Refuse the Juice

Message to O'Rourke's Army - When you find yourself in a hole...

Let me help you guys out since I'd like people to stop clicking on the ad Reyes put out and in turn deciding not to vote for O'Rourke.  Your ignorant argument against the "legalize drugs" claim is only hurting your candidate at this point, not to mention making you look like an idiot.

And... If you think I don't like O'Rourke, then you might be confused by my mom having hosted a fundraiser for him in October.

Since none of you have really done anything professionally in the political realm or for mass public consumption, I'll help you out with a little thing we call "perception" and how it's reality. 

In your tiny little minds you think that the people who would be disturbed by the claim that "O'Rourke wants to legalize drugs" think that marijuana is less of a drug than meth, cocaine or heroin.  That's because you're a pot user and you tend to classify drugs. You think marijuana is not as bad as the other drugs. These people that would take offense to O'Rourke's stance don't classify drugs.  They're all bad as they are concerned.  Marijuana is as bad as cocaine and heroin. They see no difference.  Legalizing just one of them is like legalizing them all. 

If you want to play semantics - we can.  If someone wanted to say that O'Rourke was for legalizing every single outlawed drug, they'd have to put a qualifier in their statement.  It would have to read "O'Rourke wants to legalize ALL drugs."  Now that's a lot different than "O'Rourke wants to legalize drugs," isn't it? It is.  That would be hard for Reyes to defend if he said that, right?  Yes, it would be hard.  Mainly because we know that not to be true. 

Do you see the difference there? Don't feel stupid - you're not paid to think about these things, I am.

Here's another good example for you:

Say for instance that Billy Bob Roberts hit his wife and was arrested for domestic battery.  It was the only time he'd hit a member of the opposite sex in his entire life.  And let's say Billy Bob Roberts decides to run for office.  How do you think his opponent is going to approach that assault in their ad?  I bet they'd say "Bill Bob Roberts physically abuses women."  Correct?  Yes and no.  Both answers are right. Here's how.

The statement in this case is incorrect because Billy Bob Roberts doesn't abuse "women," he abused a single solitary woman - his wife.  It's a game of semantics and the use of a plural noun makes the entire statement incorrect.  And Marty Schladen could do an entire article on how Billy Bob Roberts' opponent couldn't back up their claims made in that campaign ad based on semantics (much like you guys are doing now). 

However, the statement is also correct.  It does not matter to voters how many women Billy Bob Roberts hit, or the fact that it was just his wife that one time.  People who would be upset at the fact that Billy Bob Roberts hit a woman don't really care about the number of women involved or how they are related to him.  They just know it's bad and they don't like him for it.  End of story.

Do you think it would have been any better if the ad said "O'Rourke wants to legalize marijuana?" Do you think anyone in the public (other than you) would really differentiate marijuana from all the other drugs?  They don't.  Just because you classify drugs, doesn't mean they do.  Stop projecting.  Start thinking. 

Had you focus-grouped a commercial saying O'Rourke wants to legalize marijuana, you'd find out in your exit interviews that people would claim they heard O'Rourke wanted to legalize drugs.  People don't separate the two like pot users do. 

The more you fill my comments section with arguments of semantics, the more you drive into people's head that O'Rourke wants to legalize drugs.  You don't get to win on a technicality here.  There is no consolation prize either.

You have to admit that O'Rourke's stance on the legalization of marijuana (a drug) isn't a popular one with the conservative voters of El Paso.  Yes, I'm calling the democrats in El Paso "conservative." And that's because they are.  Trying to argue away his very public stance on a very controversial issue with semantics isn't going to help him. In fact, it continually breathes life back into an issue you really - we really - need to disappear.

Please accept that I'm right and you're wrong and move on with your life.  Go bitch at Marty Schladen for writing such an idiotic article that brought so much more attention to something voters really don't like.  Had Schladen had one ounce of brains he would have left the ad alone and it would have been lost to time.  Anybody not watching the Oscars, which was 99 percent of El Paso, would have never known it existed. Instead, Schladen gets involved to try and protect his guy (O'Rourke) and now all of you are running around like morons slapping yourself in the face with baseball bats and the whole world is taking note. 

