not want to violate local rules, they just need to be educated. That is what a good inspector attempts to do before they go to court. I have witnessed it first hand and was taught this and the City does a great job of education first. I enjoyed my 21 years with the City and all though I have moved on, I hate to see the hard working employees trashed by people who do not have a clue. I have no problem with questioning the process, but when th process is put right in front of your face and you cotinue to think you know better you then become an idiot, sorry if I have offended anyone. Our judicial system is not perfect, but it is the best in the world
Names don’t bother me, and you’re right I don’t have a clue. I’m just applying my right to free speech about a subject that most people are ticked off about. You keep repeating about the legal process, and cautionary notes, but the city has been way more than cautious with Fernandez. If the city is incapable of establishing a case after two years of effort, then we either have no case or the wrong people involved in the effort. Doesn’t the numerous citations and lack of any action by Fernandez give the courts clear rights to take action? If not, then what is the purpose of citations and laws to back them? Since you are so much more educated in this area than I, perhaps you could enlighten me oh great one.
What’s interesting to me is that they have just given him another stay, this time for 60 days. does not anyone think that this person has had enough chances? The person in question has said on multiple occasions he’ll keep the sign up until forced to take it down, so hows that? I would have to agree with anonymous at 11:57, he’s been given enough chances here. I think the the powers that be are afraid of a political or free-speech issue however they seem to fail to realize that the sign disgusts just about everyone but fernandez and is offending the multitude.
Anonymous, it is not just about establishing a case, it is also about the City’s reputation in the PWC courts. Yes, they could have just taken Mr. Fernandez to court right after they issued a nogtice and the time period expired. But as I said before, the judges do not want to se these cases unless the gov’t has made every attempt to settle. If not, then it hurts future cases. The reason why the City has such a good record at the courts is because of their caution. So when it is absolutely necessary to go to court they are all ready one leg up on the defendant. Jz 12:04, actually Mr. Fernandez hasn’t had any chances yet. He is entitled to his day in court just like you and me. It so happens the COURTS, not the City, have given him an additional 60 days which again is not uncommon. There could be any number of reasons for the extension. The powers should be afraid of political and free speech. These rights are what make this country great. And remember, this case has nothing to do with the content of the sign, it has everything to do with the fact that Mr. Fernandez may have violated the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code ad local zoning ordinances. This is a very important detail that can’t be lost because this is what everyone who supports the sign is claiming, that the City is trying to get rid of the sign because of the message and I firmly believe this is not the case. One other note, the time frame that you speak of is not correct. Remember, the sign was there for many months and no violation existed. The violation was noted when the owner altered the sign without a permit. So it has not been quite as long as it may seem.
Anonymous,
If you really want to move this up, suggest
you present the mayor with a ten million dollar secured,
nonrevocable bond to hold harmles the city, and in turn
the municipal taxpayers, if your “damn the lawsuits, full
speed ahead” strategy doesn’t turn out to be successful
in court.
So, if Fernandez loses in court he’ll get slapped on the wrist, and most likely start with a new violation all over again. His supporters will donate whatever money he needs, then we’ll go through this all over again most likely.
Thank you big dog, I couldn’t have come up with a better idea myself. So anonymous, put up or shut up! By the way, where did you get your degree as an attorney?
Big Dog always comes through. When everything just seems crazy, I always know he will say something intelligent. Great idea, Big Dog!
kgotthardt over at antibvbl says she’d be happy to have the sign at where she lives. Let’s all get together and move it there!
whatever case it’s already been proven that fernandez is just as stupid as he looks! his mamma should be slapped he’s so silly stupid.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25534250/
those poor hardworking individuals! how can you not want to grant amnesty to them? I actually got this off the other site if you can believe it, one of their members posted it.
after reading that filth over there it’s painfully apparent those chubby gals really enjoy supporting the illegal alien crowd, the funny thing is the illegals are probably laughing behind their backs about taking advantage of the gringo’s while they are doing it. talk about the three stooges: you got elena, alanna and Goatturd.
Chicko,
That is funny. I guess this is one big canvas in PWC. Bothsides are guilty of being painted with the same brush. The funny thing is, I guess it takes the eye of the beholder to appreciate the art.
Chicko, Where is the man? LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXdYrERzrWg
former COM employee- They were in violation before the sign was put up. Their demolition permit had already expired and the city did and has done nothing about that violation. Why?
The sign is on part of the original structure.
