DelawarePolitics.net

Aug 20th, 2010 by David Anderson

New Castle County Third District

Mike Protack Leading Today, Planning for Tomorrow.

To View more go to: http://www.youtube.com/user/derepublicanblog#p/a

www.protackforcouncil.com

“We are still looking for the long term solution that puts the County on a positive path”, County Executive Chris Coons. The County administration projects the reserve fund will run out in mid 2014, “if we don’t find new revenues or if we don’t reduce our expenditures,” County CFO Ed Milowicki.

The above issue rises above all others in this race so let me start there. For starters these issues have been raised for many years yet ignored by the Democratic office holders who have significantly raised taxes (25% increase in property taxes last year) in off years to avoid angering voters during election years. It is time to start a Republican Revolution on County Council.

Let me propose a few solutions on the budget and taxes.

The so called listening tour about County Budget matters was a farce; it was a poor attempt to justify doing as little as possible with an ever growing problem. There should have been a Leadership Tour.

There must be a “Streamlining Commission put in place by the end of the year (2010) to reduce the cost of County government, through all means available, including efficiencies, economies, greater effectiveness, and other means to streamline government in order to overcome the projected severe revenue reductions/reserve depletion occurring through 2015 and to ensure that available tax dollars are being spent efficiently and effectively.
A Taxpayer Bill of Rights to prevent tax increases or budget increases to exceed inflation and population growth. I will support no tax increases.
We must unleash the power of innovations in County government to reduce the county’s bureaucracy, taxes, and counter-productive regulations.

For more on the budget: http://www2.nccde.org/finance/Documents/BudgetDocuments/FY2011ApprovedBudgetOverviewsmaller.pdf

The next issue is Open and Transparent Government. Citizens will have little faith in their government if they do not trust it and it can’t be held accountable to legal authorities for misconduct or wasteful activities.

Specifically, I propose an Inspector General with investigative and subpoena powers to head up a smaller but more effective Ethics Commission.
All County business should be streamed live and be available to all citizens.

The last of the top issues is Economic Growth, stable and sustainable.

1. Specifically, we must Better Services, More Savings and Increased Efficiency to all consumers of government services. We must streamline public services, eliminate duplication, and increase efficiency. Businesses are looking for communities where government gets the basics right.

2. We must support the aggressive use of tax assistance and grants while fast tracking those issues which affect private sector growth.

Posted in Election 2010

93 Responses to “Protack takes case to the people”

on 20 Aug 2010 at 10:241Anbupro

What ever happened to Mr. Protack’s lawsuit against Dave Burris claiming he was libeled by Dave’s allegations regarding a long string of nasty and clandestine actions by Mr. Protack? It seems to me to go to the issue of character, and fitness to hold public office. It’s difficult to move forward with unresolved issues from the past. Either Mr. Burris, or Mr. Protack, is a liar. If Mr. Protack wants to take his case to the people, how about resolving this issue?
on 20 Aug 2010 at 12:442anon

DA, I know you’re obligated to put this piece of crap up, but could you insert a disclaimer at the top for your loyal readers: “WARNING: ILLITERACY AHEAD. AUTHOR DOES NOT KNOW A PROPER SENTENCE FROM A HOLE IN THE GROUND.”
on 20 Aug 2010 at 15:113Tennessee Walker

” “WARNING: ILLITERACY AHEAD. AUTHOR DOES NOT KNOW A PROPER SENTENCE FROM A HOLE IN THE GROUND.”
I agree anon. Reading this was pure torture.
on 20 Aug 2010 at 16:384Joe Cass

” It’s difficult to move forward with unresolved issues from the past.” Christine O’Donnell” is a liar. If “Christine O’Donnell” wants to take “her” case to the people, how about resolving this issue?”
Thanks Anbupro, I love copy/paste!
on 20 Aug 2010 at 19:275Anbupro

I’m sure that there is plenty of common copy between two perennial candidates. If I’ve unwittingly taken someone else’s prose, I apologize. Are you sitting outside Mr. Protack’s house tapping into his wireless?
on 20 Aug 2010 at 20:166Hube

I wonder if Mike wants the county to give in-state tuition to illegal aliens.
on 20 Aug 2010 at 21:097Tea Party Lives

The County Council in NCC is a travesty, tax increases and no way out of the nightmare the current crop has delivered to us. Paul Clark can’t wait to be Executive, yuk.