Learn to shut up when you're wrong because the louder you yell about how right you are, the more people are going to notice that you're not only wrong, but delusional on top of it.  Right now you sound like you're trying to defend Billy Bob Robert's wife beating based on the plurality of a noun.  And I don't think you want that.

Do you know how many people emailed me here in Washington about O'Rourke after Schladen's article?  Dozens.  Dozens of people who are now not going to help him.  Way to go.  Somebody tell Schladen that he's not a kingmaker and his help isn't needed. 

El Paso Times Disproves Itself Again

You read this article today http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_20058074.

The headline reads "U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes can't support key claim in ad on drugs."  The article goes on to prove the key claim made in ad.  It's the weirdest/dumbest think I've ever read. 

I'm not taking a stand on the race or the issue of drugs here, I'm just critiquing journalistic integrity - or the lack of it in this case.  Please don't take what I'm about to say a judgement on anyone except the people at the El Paso Times - who are obviously in the can for O'Rourke, which is okay as long as that affection stays on the opinion pages and off the "news" pages.

Real quick - why is the El Paso Times backing Beto?  Several reasons, but I think foremost would be the fact that Reyes has been unreachable for 16 years.  He didn't care to return their calls because he didn't have to. What was the Times going to do if he didn't talk to them - support his insane opponents?  Well, now he's got a not-so-insane opponent and they're going to exact their revenge on him and try to gain favor with the new guy.

Back to the issue at hand.

So the headline is pretty clear - Reyes' ad claims something it can't back up.  That's pretty easy track down usually.  Candidate X says candidate Y loves green cars.  Candidate Y proves he's never owned a green car and candidate X is labeled a "liar."  That's what I expected to find in this story from reading the headline.

However...

The entire article is spent proving the headline false and the original ad correct.  O'Rourke is an advocate for drug legalization.  Marty "I Should Know Better" Schladen tries to slink around the issue by claiming that O'Rourke doesn't want to legalize "all" drugs.  That caveat is what Schladen is hanging his hat on and it doesn't seem to be holding up. 

Marijuana is a drug that is currently illegal. 

Beto wants to legalize Marijuana. "Decriminalizing" it is the same a legalizing it. 

Beto wants to legalize drugs. 

It's that simple.  You can't get any more clear than that. Oh, wait... you can.

O'Rourke wrote a book on the subject. And the theme of the book was quoted in the story.

I'd like to think I am trying to convince the masses of what I'm saying here, but it appears nobody is buying Schladen's idiotic headline.  Everybody has been quick to call "bullshit" on Marty Farty's little editorial party.  Of course, he could have done a better job of proving his point by not mentioning every single possible fact that refutes it.

I really don't know what the El Paso Times is trying to do here other than play all of the remaining credibility they have to try and get O'Rourke elected.  If anything they've failed at that miserably since they sent thousands of their readers to a very sharp campaign ad for Reyes.  I think many of the people came away wanting to vote for Reyes after seeing the ad. 

Leave it up to the El Paso Times to shoot themselves in the foot - again. And you wonder why El Paso is corrupt... you can't even get ethical news coverage on politics, much less anything with any depth to cover the obvious crimes being committed by public officials and employees.  Any other paper in the country would have laughed at Schladen's article and told him to go find a car crash to cover. 

I don't feel bad for you guys - you bring it on yourselves by not being an active participant in your community.

Smoking Gun in CVNA Suits Surfaces

It didn't take long for the people of Cielo Vista to start talking about the defendants in the various lawsuits brought in connection with the Patriot Place debacle. 