Wow, Dolph supporting the illegals. Now that is a surprise. Of course the City does not have a say in what the Judge ruled. However, if the City had put their foot down from the get go, I hardly doubt we would be at this point where a judge does have a say.
CoM picking…again…what a surprise. You have no clue how I feel about the sign. If I were a citizen of Manassas, I would not want to incur the expense of a costly lawsuit just to prove a point. It has nothing to do with your ‘illegals’ and everything to do with practicality and knowing how things like this work when they get to court. Perhaps you should run for mayor and just show those city fools how to do things right! Maybe you could even get to run for playground bully.
I think discretion becomes the better part of valor.
former COM employee said on 4 Jul 2008 at 11:47 am:
Anonymous 11:09, I really don’t like to say things like this, but you are acting like an idiot. The City DIDN’T give him 60 more days, the courts did. So get off your soap box and let the professionals do their job.
Say what you will and throw your insults about. It doesn’t change the fact for the last many months “the professionals” have NOT BEEN DOING THEIR JOB. This situation has gone on for too long with nothing been done and you have to be stupid to belive that the city is going to come out ahead. The court will rule because of the inaction (follow-up) by the city, they will forfeit their right to have the sign removed. MARK MY WORDS!
Dolph said on 4 Jul 2008 at 4:18 pm:
Big Dog always comes through. When everything just seems crazy, I always know he will say something intelligent.
BOW WOW
Dolph said on 5 Jul 2008 at 12:04 am:
CoM picking…again…what a surprise. You have no clue how I feel about the sign.
Why don’t you tell us then? Always playing the antagonist. ^^^^SPLASH^^^^GURGLE
Anonymous 11:48, again you miss the point. It is not the City’s intention to bring the sign down, as much as the citizens hate it. It is the intention of the City for the owner to comply with VUSBC and local zoning ordinances. But you just don’t get it.
Dolph,
Stop attempting to appear to dislike illegals. You try to play both sides of the issue and you fail at it. You clearly at best have an indifference to them.
The City had plenty of time to go at him before it reached this point. Do you really think if it was not a infraction that was pro-illegal the City would have put up with it this long? I don’t think so.
CoM,
Must I dislike someone to post here? Why must I dislike illegals? Can I dislike a situation without disliking individuals or groups of people?
I don’t play at anything having to do with immigration. I don’t fall into the ‘let’s send all them Mexicans back to whatever country they came from’ mentality like many people do here. I never have and I never will. It isn’t practical. I have always said I was a moderate Independent since the day I showed up here. I have mixed feelings about how to deal with a problem that clearly has become a serious problem for my community.
No one is pro-illegal. What a stupid expression. Perhaps there are some people who aren’t hot-heads who are ‘pro-not getting sued.’ Don’t you think that makes more sense?
It is people like you who make coming on this blog non-productive and who caused other blogs to spring up such as Mrs. Cheney’s blog (who I notice is not on the blog roll depsite her long dedication to this blog) and antibvbl (who I don’t expect to be on the blog roll).
CoM, actually you assume too much. Your mind is made up before you ever even examine a problem. As for the wall. I find it extremely offensive. I have stated that ever since the third message went up. Before that, I believe I said it was just ugly. That, however, is not why it should come down. I leave that to the MC and the courts to determine.
CoM,
Must I dislike someone to post here? Why must I dislike illegals? Can I dislike a situation without disliking individuals or groups of people?
I don’t play at anything having to do with immigration. I don’t fall into the ‘let’s send all them Mexicans back to whatever country they came from’ mentality like many people do here. I never have and I never will. It isn’t practical. I have always said I was a moderate Independent since the day I showed up here. I have mixed feelings about how to deal with a problem that clearly has become a serious problem for my community.
No one is pro-illegal. What a stupid expression. Perhaps there are some people who aren’t hot-heads who are ‘pro-not getting sued.’ Don’t you think that makes more sense?
It is people like you who make coming on this blog non-productive and who caused other blogs to spring up such as awc’s blog (who I notice is not on the blog roll depsite her long dedication to this blog) and the anti-blog (who I don’t expect to be on the blog roll).
CoM, actually you assume too much. Your mind is made up before you ever even examine a problem. As for the wall. I find it extremely offensive. I have stated that ever since the third message went up. Before that, I believe I said it was just ugly. That, however, is not why it should come down. I leave that to the MC and the courts to determine.