I think it is great someone can lay out a plan for the County because there isn’t one now.The hateful nasty comments I see here from the GOP back benchers who spend hours and hours attacking others but offer zero of value is why I and others left the GOP.

I did some research and it appears Ms Kilpatrick has no web site. no agenda and an ethically challenged family. On top of that she has a job paid for by taxpayers which she is using for her political benefit. Good job GOP.
on 20 Aug 2010 at 21:278Corrupt Council

No Tax Increases, Inspector general to root out the crookedness of Council. open government and a real plan sounds okay to me. I am tired of government union jobs stealing from the public.

I did not know the GOP cared about New Castle County. Why was there not a County GOP endorsement?

Do we have a NCC GOP presence?
on 20 Aug 2010 at 21:409GOP in NCC

Hmmm, a GOP plan for the nightmare called New Castle County is step forward for the GOP. The republican party seems to miss why they lose statewide when they have almost nothing going on with NC County Council to the point it is more socialist than Cuba.

A committed hard working Republican for the Council is good by me because Tansey has been AWOL for years and Weiner can’t be trusted.
on 20 Aug 2010 at 21:4610Hube Don't Know

Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States struck down a state statute denying funding for education to children who were illegal immigrants and simultaneously struck down a municipal school district’s attempt to charge illegal immigrants an annual $1,000 tuition fee for each undocumented student to compensate for the lost state funding[1]. The Court found that where states limit the rights afforded to people (specifically children) based on their status as aliens, this limitation must be examined under an intermediate scrutiny standard to determine whether it furthers a substantial goal of the State.

Hey Hube, can’t you read? Guess not. Protack is citing the law, the one you can’t read.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 07:0911Hube

Hey Hube, can’t you read? Guess not. Protack is citing the law, the one you can’t read.

Oh sorry Mike — maybe you ought to quote that [belatedly found] court case the next time you’re pandering to whatever audience you’re facing. In addition, maybe YOU ought to READ that that SCOTUS case you referred to pertains NON-college education …?? LOL!

Y’see, you just can’t stick to your guns now, can you? First, you were caught on video saying that you support undocumented students getting in-state tuition. Then you backtracked on subsequent appearances, saying you stated “only if they were lawful residents.” Ultimately, you claimed that the video which captured your waffle “was doctored.”

http://colossus.mu.nu/archives/269728.php

Further from your copy and paste effort from Wikipedia:

Application of the Court’s findings have been limited by political controversy, which is particularly apparent in debate of illegal immigrant students in higher education, where some states deny eligibility for in-state tuition and scholarships, and other states even bar enrollment at public colleges and universities to undocumented immigrants[2][3][4]. The relation of Plyler v. Doe to post-secondary education was restricted by other court cases and legislation such as Toll v. Moreno[5] and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996[6].

Oh ho! How can “some states deny eligibility for in-state tuition and scholarships, and other states even bar enrollment at public colleges and universities to undocumented immigrants,” Mike? OOPS. So, Protack isn’t “citing the law.” He’s belatedly attempting to make himself look less foolish from a past blunder — but instead he just winds up blowing it. Again.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 07:1212Hube

And since it’s so relevant (still):

http://colossus.mu.nu/archives/272011.php
on 21 Aug 2010 at 07:4413Hube the Pube

Ah, the sorry but trying to be relevant Pube Hair, Hube,

That Supreme Court ruling does indeed apply even though your 15 IQ brain does not get it. It is federal and state law that if you were born in America regardless of your parent’s origin you are entitled to state rate tuition. Anyone who says otherwise is a total idiot and liar-like you.