Read this - Download Affidavit_of_Ben_Garcia[1]

Looks like members of the CVNA, or should I say - former members of the CVNA - are now talking about how the defendants in these lawsuits were in fact plotting to damage the image of the Three Legged Monkey and its owner through deceit.  Some of their acts, like planning on making calls to 911 even though they knew there was no emergency, are actually against the law.  I have mentioned before that two of the defendants had been written up by the police department for making false calls to 911.  One of those people was rewarded with being named the most esteemed volunteer for the police department and had her photo put on the wall.

What you see here is the making of a conspiracy and all of the elements of the allegations did play out at some point.  The neighborhood association bullies wanted people to think a certain way about the Three Legged Monkey and they had a plan to make that happen.  The were going to make false accusations and load up the 911 switchboard with calls so that city officials would think there were major problems at the bar.

The reality was that there weren't any problems and the police officers responding repeatedly found the 911 calls to be malicious.  However, the false impression created by the defendants eventually led to the city opposing another bar from opening in the shopping center based on that false information.  That's where things get complicated for everyone.  At what point did city officials know that there was actually nothing to the allegations made by the CVNA?  Who told the residents to pursue that strategy and how were people on the tenth floor of city hall convinced to stand behind the erroneous reports? 

There are lots of questions here that need to be answered.  I think at least a few members of council need to resign since they were violating the civil rights of private citizens in the name of what appears to be a clear conspiracy. They have proven they do not have the smarts, nor integrity to serve in their respective positions.

Furthermore the city needs to completely scrap the neighborhood association program due to the fact they are being used for nefarious endeavors.

Your thoughts?

Gandara Arrest - 100 Steps Backward...

First of all - Gandara is completely innocent until proven guilty.I am going to assume that this guy has done nothing wrong and they went to the wrong house and got the wrong guy.  Any other assumptions made on this blog will be made by commenters and they'll be liable for the crap they say. 

--------------

Here's the biggest problem for El Paso after Gandara's arrest - this whole "safest city" and "it hasn't spilled over" rhetoric is all bullshit now.  Nobody believes a word of it.  One of the five most powerful people in the county was arrested by several three letter federal agencies.  The mantra that drugs and cartels are a problem "over there" and not in El Paso, is now not believable. 

What's worse is that local authorities didn't make the arrest.  To people familiar with law enforcement, this gives off an ugly hue of internal local corruption where the local "bigs" look out for each other.  Anybody with half a brain can figure out what I'm saying here.  Everybody on the outside already has.

The entire outside world now only sees El Paso as Jaurez.  No river in between the cities, no difference at all. Any claims to the contrary will be met with this story and no satisfactory explanation can be given.  The next time Governor Perry claims there are a car bombs going off in El Paso, you're just going to have to sit there and take it - he's now got some ammo to back up his ridiculous claim. 

Economic development?  Not after this.  Who wants to put the future of their company in the hands of people who get arrested for stuff like this?  Nobody. 

I'd like to say El Paso is a joke, but it's not funny - it's sad.  The worst part is that it is YOUR fault.  You vote for these people.  You have other choices and you ignore them.  You have nobody to blame but yourself.  The next time you feel like whining about your employment situation, just remember who you voted for and how those people scare off the kinds of people who could do something about your prosperity. 

I would tell you it's about time to demand better of your representatives, but it's probably too late.  Once you've played the fool some many times it's impossible to shed that image.  Nobody will listen to you now.

Ps...

And it's not like this was a surprise to everyone.  I've had a very determined group of people emailing about once a week for three years or so saying that this would happen.  It seems that certain rumors were more than just rumors.  Who knows to what extent they were right.  We'll see.

CVNA to Demand Other Neighborhood Assocs Pay Their Legal Fees!

So the Cielo Vista Neighborhood Association had an emergency meeting last night because they just realized that being sued sucks and it's very expensive.  The very lightly attended event produced some shocking revelations. 

CVNA President, Mark Benitez is also the head of the association of neighborhood associations - he's like the king of the professional society for kings.  Rumor has it that Benitez is going to require other neighborhood associations pay for his personal legal fees and that of the other defendants in the Patriot Place debacle along with the legal fees of the CVNA itself. 