Dolph -
No offense - but if you are a “moderate” independent, then the sky is green and the grass is blue. Why not just say it - “I, Dolph, am a liberal.” I think you will feel much better, and you will finally be being honest with yourself, as well as others. Nevermind, you don’t have to say anything. We’ve known for a VERY long time where you stand. If it makes you feel better saying you are something that you are not, then by all means, go for it.
Anon, bok bok bok….still hiding?
My children will be delighted to hear I have turned into a liberal on your say so. Does this mean I have to give up my feelings on the death penalty, busing, NCLB, retention, and 2nd amendment rights when you turn that great nozzle and I finally undergo the transformation? Will it be a blast or a mere turning…or perhaps a swish?
You don’t know me, and if you think you do you are a fool.
Well now. I suppose the bok, bok, bok can be thrown back your way, seeing as you feel it necessary to use different names on the “anti” site?
Cant we all just get alomg! Ms. Wood 10:47, that is a very good question. My best answer since I am not and was never the building official is that since the demolition permit was obtained voluntarily as there was no requirement to tear the structure down, then maybe the building official opined that there was no requirement to finish tearing it down, only to leave the site in a safe and clean manner. I can only guess that the building official determined that the sign/wall was not in violation. Of course, this is only a guess.
Excuse me, cant we all just get ALONG!
Apparently not!
And quite frankly, I would rather not get along or align myself with the pro-illegal crowd, thank you very much.
And what names would those be, CoM?
How about on Mrs. Cheney’s blog? Any comments for that? Are you on the anti blog? Mrs. Cheney’s blog?
You don’t need to be the playground bully every time I post here. If you want to take issue with a comment I make, go for it. But you don’t even address that. You go for the personal stuff. That’s just nasty and small-minded. As for multiple names, I use 2 here. How many do you use?
Mrs. Cheney is a class act! That’s what I have to say about that.
And it’s MCR, not CoM.
I haven’t responded to MANY of your comments, so calling me a playground bully is a bit much. It’s no secret that we don’t get along - and that goes BOTH ways. God knows, you have been known to blast MANY, if not all of my posts. But, there you go. I don’t expect anything to change between us, which is just fine with me.
former COM employee said on 5 Jul 2008 at 12:18 pm:
Anonymous 11:48, again you miss the point. It is not the City’s intention to bring the sign down, as much as the citizens hate it.
Finally, the truth comes out. That’s why they have done nothing about it for many, months. THANK YOU!
MCR,
I do owe you an apology. I misread your name. I have no quarrel with you on this issue at the moment. One small correction, I have not blasted many of your comments. In fact, you have on several occassions confused me with other people. I thought we had gotten that straight.
You never know, we might agree on a few issues and we certainly have some friends in common. Again, sorry for misreading your name. I thought I had read Citizen of Manassas and I was incorrect.
Dolph -
Thank you. I appreciate that.
Anonymous 12:33, it is not the City’s responsibility to bring ugly signs down that you and I disagree with. It is the City’s responsibilty to ensure that everyone is complying with the law. in the case of liberty Street, the owner has been accused of violating the VUSBC and local zoning laws. If the owner had complied with all laws the City would have no choice but to allow the sign to remain. That was what I meant by my statement. I really hate it when stupid people like you make me resort to name calling but I must say you are not acting like an idiot, you have proven you are an idiot. You would be the first one bitching if the City had taken the owner to court earlier and lost the case and then got sued. You have no clue on the legal obligations on how to run a City and I can say that because of the post you have left on here. I believe the City will win the case and it will be because of the fact that they took things slow and steady and built a case. You should have learned by the City’s attempt at over crowding enforcement with the family definition that overreacting is not the smart course. I give the City a lot of credit for their repsonse to this issue and in the end it will be beneficial to everyone involved.
Ok. Then I’m an idiot. Because if he’s broken every zoning law, etc. then what the heck? You’ve lost me. Go ahead, color me “stupid.”
Attention all: It’s open season to break every code/zoning law on the books. By doing so, you will gain two years to continue to break the law. Don’t you worry now, because the city will “take its time” to take you to court to resolve the issue.