If it was not the law, why is Delaware and all 50 states doing it? Protack is indeed correct even if the law is wrong, it is the law. Saying the truth is not pandering.

You my little Pube are wrong again. Maybe if you were the kid of an illegal you could have received an education because you talk like a fool.

Stay in your Mother’s basement typing uninformed and desperately stupid claims.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 07:5414hector rodriguez

Pandering? How about being uninformed. Bill Lee supported giving illegals driver’s licenses. Mentally challenged Hube is silent there and still does not get it.

In Delaware you can register for school when you prove residency not citizenship with no ID, no one can question you at all.

So, Mr Pube if these kids are born here it does not matter where their parents came from although it sounds like you could use some parenting.

The only thing doctored is your so called grasp of the facts but you are stupid is as stupid does,
plus you are a racist.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:0115Hube

That Supreme Court ruling does indeed apply even though your 15 IQ brain does not get it. It is federal and state law that if you were born in America regardless of your parent’s origin you are entitled to state rate tuition. Anyone who says otherwise is a total idiot and liar-like you.

Really? Then how come the very Wikipedia article which you stole your “answer” from also says the following (which you must have missed the first time):

Application of the Court’s findings have been limited by political controversy, which is particularly apparent in debate of illegal immigrant students in higher education, where some states deny eligibility for in-state tuition and scholarships, and other states even bar enrollment at public colleges and universities to undocumented immigrants

What precisely is it that you don’t understand, Mike, about the above? If I can realize that you’ve been made to look the fool (with my 15 IQ) using your very own source, surely you can!!

LMAO!!

Oh, and then look at sock-puppet Protack using a stereotypical Hispanic moniker to “defend” himself. Who’s a “racist,” now?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:0116hector rodriguez

Hube señor es un racista y él es el que no es pertinente. Él es un tonto y un imbécil .
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:0417Hube

Bill Lee supported giving illegals driver’s licenses. Mentally challenged Hube is silent there

UUURNT! Was, am against it. Lee realized his blunder and rescinded his support of the idea.

You could learn from Lee, Mikey. Man up to your blunders, then call it a day. Look what refusal to do so has led to — making yourself look ridiculous.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:0418hector rodriguez

Senor Hube, you have been defeated. The law is the law.

You are confused and you are a racist.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:0719hector rodriguez

Senor Hube, Lee was incredibly stupid manning up was not the answer , he was too old and too slow to be in that race. No problem as the racist GOP endorsed him anyway and he got a smaller per cent than O’Donnell.

So come Senor Pube and man up, you are dead wrong and a racist who hates brown people like all Republicans do.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:0820Hube

Ah, ¡qué bueno que Mike sabe usar un traductor en linea! Y las cosa tan vacilón es que él implica que Bill Lee es racista, mientras tanto EL no quería dar enseñaza del estado a los indocumentados.

Qué broma eres, Protack.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:0921hector rodriguez

Senor Hube,
Tiene tanto odio y tan poco cerebro. Tal vez un burrtito le hará sentirse mejor?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:1022Hube

Senor Hube, you have been defeated. The law is the law.

I know the law is the law. I noted the relevant sections you intentionally left out. You, Mike, don’t KNOW the law. All the further reason for you never to hold elected office!
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:1223Hube

I like that — Lee was “incredibly stupid,” yet Mike [now] defends in-state tuition for illegals! And he uses a non-existent law to do so!

Question, Mike: Can someone married to a Latino be a racist against Latinos? Just curious …
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:1224hector rodriguez

Mr. Pube,
Do you hate all non whites? or do you hate yourself? You must as you make such nasty comments. I may be Hispanic but I am a tax payer and if someone can do something positive to fix New Castle County Council i am with them.

