Thursday, April 27, 2006
Bever, Wheeler-Dealer & Wendy, The Least
Costa Mesa Mayor Pro Tempore Eric Bever provided us with a
window into his narrow mind again with a commentary published in
the Daily Pilot today. In that commentary, entitled "Mexico
should offer concessions to the United States", Bever points out
the disparity in the "rights" being proposed by some members of
our government for illegal aliens currently living and working
productively in our country and the lack of "rights" for
Americans in Mexico. He cites the inability, for example, of
Americans to own property in Mexico.
Bever goes on and on about how unfair it is for Mexicans to receive benefits here while Americans south of the border have none. I have no doubt that his position will strike a chord for many Americans who have been abused, both physically and financially, by the corrupt system south of the border.
Bever has been a major proponent of the plan put forward by his buddy, Mayor Allan Mansoor, to cross-designate Costa Mesa Police officers to become immigration screeners. The result of that move would be the accelerated expulsion of Latinos within this city under the guise of attempting to rid our streets of "dangerous criminals".
When Bever, in his commentary, says, "If it is imperative that concessions must be made, for God's sake, get something in return.", is he now saying it's OK for those folks to be here as long as Mexico gives us something in return? It seems to me we have a case of situational ethics here. Bever is saying that it's OK for our government to grant amnesty and a path to citizenship for undocumented workers currently in this country as long as we get something in return. What happened to the "dangerous criminals" stalking the streets? Is it OK for them to be here if we can own property in Ensenada? This sounds very much like the corrupt form of government we see in Mexico right now. Is that what our Mayor Pro Tem is advocating - the importation of the worst elements of Mexican society as long as he can buy a condo at Rosarita Beach? Sure sounds like it.
It's this kind of demented and convoluted thinking that forms the current leadership of this city. Hopefully, we can resolve at least part of that problem in November.
***
While we're on the subject, at last night's Parks and Recreation Commission meeting Chairwoman Wendy Leece - a candidate for city council in November, by the way - demonstrated for us just how in step she is with our young jailer/mayor and his other cronies. During the discussions about lighting two more fields at The Farm sports complex she, along with the other commissioners, listened to arguments on both sides of the issue, but she apparently didn't hear many of them.
At the end of the discussion, when it was time for the vote on this issue - which she asked to be removed from the broader agenda item of the Capital Improvement Project budget for separate consideration - she proceeded to read a statement on the subject. This statement, which had obviously been prepared long before the meeting without the benefit of the testimony presented at the meeting, explained just why she felt the views of a few citizens were more important than the needs of the city as a whole. She wasn't about to let the opinions of the dozens of speakers who addressed the subject sway her view - just as Mayor Mansoor ignores the wishes of the broader community. They both choose to be guided by the opinions of their small group of supporters and hangers-on to the detriment of the rest of us. This attitude will not be forgotten. Ms. Leece and our young jailer/mayor will be held to account for this come election time.
12:11 pm pdt
Bever goes on and on about how unfair it is for Mexicans to receive benefits here while Americans south of the border have none. I have no doubt that his position will strike a chord for many Americans who have been abused, both physically and financially, by the corrupt system south of the border.
Bever has been a major proponent of the plan put forward by his buddy, Mayor Allan Mansoor, to cross-designate Costa Mesa Police officers to become immigration screeners. The result of that move would be the accelerated expulsion of Latinos within this city under the guise of attempting to rid our streets of "dangerous criminals".
When Bever, in his commentary, says, "If it is imperative that concessions must be made, for God's sake, get something in return.", is he now saying it's OK for those folks to be here as long as Mexico gives us something in return? It seems to me we have a case of situational ethics here. Bever is saying that it's OK for our government to grant amnesty and a path to citizenship for undocumented workers currently in this country as long as we get something in return. What happened to the "dangerous criminals" stalking the streets? Is it OK for them to be here if we can own property in Ensenada? This sounds very much like the corrupt form of government we see in Mexico right now. Is that what our Mayor Pro Tem is advocating - the importation of the worst elements of Mexican society as long as he can buy a condo at Rosarita Beach? Sure sounds like it.
It's this kind of demented and convoluted thinking that forms the current leadership of this city. Hopefully, we can resolve at least part of that problem in November.
***
While we're on the subject, at last night's Parks and Recreation Commission meeting Chairwoman Wendy Leece - a candidate for city council in November, by the way - demonstrated for us just how in step she is with our young jailer/mayor and his other cronies. During the discussions about lighting two more fields at The Farm sports complex she, along with the other commissioners, listened to arguments on both sides of the issue, but she apparently didn't hear many of them.
At the end of the discussion, when it was time for the vote on this issue - which she asked to be removed from the broader agenda item of the Capital Improvement Project budget for separate consideration - she proceeded to read a statement on the subject. This statement, which had obviously been prepared long before the meeting without the benefit of the testimony presented at the meeting, explained just why she felt the views of a few citizens were more important than the needs of the city as a whole. She wasn't about to let the opinions of the dozens of speakers who addressed the subject sway her view - just as Mayor Mansoor ignores the wishes of the broader community. They both choose to be guided by the opinions of their small group of supporters and hangers-on to the detriment of the rest of us. This attitude will not be forgotten. Ms. Leece and our young jailer/mayor will be held to account for this come election time.
No comments:
Post a Comment