Signed,
Stupid
MCR, he has not broken every zoning law and in fact he was not notified of a zoning violation until very late in the process. And the City’s strategy of slow and steady will prove correct. In addition, this is not the normal case. This involves free speech. You and I and many others may not agree with his message but he has a right to say and/or write it. The only difference is he has to do it within the bounds of all laws and ordinances which it appears he has not. It is not open season to violate local laws and ordinances and I would expect better from someone like you who seems to think he knows how this should be handled. Not all cases are alike and not all get handled the same way. The City is handling this one the right way.
former COM employee said on 6 Jul 2008 at 3:05 pm:
I suppose I will have to trust you on this, since you are in the “know”… and perhaps I don’t know how this should be handled - but I do know that I do not like what I have seen to date. How long do you think this would have gone on if I had done this, or anyone else for that matter? Are we walking on eggshells because his name is Fernandez?
As a city resident, it has always been like a slap in the face to have had to look at this piece of garbage for so long. But, again, I will have to trust you on this one. I just hope that we are not having this same discussion in September, should it be delayed YET AGAIN.
Manassas city resident, I suspect that it has more to do with the fact that the city has been enbattled with a lawsuit brought forward by the equal rights center rather than the owners last name. But I know it can be hard to understand, but the courts really do want an attempt at working these things out rather than coming to court. I promise you that the City needs to show that they made every last attempt to work this out before showing up to court especially since the defendants side is going to make it a free speech issue rather than a violation of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code issue. Remember, all the owner had to do was obtain a building permit and keep his property clean and no violation would have existed.
Got it - thanks. I will look forward to a successful ending.
I’ve read the comments about the failures of the city….and on the other hand, it’s a court issue…and they must be sure that the city did everything to work this out before showing up in court etc…. You’re probably ALL right, but the sad part is that it takes sooooooooooo long to enforce a simple ordinance. There is no question that 99% of the residents disagree with the signs’ message and consider it to be an eyesore.
Here’s the kicker…if the sign were critical of illegal aliens, critical of those who violated our immigration policies in crossing our border illegally…regardless of race or nationality…the city/county/court would act quickly in having the sign removed.
How can this be? …but it is!
Dolph,
There is nobody that is pro-illegal? I suppose Mexican without borders is not pro-illegal? How about the elected officials who voted in favor of amnesty? How about the many people who speak out against efforts to stop it?
You have tried to play both sides of the issues and now that you have been called out on it, you get defensive and attempt to belittle those that call you on it.
Why would not the goal of taking care of illegals include deporting them? That is the current law. Is it possible for law enforcement to round up every single criminal? Nope, but that does not stop law enforcement from enforcing the laws, or from taking into custody the criminals they do run across.
Do you really have mixed feelings about people that rape children? Or mixed feelings about people that murder? Or that steal identities? I suppose I should not be shocked, but really, you should not even try to say you are concerned about this issue, and then turn around and say you are against the one law that will go a long way in taking care of that problem.
CoM,
You seem to feel that the only rapists, murderers, and identity thieves are illegal immigrants? I want all people who do those things in jail, regardless of their status. If those who do those things serve their time, when finished I want them deported, if they were in this country illegally.
Hating others is very energy draining, time-consuming and counter productive. It is especially counter-productive to waste time on things that will never happen.
Dolph,
No, as I have said many of times here, we have plenty of our own criminals. I have also said we should not cut them a break, and in fact, unlike our own criminals, many pro-illegal folks seem to make only excuses for illegals and their own criminal behavior.
The point about illegals is they should not be here in the first place, so regardless of the type of crime they commit it is one too many, and one that should not have happened if we had elected officials who did their jobs.
The usual excuse for the pro-illegal crowd is that illegals are hard working and otherwise law abiding. Well, at what point does they law breaking become an issue? After driving without a license? After stealing an identity? After driving without insurance and getting into an accident that was their fault?
Why take a chance on an illegal that has already shown they will disregard the law(by coming here illegally) when they feel like it?
Hate is a good thing sometimes that can motivate people to do the right thing.
Of course if ICE and our elected officials who oversee ICE are indifferent to the problem of illegal immigration, nothing will happen. However, that hatred for illegals that is growing does good on the local and State level.
CoM,
I try not to operate on hatred. I find it is self destructive for most people.
I just want to hear how you are going to get 12-20 million people, depending on who is counting, out of this country. I would say that stopping them from entering is not possible.
Would you be comfortable with rounding up anyone you thought might be illegal? Where would you house them until you could get them deported? Who would pay for the deportation or would you use the honor system?
Would you treat those who entered legally and overstayed a visa differently than those who crossed a border without permission?