I may have to put down my Nachos and burritos and go to the Hockessin debate on Monday night. Perhaps I will see you in your white hooded robe?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:1325Hube

Tiene tanto odio y tan poco cerebro

That’s the problem with sock puppetry, Mike — you slip up. “Hector’s” Spanish is pretty pathetic.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:1526Hube

I may have to put down my Nachos and burritos and go to the Hockessin debate on Monday night. Perhaps I will see you in your white hooded robe?

LOL!! Good one! Keep invoking those invidious stereotypes, all the while crying “racism” Delicious!!
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:1527hector rodriguez

Senor Pube, if a child is born in America it does not matter where the parents cane from, they have the tuition rights.

You are so full of racist hatred you don’t listen.

Yes you can be a racist and be married to a Latino. Perhaps some of your best friends are black?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:1728hector rodriguez

Senor Pube, like the Alamo you have been defeated. The child has the rights not the parent.

Keep hating and keep pretending you have some idea of the law bit you are a racist fool and a huge waste of GOP space.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:1829Hube

Senor Pube, if a child is born in America it does not matter where the parents cane from, they have the tuition rights.

Not according to the very law you cited they don’t, Mike.

Why did you then backtrack on your 2008 answer if you are so knowledgeable about the law? Is it b/c you’re … RACIST??
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:1930Hube

The child has the rights not the parent.

Not according to the law you cited, “Backtrack Protack!”
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2031Hube

(I wonder if Latinos who believe illegal immigrants shouldn’t get in-state tuition — or tuition AT ALL — are “racists.”)
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2132hector rodriguez

It has been delicious kicking your butt all over this blog, you refuse to submit but you are stupid, wrong and a total fool.
Protack did not support illegal immigration but he did recite existing law and if you notice so did Markell and Carney. Your hero Lee went off the planet with driver’s licenses.
Vuelve a tomar los medicamentos . Have your so called ‘wife’ translate.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2133hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2234hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent. Read and heed.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2335hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.
You are so dumb, does some one cut up your food when you eat your burrito?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2436hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.

When is the next KKK rally or will that be the next Republican convention?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2537Hube

Protack did not support illegal immigration but he did recite existing law and if you notice so did Markell and Carney. Your hero Lee went off the planet with driver’s licenses.

I wonder, Mike — do you keep insisting you’re flying over New York City … when you’re actually over Cleveland? Is that how delusional you are? God help me if I’m ever in a plane with you.

I don’t need my “so-called” wife to translate. I actually speak the language. Y’know, because I wanted to. Weird for a “racist,” eh?

Now go slink off and think of some more racist, stereotypical epithets to toss around somewhere, scumbag.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2638hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.
There is not one Hispanic of any importance in the GOP in Delaware.

As a thought, why did Lee not attend the debate? And you say the GOP is not racist?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2639Hube

Application of the Court’s findings have been limited by political controversy, which is particularly apparent in debate of illegal immigrant students in higher education, where some states deny eligibility for in-state tuition and scholarships, and other states even bar enrollment at public colleges and universities to undocumented immigrants
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2640Hube

Again: Application of the Court’s findings have been limited by political controversy, which is particularly apparent in debate of illegal immigrant students in higher education, where some states deny eligibility for in-state tuition and scholarships, and other states even bar enrollment at public colleges and universities to undocumented immigrants
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2741Hube

Once again: Application of the Court’s findings have been limited by political controversy, which is particularly apparent in debate of illegal immigrant students in higher education, where some states deny eligibility for in-state tuition and scholarships, and other states even bar enrollment at public colleges and universities to undocumented immigrants
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2742hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.

You are too poor and too stupid to pay for a ticket on any airline.

Perhaps you can borrow my low rider?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2843hector rodriguez

God help me if I’m ever in a plane with you.
What would you do to someone on an airplane?

Why don’t you simply show up somewhere in Delaware you racist.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:2944hector rodriguez

God help me if I’m ever in a plane with you.

Protack carries a gun on his airplane what are you going to do, threaten him with a quote from the Supreme Court?