His idea, I have heard, is that the other neighborhood associations have a common interest in what the CVNA has done and should pay to protect them since they might get into the same trouble at some point in the future.  It's the whole "you scratch my back now and I might, or might not, scratch yours later."

Each of the neighborhood associations not named "Cielo Vista Neighborhood Association" would be assessed a few hundred to a few thousand dollars and that money would be used to pay Benitez's and his friends' legal fees. I'm sure this is going to go over very well with the other associations.

This guy wants to run for office and he's already proving he has no regard for OPM (other people's money) - the future is not bright, but it's expensive.

The Fake Norma Chavez - The Best Thing EVER!

A lot of people have been telling me about a twitter personality named "FakeNormaChavez" for a while now.  This past weekend I decided to "follow" FakeNormaChavez and read what she had to say... it was/is the funniest thing I have ever read in my life. 

You must "follow" FakeNormaChavez if you have a twitter account. If you don't have a twitter account - get one and follow FakeNormaChavez.

If you know Norma, you'll love FakeNormaChavez.  Whoever this person is, they're very CUNNING!

Mayor Cook Wins! Kinda... - The Whole Story

Color me shocked that the Texas 8th Court of Appeals threw out the petitions to recall Mayor Cook, Representative Byrd and Representative Ortega.  Although, I didn't have any of the facts because the newspaper in El Paso is setting the standard for shitty reporting (yes, Mr. Schladen we are looking at you).

Here's how I see all of this.

The Ruling

For the first time since the court proceedings started, the El Paso Times reported the actual instance of law breaking that Cook had alleged in his lawsuit.  Here's the quote from the article HERE:

"Cook sued the group, arguing that the church, a nonprofit corporation, violated a state law prohibiting corporate political contributions to recall elections. The mayor also argued that El Pasoans for Traditional Family Values had not properly registered with the state as a political-action committee, even though its treasurer, Ronald Webster, admitted in court that it had raised more than $3,000 for the recall."

That is much different than the "they passed around petitions in church" argument that was reported by the El Paso Times and every other jackass with a keyboard and an internet connection since this saga began.  You can pass around a petition anywhere you damn please - including a church.  What you can't do is raise or spend money unless you are properly registered to do so.  These guys weren't and Mr. Webster scored what is known in soccer as an "own goal." 

I should point out that they weren't "guilty" of anything because they "pleaded the fifth" in court as insinuated by the El Paso Times and many other armchair lawyers out there.  If you love the constitution and you love freedom, then you'll understand that "pleading the fifth" isn't always about guilt or innocence - it's about a lot more than that.  There's a lot of historical perspective that went into that protection.  To make an assumption about someone "pleading the fifth" is to hate the constitution and the country it defines.  I hate to be that harsh, but I do not like it when constitutional rights are interpreted in such a way as to promote someone's editorial views in the news section of the newspaper. Journalistic ethics serve as toilet paper at the El Paso Times and it shows almost daily. 

It wasn't until late Friday afternoon that people on Cook's side started talking to me about what was actually being presented in court to judges.  I wish I had known about Mr. Webster's admission months ago and the fact that the church leadership was meeting in their official capacity as church elders to talk about this political initiative and plan their attack.  I would have been the first to come out and say they were engaged in illegal activity had I know that.  Instead, I got a bunch of pissy, ill-informed emails about petitions at church, which isn't illegal in any way.  Leave to El Pasoans to be focused on the wrong thing at all times - it's the mob mentality of the educationally challenged, I guess.

I say good for the Texas 8th Court of Appeals for doing their job. 

Judge Alvarez

The Texas 8th Court of Appeals wasn't too happy with Judge Alvarez's actions on this matter.  They aren't the first to have a feeling of contempt for a judge who refuses to rule on the side of obvious.  I was sued in his court - the entire legal community, minus the three involved with suing me, gasped at his inability to rule in my case.  I literally had conversations with lawyers that went "I hate you and everything you are as a person and a member of the  community, but there was no way that lawsuit shouldn't have been dismissed."