I see a rather complex set of issues for which there are no easy solutions. I don’t see it as being an illegal lover or any of the other names some people want to throw on people when they don’t have solutions for the questions, or perhaps their solutions are too unspeakable for public consumption.
former COM employee,
I have said many times on this very blog that the city is giving him enough rope to hang himself. It just takes some longer to tie the knot than others
Dolph,
As I said, is it possible today for law enforcement to go out and retain every criminal? Is it possible for law enforcement to prevent every crime? No. However, does that mean they should stop trying or stop taking into custody the criminals they come across?
The same goes for illegals. Steps that Counties are taking, including Prince William, are making it more difficult for illegals to openly live as law breakers by taking away the incentive.
ICE it seems can and will pick up illegals to deport. Just by taking a more aggressive approach to enforcing the law will make illegals move or even stop people from thinking of coming here illegally. The same way it would prevent many from speeding if they knew the local law enforcement agency was going to ramp up speed limit laws and to set up speed traps.
The Federal Government pays for the deportation of illegals.
I would include those that overstay their visias the same.
When the police are running DUI check points, do they round up everyone driving? Or, just those that are drunk and have broken the law by drinking and driving.
Really, you question about rounding up everyone who looks illegal is pretty stupid, and again is an attempt throw mud. I suppose I should just consider the source…..
It is not complex, you just want to see it that way.
How would you handle the issue?
Nope Dolph, no easy solutions. However, pretending that a problem does not exist may SEEM like a solution, but it isn’t. With no skills, a language barrier, no desire to assimilate, and a professed “home” that isn’t home simply creates a permanent poverty class. We don’t need that in this country.
Stopping border crossers 100% is impractical if not impossible, but 90% would be a GREAT start…and given desire, I believe that to be possible. Without desire, few things ARE possible.
As for those who are already here illegally, no, I don’t suggest “rounding ‘em up and shipping ‘em out.” That too is impractical, but through a series of measures…the PWC Resolution being a start…it IS practical to discourage illegal presence.
If enough localities (even Fairfax county, when they decide that they can’t afford to support their own, plus the PWC transplants) adopt the Rule of Law Resolution, the federal government (even Jim Webb) will see the will of the American people and recognize that their jobs are on the line. Then, they will step up to their responsibility and take appropriate measures to stop the inflow.
I don’t hate these people, not at all. In fact, I will wholeheartedly support and help those who comply with our immigration laws and wish to become American citizens. …and yes, the immigration quota does need to be adjusted periodically to meet the labor needs and economic capabilities of this country.
The “take one, take all” mentality must come to a close however; we simply can’t afford it.
freedom,
There is a great ring of truth in your post. We should step up and start to enforce the laws we have on the books. Once the laws are enforced, the self deportation will remove any need to round them up and deport them. OK and AZ have had a decrease in unemployment rates since their immigration laws have been put into effect.
Dolph said on 7 Jul 2008 at 9:50 am:
CoM,
I just want to hear how you are going to get 12-20 million people, depending on who is counting, out of this country. I would say that stopping them from entering is not possible.
No jobs = no money = SELF DEPORTATION.
Stop the jobs for illegals. If they have no money and no prospects of earning anY, they WILL leave. Look at ARIZONA.
former COM employee said on 6 Jul 2008 at 2:07 pm:
Anonymous 12:33, it is not the City’s responsibility to bring ugly signs down that you and I disagree with.
We must have a lot of “stupid” people and “idiots” in the city and county then.
Color your self a “stupid idiot.”
I would like to know how much it has cost the City to go to court
all these times, sending summons, notices, comic books, whatever
they’ve sent to the owner.
Is there a way to figure out the cost? Does the City keep an
ongoing “log” of the cost of each violation? Will Fernandez (?)
have to pay this back to the City when he loses? (in 2010 maybe?)
I have heard that the neighbors are really tired of this sign and it’s
a blight to their neighborhood. Maybe all the neighbors should
send in a complaint? Would that get things rollin’???
Jeez I’m glad I don’t live next door…..
Hey Dolph,
You have been called out by two people. Come on, we are waiting to hear what you would do with illegals and how you would decide which ones are worthy to stay here and which ones you would ship out…. Please do not turn into the typical pro illegal alien supporter(and yes that is what they are called when they support illegals) and run away when faced with the tough questions.
FOX news channel is going to have a story on the “sign” coming up in the next couple of segments.