Well racist?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3045Hube

I know it INFUUUUUURIATES you that I use your very own source against you, right Mike? How DAAAAAARE a mere potential constituent make ME look like a fool, that’s what you say, right Mike?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3046hector rodriguez

Other states have a sales tax, what is Delaware law you racist fool.

The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3147hector rodriguez

Senor Hube, Protack would not waste a minute on you but I am calling you a racist to your face and so you are furious.

The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3248Hube

God help me if I’m ever in a plane with you.

LOL … you’re taking that as a threat? God, you’re thick. Here, I’ll translate for you again, since you couldn’t even comprehend the basic text of the article you cited: I don’t want to be in a jet flown by someone with a Neanderthal IQ.

That’s all.

Why don’t you simply show up somewhere in Delaware you racist.

Oooooh … now the perennial candidate threatens Delaware voters??
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3349hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.

So when are you going to get on an airplane? Or when will you be man enough to meet anywhere in Delaware?

You are typical GOP scum, talk big and hide hide hide.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3350Hube

Application of the Court’s findings have been limited by political controversy, which is particularly apparent in debate of illegal immigrant students in higher education, where some states deny eligibility for in-state tuition and scholarships, and other states even bar enrollment at public colleges and universities to undocumented immigrants
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3451Hube

What’s your new campaign slogan, Mike? “Protack 2010: I Can Beat Up Those Who Contradict Me”??
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3552hector rodriguez

Senor Hube, you are a small and little hombre.

Your name says it all, a person no one ever knows is there yet you want to be noticed so badly.

The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3553hector rodriguez

Here is your slogan, I am a chump and a coward but give me a keyboard and I can hate any race?

The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3654Hube

I’m not surprised you don’t know me — you can’t even realize your very own source contradicts precisely what you claimed.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3655hector rodriguez

GOP racists are the contradiction, you try outreach and yet you hate all minorities.
The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3756hector rodriguez

I will stay here all day and continue to make you look stupid and uninformed.

The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3757Hube

Oh, what would you have me do — meet you in person so that I quote the relevant portion of the SCOTUS case that proves you wrong? Is that it? So then you can punch me in the face for making you look foolish?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3858hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.
Hube has no brain and the GOP is racist.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3959Hube

Application of the Court’s findings have been limited by political controversy, which is particularly apparent in debate of illegal immigrant students in higher education, where some states deny eligibility for in-state tuition and scholarships, and other states even bar enrollment at public colleges and universities to undocumented immigrants[2][3][4]. The relation of Plyler v. Doe to post-secondary education was restricted by other court cases and legislation such as Toll v. Moreno[5] and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996[6].
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:3960hector rodriguez

Senor Hube,
The child has the rights not the parent.
Keep pretending you are important and smart we all know you are a racist and a GOP wannabe.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4061Hube

Protack is stupid. He doesn’t know squat.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4062hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.
Senor Hube, ask the Supreme Court is the child is a citizen does it matter where the parent is from?

Is an entire family deported or just the illegal?

The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4163hector rodriguez

Senor Hube, so full of hate. Were you not loved as a child?
The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4164Hube

Please explain how your constant repetition jibes with this:

Application of the Court’s findings have been limited by political controversy, which is particularly apparent in debate of illegal immigrant students in higher education, where some states deny eligibility for in-state tuition and scholarships, and other states even bar enrollment at public colleges and universities to undocumented immigrants[2][3][4]. The relation of Plyler v. Doe to post-secondary education was restricted by other court cases and legislation such as Toll v. Moreno[5] and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996[6].
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4165hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.
Senor Hube is squat.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4266hector rodriguez

Senor Hube, the child is a citizen and you are a racist.
The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4367Hube

Are the parents going to college, then? Is that what you’re saying that quote is about?? LOL!
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4368hector rodriguez

My parents were immigrants and I attended USNA even though they were not citizens.