One could say that Alvarez was not interested in pissing off the electorate all by himself and let the case be kicked to the court of appeals where a panel of judges could absorb the public's likely outrage at the correct ruling.  And believe me - people are still pissed at the mayor despite this ruling. 

The problem here is that the Alvarez has the shield of "plausible deniability" in the fact that while there was wrong doing, you can't prove which signatures were collected directly because of that wrong doing.  I, like many others, saw the petition in many different places that weren't churches circulated by people not connected to Tom Brown.  I saw the petition spread like wildfire through business circles - people who think Brown is a weirdo, but wanted the opportunity to get rid of Mayor Cook.  How does a judge decide to discount the signatured will of thousands of people in this situation?  You have to think of Alvarez's inaction in that way if you want to be intellectually honest. 

The bad news is that Alvarez's fear of retribution was realized in a form he probably didn't account for.  I doubt this will make him any better of a judge in the future. He will probably be even mor paralyzed with fear now.

The Outcome

Cook won, but he lost.  He won't be the first city politico to fall to a recall.  That's a small consolation prize for a guy whose political career is dead... whose years in office are now tarnished by this one issue... whose departure from city hall will be wrapped in shame.  

If Tom Brown's ultimate goal was to make sure nobody liked Mayor Cook for what he did - Tom Brown was successful. Cook would likely lose an election to Anthony Cobos at this point.

The court case may have removed the chance of their being a recall, but it didn't remove the ire of the thousands upon thousands of people who signed that petition.  That is something that the courts can't change. 

What Did We Learn?

There were lots of lessons here with the powers of city government being the most important.  The "will of the people" isn't something city government (or any other level of government) has to accept.  All the rhetoric of "by the people" is just that - rhetoric.  Government was set up by government thus making itself supreme, not the people who would be governed.  The faster you realize that, the better off you'll be. 

I like the fact that Brown and his cronies lost because they didn't follow the rules.  Yes, there's something to be said for the idea of a couple of concerned folks getting together to try and fix what's concerning them.  There's also a slippery slope that ends with sophisticated campaigns operating under the radar as something else - in this case a church group. 

Using the federal government's rule on corporate participation in elections here does not protect Brown and friend's actions.  If corporations "raise money" they do it in a form of a PAC and those PACs are strictly regulated by the federal government.  Brown and friends were okay until they started collecting and subsequently spending money in a political effort.  This whole crap about some kind of small time grassroots effort went out the window when money started changing hands.

Because Brown was so successful in his recall attempt (the signature gathering portion), members of council decided to start making the role of community groups much clearer.  This means neighborhood associations will likely be banned from being part-time political organizations who threaten recall petitions and other political tactics when they don't get their way.  And believe it or not - that's a good thing.  Transparency is good for both the government and those who wish to change it. 

Declaring a Winner

I win. 

Just kidding.

Brown loses because those awful gay people and unmarried fornicators have benefits (that were available to them all along). 

Gays lose because a large part of El Paso doesn't approve of their lifestyle.

Mayor Cooks loses because he tried to trade his vote on the same sex issue for a charter amendment to make him King of El Paso (end term limits) and it backfired on him worse than he could have imagined.  Cook thought he'd throw Susie and Ortega a bone (overturn "the will of the people") and they'd get everybody on board for a charter amendment that he wanted. They didn't move to help him and the backlash for his risk was far greater than he ever imagined.  Add some candid statements to the people about not being a plumber in a time of crisis (the mayor was in fact right, but you can't say that to a bunch of government dependent plebeians) and you have the making of the greatest fall from grace ever recorded in El Paso politics. 

"No Recall" group loses because not only did they fail to stop enough signatures from being gathered, they created some giant new egos who think they speak for the masses.  Single issue assholes with a little power are very dangerous and El Paso is about to get yet another lesson in that scenario. 

That's it - no winners. 

I now declare this a dead issue.  Henceforth there shall be no mention of this whole debacle because El Pasoans refuse to learn from history and I'd like that tradition to stand.  Let's be honest - if you don't have tradition, what do you have?

Great El Paso Digital Magazine and Other News

Please go visit http://2310scenicdr.com/ and share with your friends.  It's the type of online magazine El Paso must have for the six or seven of you who know how to operate a computer and navigate the interwebs. 

Seriously - it's a well done, slick site with good local stuff.  Make it your mission today to have five friends visit the site.

--------------------------

I'm on a little break right now trying to launch another blog project.  I hope I can get back around to refusing the juice soon. 

Incredible Local Band - Please Support Them!

The Iveys are from the valley and are very talented! 

Check out their latest video and song HERE.

Do me a favor if you like it - post to your facebook and email to your friends.  This local band could use our support!

Getting It Wrong On Transmountain

Note:  Pastor Brown and recall people - the part you're interested in starts right before the indented paragraph.

--------------------

The El PasoTimes reports this morning that the Sierra Club is suing both the federal government and the state of Texas over the Transmountain road expansion project that is - CURRENTLY UNDERWAY.  Timing doesn't appear to be the Sierra Club's strong suit. 

The local Greenies have had a rough go of it when it comes to the northwest side of the mountain.  They couldn't force the city to break the law and rezone the entire space between the mountains and California as "open space" and they couldn't stop the Transmountain road expansion even though they threw everything but the kitchen sink at it.  I know it's a terrible feeling to not get what you want, but that's what being a part of the minority is about. 

The project went through the state and federal vetting processes and was approved by both.  I'm sure that's why an injunction to stop construction wasn't filed along with the lawsuit.  I'm also sure the state and federal government checked each applicable box as they went along and any judge would have to let them keep working if they knew this to be true.  That's right - the project is underway - they're too late.  Suing to stop the project is idiotic since that's their outcome - suing to stop until more tests/plans/etc et al can be done, not for any other gain.  That puts the Sierra Club and the local Greenies in a bad spot because the defendants can draw out the process until the project is done.

I don't know - maybe a sympathetic judge will stop it shortly.  I should say - a sympathetic moron.  The Sierra Club can not put arbitrary rules on development of any kind since they are not the rule making body.  Just because they think more environmental studies should be done, doesn't supersede the fact that the state and federal government got what they needed to move forward and they are the "deciders" when it comes to these things. 

I've heard all the different complaints from the Greenies and they can all be shot down rather quickly by someone who knows what they are talking about.  The biggest misnomer is that the project can't go forward because public input was given after it was designed.  There's a state process for these projects and public input does not come in at the coin flip- it comes in somewhere after the third quarter starts.  It's always been that way whether you agree with it or not.  I have worked in both the design and construction sides of municipal projects and can tell you that this specific project is consistent with every other single one I've seen.

I think all of you who think that any community project comment meeting you go to - whether it's charettes by Dover Kohl or quality of life bond issue get-togethers - need to know that an approved plan devoid of your input already exists and is exactly what is going to be done/built/developed no matter what you say. 

Do you think anyone cared to take your thoughts into consideration when the city decided to pay a Canadian artist $70,000 for an art deco wind vane at the upper valley traffic circle? NO! They didn't care then and don't care now.  And here's the best part - they make the rules, not you.  I don't really mean that it's the "best part," it's just the way it is because designing a community by community input would look like something a toddler scribbled on a wall with a crayon.  And let's face it - most of you don't have the background to be even commenting on such things - which is much of the case when it comes to the Greenies and why they never win anything - they make shit up as they go and the people with the proper background know it.  And soon, so will a judge.

Here's the funniest part about this whole issue and it's not something you'd catch unless you know how liberals play the game.  Representative Byrd is reported (not quoted) as saying:

"City Rep. Susie Byrd, a frequent critic of the plan, said officials failed to follow federal rules by disregarding concerns of the community."