The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4469hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.

You have lost not go hate another group.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4470Hube

Um, we’re not discussing children who are citizens, you dolt. We’re discussing children who are NOT.

Is this how you’re going to “get out of this one,” Mikey? By feigning ignorance b/c you realize how freakin’ stupid you’ve been?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4571hector rodriguez

Senor Hube,
Can I pick lettuce for you?

Maybe cut your grass?

The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4672Hube

Um, we’re not discussing children who are citizens, you dolt. We’re discussing children who are NOT.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4673hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.

Come on Hubey, the pubey. Get on that airplane.

Come on Hubey.
The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4674hector rodriguez

Senor Pubey, you are not discussing anything. You are spreading hate.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4775hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parents.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4776Hube

“Backtrack Protack.” Backtracking yet again. First, backtracking after that Latino forum; now, backtracking on the entire “debate” here (or, if you will, “moving the goal posts”) b/c he realizes OOPS.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4877hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.

Senor Hube is loco.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4878hector rodriguez

You are OOPs, loco and a racist.
The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:4979hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.

OOPS, I think Hube as to go to a KKK rally.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:5080hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.
Senor Hube, can I cut your grass or do some drywalling for you?

The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:5181hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.

Senor Hube, I don’t have car insurance either, do you hate me more?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:5182hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.

I have a Social Security Card, will you still hate me?
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:5283hector rodriguez

Senor Hube is buying his airline ticket on United, or he is mad and still hating.
The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:5384hector rodriguez

The child has the rights not the parent.

Senor Hube must be calling the hall monitor to see if he can hate brown people some more.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:5485hector rodriguez

“We are still looking for the long term solution that puts the County on a positive path”, County Executive Chris Coons.

The child has the rights not the parent.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:5586hector rodriguez

te veo en una verdadera lfight Unidos pronto . Mantenga odiar la gente morena
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:5687hector rodriguez

Adios Hube. I must go pick strawberries.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 08:5688Pat Fish

Mr. Rodriguez with his childish spamming of this thread is really bringing me over to his side.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 09:0589Hube

Neat, isn’t it, Pat? Who really knows if that was Protack or one of his [amazingly] like-minded acolytes. Just keep repeating the same nonsense over and over, all the while spewing stereotypical racist bile as a bonus. What a “winning” strategy!

LOL!
on 21 Aug 2010 at 09:5490anon

That entire debate was pointless because no one defined the terms. One guy was talking about the legal citizen child of illegal immigrants, and the other was talking about children in the country illegally.
on 21 Aug 2010 at 10:1291Hube

Sorry, but that is mere obfuscation on the Protack supporter’s part. He (and Protack, if they weren’t one and the same) KNOW the issue is one of college in-state tuition for ILLEGAL residents.

The history: http://colossus.mu.nu/archives/304888.php

Now, if Mike is indeed confused, fine. But don’t claim OTHERS don’t know what they’re talking about, or claim that videos of him are “doctored.”
on 22 Aug 2010 at 15:1592FVoshell

Sheesh, I don’t know about everyone else, but after wading through 91 posts of bi-lingual bi-partisan bickering, I’m inclined to support a “write English only” requirement for this site.

Just kidding, Senor Rodriguez.

And Hube.
on 23 Aug 2010 at 09:3493Rick

The first three posts;

What ever happened to Mr. Protack’s lawsuit against Dave Burris claiming he was libeled by Dave’s allegations regarding a long string of nasty and clandestine actions by Mr. Protack? It seems to me to go to the issue of character, and fitness to hold public office……Anbupro

DA, I know you’re obligated to put this piece of crap up, but could you insert a disclaimer at the top for your loyal readers: “WARNING: ILLITERACY AHEAD. AUTHOR DOES NOT KNOW A PROPER SENTENCE FROM A HOLE IN THE GROUND.”…anon

I agree anon. Reading this was pure torture.…TW

Gee, I wish I could be nice like you guys.