The quotation marks here denote what the paper wrote - not that Byrd was being quoted directly, because she wasn't.  However, it appears that she said something to the effect of "this shouldn't go forward because they didn't listen to the public."

HHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! Funniest thing I've ever heard considering Byrd did quite the same thing she's accusing the state and federal government of doing, only the public had actually voted to force her to accept their concerns and she disregarded their vote!  Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

If Byrd thinks this project should be stopped because the people spoke against it, shouldn't she also be against same sex benefits? 

Politics is a funny thing, isn't it?  One day you're all for unilateral movement by the government and the next day you're against it.   Who knew?

Planned Parenthood Suddenly en vogue in El Paso - much too late

It's funny to see people in El Paso freaking out about the Susan G. Komen foundation cutting funding for Planned Parenthood.  I don't really care to get into a political argument here since Komen is a private charity and they can do whatever the hell they want with their money (well, that's not true they can' t do a lot of things, but you know what I mean) and if you don't like it, stop giving them money. 

anywho....

More than a year ago the Planned Parenthoods in El Paso vanished - almost overnight.  The only person I remember paying attention to the issue was Lisa Degliatoni.  She was pissed.  She was concerned. She was largely ignored and moved to Evanston, Illinois where Planned Parenthood is alive and well.  Okay, maybe that's not exactly "why" she left, but a case could be made.

Because of political expediency El Paso politicians are now speaking out against Komen's mean move.  Too bad they didn't have much to say a year or more ago when they (Planned Parenthood) disapeared in El Paso.  One has to wonder how real their outrage is when they didn't even bat an eye when Planned Parenthood needed them most. 

Pay attention folks - fake outrage is equal to real lying.

Benitez Places CVNA Under Tires of Bus

I hear that Mark Benitez of Cielo Vista Neighborhood Association (CVNA) fame has answered the lawsuit brought by David Cooper - blocked bar owner - and it isa doozie for the CVNA.

From what I can understand here Benitez invokes Texas' new "slap law" and then goes on to say something to the effect of "the devil made me do it."  And the "devil" is the CVNA.  It appears that he's going to claim he was acting on the CVNA's behalf so any legal action should be taken against them, not him. 

I told you the CVNA was ripe for a lawsuit and now the president of the group is not only asking that they be sued, but admitting they probably did something worth being sued over!  Of course, I may be reading the whole thing wrong, but it seems quite clear to me.

I was surprised that all four of the CVNA members who got sued didn't go in together to defend themselves.  You have to wonder if there is some internal friction developing over at the CVNA. 

This Benitez guys sounds like he's perfect for the role of a politician!  He's going to stomp Emma Acosta into the ground. 

---------------------

On another note... I see somebody spent all last night capturing my previous posts on a range of subjects - 500 seperate pages worth.  Gearing up for a lawsuit? 

Here we go again.  Only this time I have the ACLU dialed up and ready to go. 

Also, suing in Texas and losing is an expensive proposition these days.  Make sure you have an incredibly good case. 

If You're Not Firth, You're Last - Questions Must Be Asked

When city attorney Charlie McNabb jumped ship late last year the mayor lost his biggest legal advocate.  McNabb had been helping shield the mayor from the eventual realities of the successful recall effort undertaken by God's personal lobbyist - Pastor Brown.  When he left, the mayor was in a bind and that's when he made a desperate decision.  One we all may regret. 

Sylvia Borunda Firth has worked at the city for 14 years and is most noted for her work as the mayor's chief of staff recently.  Insiders tell me that her appointment to city attorney has not set well with anyone but the mayor, who loves having his puppet playing the lead in the show.  He's still hoping to find a legal solution to his recall problem and up until recently was doing everything he could to avoid setting an election date for his political funeral. 

The mayor figured if he could stretch out the election date to a point very close to when he had to leave office, the voters would likely just keep him so they wouldn't have to do two back to back elections. It should be noted that former city attorney Charlie McNabb conveniently forgot to tell the mayor he could ask the governor for a special election date any time he wanted and the governor would have likely granted him his wish posthaste. The mayor would have actually benefitted from that seeing as how he could have rushed an election and found his foes stuck on their heals. Too bad for him he's done nothing but create more negative press about himself and is now sure to lose his recall. 

The mayor made Firth his new defender, but it's probably too late and now the city has all kinds of problems developing because of the hasty hire. 

Here are some concerns:

1. The promotion of Firth crushed morale in the city attorneys office. Nobody working under her believes she should have gotten the job and many of them are wondering when she's going to stop wearing her "Mayor's Chief of Staff" hat and start wearing the the "City Attorney" hat.  My sources tell me that a whole bunch of resumes within the city attorneys office were updated and LinkedIn profiles were flying up on the web like it was a race. 

2. I have received no less than ten emails about a possible city contract held by Borunda Firth's husband's law firm.  There are some questions as to how that is being handled.  Nothing illegal has happened, but in the shade of the cloud of corruption over the skies of El Paso, it doesn't make for good appearances.  Many of the tipsters tell me that Mr. Firth's law firm had a contract with the city dating back to 2006 and that it's nothing new.  Although they think it's odd that Borunda Firth was working at the city when the original contract was approved. 

3.  I have learned that Borunda Firth signed the answer to the David Cooper's lawsuit against the city, city council members and Cielo Vista Neighborhood Association (CVNA) members that includes Borunda Firth's alleged aunt (by marriage - allegedly).  The general sentiment of the legal community is that she probably shouldn't have done that seeing as how she is allegedly connected to someone named in the suit.  There are also concerns that she might have been an advocate for the CVNA members and might be involved in the suit via depositions, requests for production - so forth and so on.  I may have the legal terms messed up there because I'm no lawyer and when talking to one I tend to stop listening about three sentences in because they talk without saying anything useful.  From what I understand - in layman's terms - she's signed herself up as a player/manager and this league frowns on that type of arrangement.

Pop quiz - who was the last MLB player/manager?  First person to answer in the comments section gets a date with Norma Chavez!

4. I have information that says that Borunda Firth's alleged aunt may have made a 911 call that was deemed "Malicious, mischievous false call, or other incident found," and it may have happened more than once.  A mother who was put in handcuffs after the police came to her house to follow up on repeated 911 hangup calls were made was quite upset to hear that the two women in the CVNA saga had not been arrested, detained or in any other way punished for what they did.  In fact, one of them allegedly holds the highest volunteer position possible at the regional police command center with a picture of her on the wall and everything (allegedly - I doubt they have her picture up there).  This woman's child had seen an educational video on using 911 and had been "practicing" as five year-olds tend to do.  She was taken out of the house and put in cuffs.  She was later released, but not before the entire neighborhood came out to see what was going on.  Needless to say, her emails have a pointed question - "what could I have been spared if I had a family member at city hall?" 

5. Given what was just written, the question must be asked - How did the CVNA benefit from Borunda Firth's position at city hall?  The answer could very well be, "not at all."  However, the world needs to see proof of that since extraordinary measures were taken against two business owners in the Patriot Place shopping center - measures never taken anywhere else in the city where much worse problems exist and many more complaints have been filed.  Is everyone with a complaint given equal treatment? Or, does one group get better treatment than another due to someone's familial relationship with someone at the city?  It's only fair that these questions be asked because Councilman Eddie Holguin was dragged through the mud when his in-laws allegedly used him name to get special treatment and there were demands made to "get to the bottom of this" when the issue arose - now is no time to stop holding people accountable. 

---------------

Those are just a few of the questions I have.  It seems as if the city is putting themselves in a bad spot by not farming this issue out to outside council.  The liabilities here are far too great to take any chances. 

Your thoughts?

Whatever Happened to Lisa D?

You can see what she is up to in Evanston, Illinois at the link below. 

http://evanstonnewbie.blogspot.com/